REGISTRATION IS OPEN
http://novaopenstore.com

Current 40K GT/Invitational Primer: http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015-40K-GT-Invitational-June-22-Primer.pdf

5/5 Update - NOVA Open Show Miniature and more super cool stuff
http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/05/adding-total-wow-factor-to-nova-open.html


4/20 Update - on May 1st, we stop pre-selling Beer Mugs. The NOVA Open Beer Mug is both a cool commemorative item and a value at the NOVA proper ... owning one earns you $1 off draft beer in the NOVA Open Charitable Foundation's Charity Bar & Lounge (which already has pretty good deals on beer and cocktails all weekend ... all proceeds of which go directly to charity).


http://www.novaopen.com
2015 sees the 6th Annual NOVA Open in Washington, DC.

Held in Crystal City, next to Washington Reagan National Airport and on the DC Metro Rail, the NOVA Open consists of four fantastic days of gaming, shopping, seminars, and miniature figure art at one of the United States' largest tabletop wargaming conventions.

What began as a large pair of 40K and Fantasy tournaments in 2010 has blossomed into a diverse, genre-wide event with an increasing emphasis on charity, hobby, fun, and fair play with international attendance across numerous organized play and hobby-centric event formats and offerings.

Registration opens on February 1, and our newsletter (chock full of information!) goes out on the 1st and 15th of every month. If you'd like to receive the most up-to-date information on the NOVA Open, sign up for the newsletter by e-mailing novaopen@gmail.com

Seminars
The NOVA Open 2015 will include nearly 50 distinct seminars, beginning on Thursday of the convention (9/3). These range from free "lounge talks" hosted in the Charitable Foundation's Bar & Lounge to designer/developer talks (i.e., Justin Gibbs of Wyrd Miniatures, who designed Malifaux ... or Gutier Losquinos of Corvus Belli) to art/hobby lectures and instructional seminars. We are proud to note that 2014's highly acclaimed instructors will be back, such as Justin McCoy of Secret Weapon Miniatures and Caleb Wissenback. We are also extremely excited to be joined in 2015 by Roman Lappat and Raffaele Picca of Massive Voodoo, who will teach a large # of seminars over the course of the weekend.

Warhammer 40,000
The NOVA Open, over the years, has been an influential and high-profile event in terms of its impact on the tournament world of Warhammer 40,000. This stems from a desire, year after year, to apply reasoned modifications to our formats in order to present the most fun, fair opportunities possible for attendees of all interest and skill levels to find their fit within a combined attendance of nearly 300 40K players. The highlight of our 40K offerings is our 256-slot Grand Tournament, held over 8 rounds (with free option to drop after 6 built into both the format and schedule) from Friday through Sunday. This 1850-point tournament innovatively combines several "styles" of 40K event (Win-Loss, Battle Point, and Overall / "Classic" GT Soft Score Heavy) in parallel tracks within the one large tournament to allow players of all skill and style to fairly compete for awards, recognition, and fun deep into the tournament, rather than just until their first loss or if they failed to accrue large enough victories. Players are even bracketed out into sub-brackets composed of their competitive peers after Round 4, locking players into peer-levels who've experienced a similar beginning to the tournament experience in pursuit of facing similar list styles, playstyles, and attitudes.

While the GT was originally our "big" 40K event, it is now rivaled by something altogether unique within the 40K Organized Event world - the Narrative. Most places you go, Narratives consist of hackneyed storyboards of "one more forgeworld or hive city" that secretly harbors an artefact of incredible significance to every race, while conveniently being right in the path of the nearest handy Hive Fleet, all happening above a newly-awakening Necron tomb complex, and ... for good measure ... right in the path of the next big Tau expansion. Proudly entering its fourth consecutive year, the NOVA Narrative takes a different approach. Players partciipate in one of two event tracks - Warlords and Nightfighters - to leverage the game of Warhammer 40K toward driving and telling the story of the NOVA Open's own unique sci-fi universe. Centered around culture-shattering conflicts between nascently space-faring Humanity and the questionably benevolent, star-spanning Virtue, players representatively participate as one of these two factions through the use of their favorite Warhammer 40,000 forces. No common fan-fiction here, the Narrative's creative team spend every year crafting intricate details and developing spine-chillingly epic briefings and story primers to draw participants into this world - a world of their own creation. You've never seen a collection of over 60 gamers go so completely silent as when Commander Beste is artfully providing his nightly introductory briefings and projected high-detail presentations on the current and future status of this ongoing conflict. Functionally, the Narrative provides two tracks leveraging more relaxed and diverse gameplay (complete with Heresy Era armies being legal, and everything Forgeworld has to offer). The Warlords track includes strategic planning sessions where participants directly impact the larger nighttime gaming events (who plays where, environmental effects, strategic and tactical injects, the works!), as well as additional games. Warlords players participate in 7 games stretched from Thursday evening through Sunday. Nightfighters, on the other hand, are players who wish to enjoy the Narrative while also participating in some of the NOVA Open's other day-long activities (such as other game systems or the 40K GT). Nightfighter games occur at carefully-scheduled times on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday evenings, providing a laid back opportunity to get that extra gaming fix while helping drive and get deeply involved in something you truly own yourselves. The names of past famous and infamous (two titles you can actively seek that have very little to do with simply winning or losing games) players adorn even the little details of our narrative terrain (terrain which includes a fully-lit 6 foot tall replica of the Washington Monument ... wouldn't be a DC convention without such things!).

The NOVA Open also sees the fifth consecutive year of its Trios Team Tournament, a unique Team event happening on Thursday of the con where 3-player teams face other 3-player teams in pairs of 2v2 and 1v1 games. Each player gets the opportunity to play a 1v1 game and 2 x 2v2 games over the course of the day in very relaxed fashion with longer round times. It's a great way to kick off the con, and is a true legacy event for NOVA ... usually with smaller, more intimate attendance and a more laid-back feel.

New this year for 40K, we're adding a series of events that you sign up for at the con called Highlander: Quickenings. These events are 8-player, 3-round "sign-up and go" events that begin at predetermined, scheduled times so long as 8 players have signed up. They're more relaxed in terms of model representation to enable easier prep for traveling attendees, and follow the NOVA Open's version of the Highlander rules, keying around the concept that there can "Be Only One" (of any unit type!). These harken back to another time in 40K, before battle brothers and the craziest of spam. Coincident with Sunday's opt-out day for the GT (you need only participate in the Final 2 rounds of the GT if you are still competing to win your personal bracket; nothing prevents all players from finishing Rounds 7-8, but it's not mandatory if folks want to see the city or shop or try other games), we're also adding a pre-registration-enabled event called The Gathering (fitting, right?). The Gathering will be a larger-slot Highlander event at an affordable rate with laid back feel, simplified missions, and straightforward presentation.

It's going to be the biggest, most epic year yet to play Warhammer 40K at NOVA. We're also exploring concepts for a Heresy Era event (event lead wanted!).

Warhammer Fantasy
This year will see the 6th consecutive Warhammer Fantasy GT at the NOVA Open. The past two years have both sold out at 64 players, with substantial potential to grow in 2015. The 2013 event encountered a few bumps and bruises along the way, leading to a dramatic revitalization under strengthened leadership in 2014. Organizer Steve Gant is returning to bring it back even better! The Fantasy GT occurs on Saturday and Sunday of the con, and is supplemented by a Friday event with a more laid back tone and flavor. 2014 consisted of a Doubles Tournament, though we're discussing everything from smaller games to End Times focused gaming to Narrative play for Friday at present. More info on this to come!

Malifaux
Malifaux was present at the NOVA Open in 2011, but vanished from our radar for a couple of years as the game went through its development into M2E. Heralded by many as one of the most aesthetically memorable, yet competitively balanced games on the market today, M2E gamers quickly recognize that many of the "competitive vs. casual" intonations that are so divisive within some TT wargaming communities simply vanish when playing Malifaux - everyone is casual, and everyone is competitive, and everyone can be both while playing exactly what they want to play! Malifaux returned to the NOVA Open in 2014 in a big way, with world-class terrain co-designed using the input of the game's designers and even direct attendance and participation from those designers - Justin Gibbs and Mack Martin, lead developers of Malifaux, spent their 2014 Labor Day with us at the NOVA Open.

Wyrd is back in a very big way for 2015, so big in fact that it's a first for them! The First Wyrd Malifaux National Championships for North America are being hosted at the NOVA Open in 2015, in part due to its timing within the calendar year relative to many other events that are now qualifiers. Don't hesitate at the word "Qualifier," however - the National Championship is an open registration event, and all are welcome, with space for up to 3-figures' worth of Malifaux gamers. This event is being hosted and sponsored directly by Wyrd with NOVA support, and the prizes and recognition are off the hook! Simultaneously, we'll be hosting a number of other Malifaux events all weekend long, including a participation-focused Achievement League, an in-depth Story event, Hardcore and Enforcer mode rapid fire events, and more! Some of Malifaux's best Henchmen will be in attendance and support, including Crissy of A Wyrd Place and "The Ma(h)(t)ts," Matt Stanley and Maht Crestborn, who are the official leads for Malifaux events at NOVA. To make everything *just* right, Justin Gibbs - design lead for Malifaux - will once again attend, taking a larger role in coordinating, organizing, and ensuring events run precisely as they should in representing Wyrd for their first National Championship. Can you tell we're excited?

Warmachine/Hordes
WM/H events at NOVA have been growing year after year, and they absolutely exploded in 2014. Nearly 100 WM/H players showed up from all over the country, and we had sell-out organized play rolling from the very beginning of the con on. This year, the NOVA is set to once again be a Warmachine Weekend Qualifier, and is also an official Iron Gauntlet event. Space is limited (to a point, we're still able to field over a hundred WM/H gamers quite easily!), and last year many locals assumed they'd have space only to not quite find it when they showed up the day of! The schedule will once again be chock full of organized play, iron arena, and more. Don't miss this! Along with TempleCon, the NOVA has risen to be one of Warmachine's premier events on the East Coast.

X-Wing
X-Wing showed up at NOVA for the first time in 2014, and promptly sold out. Sold out so dramatically, in fact, that we twice increased our event size at the con in order to allow more players in (thank goodness for planning ahead on board prep and a game that doesn't require much in the way of terrain!). Roy Scales and Kris S., who run the very popular X-Wing website, A Few Maneuvers, are excitedly planning on hosting over 100 X-Wing attendees in 2015. Furthermore, they've added a new Narrative track of events modeled after the wildly successful NOVA 40K Narrative, with players able to make their mark on a slightly alternate Star Wars Universe through annual player driving of the story. I even hear tell of design work begun on an 11 foot replica scale (to the "big ships") star destroyer around which many epic starfighter battles are to take place ...

Charitable Foundation
The precursor to the NOVA Open was a small outdoor 40K tournament held on picnic tables in August, 2009. The first NOVA Open wasn't held until a year later, but this original event was spawned purely from a desire by the organizers to raise funds in support of the fight against Breast Cancer. Today, the NOVA Open partners with a sister organization - the NOVA Open Charitable Foundation, a formal 501(c)(3), to leverage the global community of gamers as a compassionate force to raise funds, awareness, and support for critical causes worldwide. Though we support many worthy charities, our efforts focus on Doctors Without Borders (Medicins Sans Frontiers), the Fisher House Foundation, and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. Last year, the Foundation more than doubled its inaugural 2013 campaign by raising nearly $20,000 for charity! The highlight of these efforts are studio-caliber armies painted by a global consortium of figure artists, led by Foundation Board Member Dave Taylor. These armies are designed by top tier innovators and competitors from within their game systems, painted by world class artists, boxed in limited edition KR MultiCases, based on custom Secret Weapon Miniatures bases, and shipped to raffle winners anywhere on Earth (we've shipped armies to Tasmania!). Raffle tickets go up for sale in early 2015 for a wide variety of offerings, and are only $1/each. The NOCF proudly contributes more than $.96 on the directly to the charities it supports, with any excess purely being spent on administrative expense and web hosting fees (no member of the foundation or NOVA Open, LLC collects a salary or compensation of any kind for anything the NOVA Open does). Both the LLC and NOCF are entirely volunteer organizations, inclusive of gamers and non-gamers ranging from senior military officers and career professionals to stay-at-home moms and college students.

Foundation Lounge
The NOVA Open's organizers may or may not admit to really enjoying a good beer with their gaming pretzels. Or a good glass of wine. Or a good cocktail. Or a good glass of scotch. Or simply a good can of soda/pop/cola. Well, heck with it, we openly admit these things. So it stands to reason why we have the Foundation Lounge. Every year, the NOVA Open rents out premier Hyatt Regency suites and converts them into an incredibly epic Bar and Lounge, with everything from coffee and donuts in the morning to bloody mary and mimosa offerings in the ... well ... the morning ... to craft beers and cocktails (and non-alcoholic offerings) throughout the day (all the way until 1:30AM VA last call!). This non-profit event occurs thanks to a VA license for the Foundation ... granted because the Foundation Lounge's revenues are entirely donated to charity (the same charities supported by the Foundation's army raffles and other activities)! Not only is all the booze you buy in support of good causes, it's pretty cheap too! We offer rock bottom rates for the area on cocktails, beer, shots, coffee, donuts, whatever. Plus, the Lounge hosts rolling free lounge talks given by everyone from our esteemed seminar instructors to industry professionals, game designers, and more. IT's a great way to cozy up next to some of the most creative people in the tabletop gaming world with their favorite drink (which are, conveniently, discounted while each lecturer is talking). The Lounge is free to enter for any and all NOVA Open attendees all weekend long.

Capital Palette
Capital Palette returns to NOVA this year as one of the DC area's premier miniature figure art competitions. This juried exhibition takes an enormous leap up in prestige and quality this year with the addition of Roman Lappat and Raffaele Picca from Massive Voodoo as head judges, along with Justin McCoy. With one of the swankiest display areas out there and a great deal of organizational support from the NOVA, the Capital Palette is a fantastic way to show off your miniatures' best stuff, have them judged by world class and world-renowned miniature figure artists, (and receive input on them from) , and win awesome prize support thanks to enormously generous partnership by companies like Grex Airbrush (category winners take home a brand spankin' new, top of the line airbrush!). Additions of higher experience level seminars, speed-painting/speed-airbrushing competitions, and more make the Capital Palette and NOVA in general more appealing than ever for the talented (and even only sorta talented!) miniature figure artist out there.

One of the things we want to advance at the NOVA is the notion that what we do with our figure painting hobby is more than just slopping pigments on toys. Art is a diverse term, and nothing should prevent that term being rightly and fairly applied to what many figure painters do - some of it is pretty awesome! Roman and Raffa are poster children for advancing the cause of miniature figure artists by connecting them more closely to fine artists at a whole, and we share with them a desire to leverage NOVA as a mechanism for further perspective change in this regard. Stay tuned to the NOVA Open and Capital Palette for more on this in the future, as we seek to both expose figure artists to a broader audience, and bring a broader range of artists (Beyond just figures) to the NOVA Open proper.

Infinity
Infinity is why the NOVA Open's dedicated terrain staff considers the word "More" to be a 4-letter word! If you haven't played it before, Infinity battles occur on some of the most epic battle boards you've ever seen in a miniatures game, and 2014 was no different for the NOVA Open. Event lead Craig further supports this by hosting terrain competitions among attendees to see who can bring the best tables (there were LEDs and epic buildings aplenty in 2014!). Infinity is set to once again grow leading into next year, spurred on by the fact we hosted Corvus Belli designer Gutier Losquinos all the way from Spain. Corvus is set to once again attend, bringing with them - as in 2014 - first-time-ever looks at their newest studio painted minis and seminar-based reveals of the newest Infinity news, rules, and information (even stuff they don't share at GenCon!).

Blood Bowl
It is a little known fact that Blood Bowl, in a sense, started the NOVA Open, as its organizer began by hosting local DC area Blood Bowl Leagues. It was thus with great pleasure that we brought Blood Bowl to NOVA for the first time on its 5th Anniversary in 2014. Once established, never abandoned, the pitches will return to the NOVA in 2015 for a larger and more concrete offering of Blood Bowl events. We're also working to make sure the rates are affordable, the pitches are gorgeous, and the events are fully certified with the NAF across all activities. Don't miss your chance to break some heads! It's also more than just a rumor that late night Blood Bowl may be one of your only places to challenge NOVA staff to open gaming ... so don't forget to bring your team with you even if you plan on participating primarily in other genres and games.

Vendor Hall
A Con is not a Con without sweet shopping. The NOVA Open is attended by an increasingly diverse array of industry vendors, including niche suppliers like Greenman Designs and Tectonic Craft Studios, and broad-band discount retailers like Atlantis Comics & Games and the Toledo Games Room (the Bits Guy from outside the AdeptiCon 40K hall). We proudly partner with our vendors and sponsors to provide the epic quantity of swag given away through awards packages and the [in]famous lemonade raffle (any time you lose a game in any game system at NOVA, you get a raffle ticket in a Lemonade Raffle (get it, making lemons out of ... you get it) that includes everything from simple bits bags all the way to vacation getaways) at NOVA, and they also take pains to provide rock bottom discounts throughout the convention. We also - after popular demand - were able to partner with UK-based major NOVA sponsor KR MultiCase to bring their diverse array of army protection products to NOVA this past year, at a discount! The NOVA Open's vendors offer additional discounts on Thursday evening as the con kicks off, and we're working to see what we can do to keep them open just a bit longer after the award ceremony on Sunday evening this year (the better to go and spend your gift certs and winnings with the providing vendor).

The SuperNOVA Program
Speaking of KR MultiCase, the NOVA Open has - hands-down - the best "VIP/G" style gamer bags on the planet. This is, primarily, because they are KR MultiCases. Not ones to provide our "SuperNOVAs" with throwaway plastic bags into which their epic VIP-style swag has been placed, the NOVA includes (thanks to KR) free KR MultiCase bags with every SuperNOVA pass. In your first year, you get a free $85 KR BackPack2. In your second year, you can get another of those, or a Kaiser2 instead. In your third year, you can get a Kaiser3 instead. We're still trying to figure out how awesome it's going to get for the fourth year guys. Either way, the other thing you get - that's not to be overlooked - is that those who buy a SuperNOVA bag and return in a future year to NOVA (whether or not they SuperNOVA again) receive a free BOGO for KR $65 custom-foam Card Cases to fill their bags with (and you can redeem these at the NOVA's KR vendor booth). Beyond this, SuperNOVA's get convenient in-con storage for their armies/bags, awesome T-Shirts, beer mugs, and several hundred dollars of custom swag (i.e., Greenman Designs will do you up a custom measuring device suited to your game system of choice with both your game system faction and name incorporated on the device ... imagine getting a multi-measure tool in Ultramarines Blue with your name inscribed under the logo). Last year, our 80 SuperNOVA bags sold out in a few hours ... we're offering more this year, but they won't last the weekend after reg opens on Feb 1.



SO MUCH MORE TO COME, AND WE'RE EXCITED! Who is coming to the NOVA in 2015? What are you most looking forward to?

Awesome! Keeping my eye on this! Will it be possible to play in the INFINITY event and the 40 GT?

Yeeaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!! im in DC!!!!

 Red Corsair wrote:
Awesome! Keeping my eye on this! Will it be possible to play in the INFINITY event and the 40 GT?

There are Infinity events every day/evening of the con, so you should be able to work it out just fine. You can also drop after Round 6 of the GT w/out affecting your Overall score (by deign), so Sunday is fully open for 40K players who wish to participate in the primary rounds of the GT and also do something else that requires a full day's participation (e.g., Sunday's Infinity tournament).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Early discussion question for those that occasionally troll Dakka threads ...

Roman Lappat and Raffaele Picca of Massive Voodoo are attending NOVA Open this year to judge and teach.

Are there any classes in particular folks would love them to teach?

On the 40K front, there's yet again discussion of Forgeworld legalization in the 40K GT/Invitational (it's been legal in all other 40K events for a few years now). With the continued expansion of the game on the Dataslate/etc. front, and increasing lack of clear balance, many of the old arguments against Forgeworld inclusion are starting to pale. Opinions?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
PS - We are also considering / leaning toward a limited LOW list for this year, and banning AdLance (but not Knights).

I'm aiming to go to Nova this year. It is one of the larger tournaments that I haven't been to yet.


FW is fine as long as it is 40K Approved. I feel that there are a lot stronger stuff in normal codices and the formations than with FW units.


Limited LoW is fine as well. Most of the LoW stuff isn't really that great anyways. However, they do add variety to the game.


As for banning Adlance, that's probably something you should poll your customer base and do it early. Don't make the mistake of doing it too late like what Frontline did with Invisibility. Personally for me, I've got no problems with Adlance.

MVBrandt wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Awesome! Keeping my eye on this! Will it be possible to play in the INFINITY event and the 40 GT?

There are Infinity events every day/evening of the con, so you should be able to work it out just fine. You can also drop after Round 6 of the GT w/out affecting your Overall score (by deign), so Sunday is fully open for 40K players who wish to participate in the primary rounds of the GT and also do something else that requires a full day's participation (e.g., Sunday's Infinity tournament).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Early discussion question for those that occasionally troll Dakka threads ...

Roman Lappat and Raffaele Picca of Massive Voodoo are attending NOVA Open this year to judge and teach.

Are there any classes in particular folks would love them to teach?

On the 40K front, there's yet again discussion of Forgeworld legalization in the 40K GT/Invitational (it's been legal in all other 40K events for a few years now). With the continued expansion of the game on the Dataslate/etc. front, and increasing lack of clear balance, many of the old arguments against Forgeworld inclusion are starting to pale. Opinions?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
PS - We are also considering / leaning toward a limited LOW list for this year, and banning AdLance (but not Knights).

If the Massive Voodoo guys are coming and teaching, I'm like, 100% doing that instead of playing this year. Make it happen!

It's already confirmed. Massive Voodoo will be attending and teaching 10 classes at nova. Subjects in development. They'll also be joining Justin McCoy as head judges of Capital Palette, our juried miniature figure art exhibition.

Malifaux!

Also, if you can, do the Narrative. It's the best 40k event I have ever participated in, bar none.

The Narrative is not for the feint of heart, however. The Virtue have no mercy for Humanity.

Questions for the 40K prospective attendee:

1) Should we allow Forgeworld in some capacity, given the variety of things now in the game anyway via all the datasheets/formations/white dwarves/etc.?

2) Would you like to see the detachment rules change from "max of one CAD" to simply "2 detachments" as the limit, in light of the fact many of the factions can now 'effectively' get 2 Combined Arms Detachments via their Codex-specific detachments anyway?

3) How do people feel right now about lords of war? They were widely reviled by casual players in our post-event survey. Should we allow a limited LOW list? Should we ban adlance or ban superheavies altogether while allowing Lords of War that are not superheavies/gargantuans?

Feedback is always welcome at NOVA, and we typically perform post-event and sometimes pre-registration surveys. We're contemplating a survey in January prior to registration opening.

Happy Holidays,
- Mike

Mike,

In response to your questions (Looking forward to being there this year)

1) I haven't found a 0-1 FW policy to be a problem so far. And I say this as a Tau, where unfortunately our two "best" things so far don't yet have official rules. But yeah, Malenthropes and other goodies as long as they have official rules have made it into the other east coast tourneys it feels.

2) Anything to simplify the detachment nonsense that GW created when the 7th edition rules clashed with the sub-codices (Enclave, Iyanden, etc.) is appreciated. Allowing 2 detachments I feel solves it unless someone would like to point out a really game-breaking combo that is allowed because of it.

3) Honestly, I love it when I see a Lord hit the table. 4+ seize and potentially 3 more VPs in a tournament setting when I'm using an alpha-strike army? Yes please. But I do realize that many of the heavier lords (revenant, Necron, and some of the tanks) really ruin the day of any lists not prepared for them. The revenant and necron one can practically solo entire lists without support if the dice go their way. Perhaps take a cue from Adepticon and make them a max % of the list's points?

4) Ad-Lance and Super Heavies I don't feel in general are a huge problem. I realize that the non-competitive side of the game has problems with them though. At most I'd pull the Ad Lance formation, but not knights/super heavies in general. Once you remove the formation knights become more like a rip tide or wraith knight than the "unstoppable" beasts those who aren't prepared for them find them to be.

Per JY's note earlier, I would suggest that you guys make sure these rules are all set in stone in advance of ticket sales. Definitely had a bit of a dust up on the LVO side of things when these got changed post-sell out.

Looking forward to it, you guys always throw a great competition.

MVBrandt wrote:
Questions for the 40K prospective attendee:

1) Should we allow Forgeworld in some capacity, given the variety of things now in the game anyway via all the datasheets/formations/white dwarves/etc.?

2) Would you like to see the detachment rules change from "max of one CAD" to simply "2 detachments" as the limit, in light of the fact many of the factions can now 'effectively' get 2 Combined Arms Detachments via their Codex-specific detachments anyway?

3) How do people feel right now about lords of war? They were widely reviled by casual players in our post-event survey. Should we allow a limited LOW list? Should we ban adlance or ban superheavies altogether while allowing Lords of War that are not superheavies/gargantuans?

Feedback is always welcome at NOVA, and we typically perform post-event and sometimes pre-registration surveys. We're contemplating a survey in January prior to registration opening.

Happy Holidays,
- Mike

I'll take a crack.

1) 40K approved Forgeworld units and characters should be allowed on a unique basis (i.e. every unit becomes a 0-1 selection). I've been playing against opponents using FW units since 6th edition and have used my Whirlwind Scorpio from time to time as well in competitive play. The only real complaint I remember running across as a TO was when units like the AM quad-mortars or saber platforms where spammed, which generated the unique basis caveat. The FW army lists are slightly different beasts and I generally tended to either disallow them or require pre-approval because I have no way to get all the books or keep current on them. Since pre-approval is much harder to do at an event Nova's size (200+ players versus the 20-25 player RTTs I ran), I'd tend to ban them or create a list of those I'd allow (i.e. the FW chapter tactics for the Marine codex are easy to include since they don't change units and have no unique detachments).

2) Allow 2 detachments and remove the current restriction on CADs. It longer serves a purpose when every book since Orcs has a detachment that is essentially a CAD (Orc Hordes, Nemesis Strike Force, Wolves Unleashed, Sanguinary Strike Force, etc.). Replace the current format with the caveats of each detachment is unique and you can bring either a codex specific detachment or a CAD. Then, disallow self-allying except where the codex specifically allows it to close the loop hole for obtaining a 2nd, mini-CAD. This will reign in some of the wilder spam builds while still allowing plenty of competitive ones.

3) Given the changes to how named characters of Chapter Master equivalency are now presented, you need to allow Lords of War in some capacity. I think an "allowed list" is the way to go. That way you can include all the infantry characters and any vehicles you think aren't too overpowered. Personally, I'd also consider a % point cap in the Adepticon fashion. That would make it a little easier to achieve the same effect.

PanzerLeader wrote:

2) Allow 2 detachments and remove the current restriction on CADs. It longer serves a purpose when every book since Orcs has a detachment that is essentially a CAD (Orc Hordes, Nemesis Strike Force, Wolves Unleashed, Sanguinary Strike Force, etc.). Replace the current format with the caveats of each detachment is unique and you can bring either a codex specific detachment or a CAD. Then, disallow self-allying except where the codex specifically allows it to close the loop hole for obtaining a 2nd, mini-CAD. This will reign in some of the wilder spam builds while still allowing plenty of competitive ones.

@Panzer - When done in this fashion per your self-allying note, would Farsight Enclave still be able to ally to the Tau Codex since it is specifically stated that they are battle brothers in the supplemental codex? Just wanted to check to see how that works.

MVBrandt wrote:
Questions for the 40K prospective attendee:

1) Should we allow Forgeworld in some capacity, given the variety of things now in the game anyway via all the datasheets/formations/white dwarves/etc.?

2) Would you like to see the detachment rules change from "max of one CAD" to simply "2 detachments" as the limit, in light of the fact many of the factions can now 'effectively' get 2 Combined Arms Detachments via their Codex-specific detachments anyway?

3) How do people feel right now about lords of war? They were widely reviled by casual players in our post-event survey. Should we allow a limited LOW list? Should we ban adlance or ban superheavies altogether while allowing Lords of War that are not superheavies/gargantuans?

Feedback is always welcome at NOVA, and we typically perform post-event and sometimes pre-registration surveys. We're contemplating a survey in January prior to registration opening.

Happy Holidays,
- Mike

Second year attendee. And I hope first time GT player. To echo JY2:

1. FW is fine as long as it is 40K Approved and the 0-1 restriction sounds perfectly fair, even considering FW Gargs/Supers

2. Limited LoW is fine. With Knights even in the game as a Codex, I think allowing a limited Super/Gargantuan will add a lot to the tournament games, give Knights a solid Challenge and break open the meta in a fun and challenging way.

3. As for banning Adlance: I see no problems with AdLance. I genuinely do not see how AdLance affected the game to any game-breaking degree, as reflected in the 2014 results, even without allowing additional Lords of War, AdLance was certainly powerful, but clearly not game-breakingly so.

GreyDragoon wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:

2) Allow 2 detachments and remove the current restriction on CADs. It longer serves a purpose when every book since Orcs has a detachment that is essentially a CAD (Orc Hordes, Nemesis Strike Force, Wolves Unleashed, Sanguinary Strike Force, etc.). Replace the current format with the caveats of each detachment is unique and you can bring either a codex specific detachment or a CAD. Then, disallow self-allying except where the codex specifically allows it to close the loop hole for obtaining a 2nd, mini-CAD. This will reign in some of the wilder spam builds while still allowing plenty of competitive ones.

@Panzer - When done in this fashion per your self-allying note, would Farsight Enclave still be able to ally to the Tau Codex since it is specifically stated that they are battle brothers in the supplemental codex? Just wanted to check to see how that works.

Yes, as they are what I'd considered to be two different factions. You could take a FE CAD and Tau allies or vice versa. Its more to prevent Necron/Necron or Tyranid/Tyranid where the bonus of the mini-CAD really shines.

@notbriang: I think the question of AdLance comes down to how fun it is for the average player to play against. It's not game breaking at the top levels, but for the average person AdLance is decidedly not fun to play against. That alone merits a discussion of a ban if it would drive down attendance. I played AdLance twice at Battle for Salvation this year, once when accompanied by 3 Stormfangs and once when accompanied by 3 Riptides. I managed to win both games with my White Scars, but they were highly contested and came down to the very last couple of rolls. I found them entertaining because I like those challenging games. I have no doubts a less competitive player would have been severely frustrated and annoyed.

@Panzer - Ok cool, just wanted to make sure I read that right.

@NotBrian - Agreed personally on the AdLance. I just don't see it being a likely top-table contender in a really competitive environment. I only mentioned dropping the formation depending on if they are more worried about the competitive environment or dealing with the frustrations of those who play in the GTs with no intention of having a top-teir/competitive army. Fun armies tend to have serious problems with AdLance, Trip/Quad-Tide, etc. but that's to be expected I suppose.

PanzerLeader wrote:

I'll take a crack.

1) 40K approved Forgeworld units and characters should be allowed on a unique basis (i.e. every unit becomes a 0-1 selection). I've been playing against opponents using FW units since 6th edition and have used my Whirlwind Scorpio from time to time as well in competitive play. The only real complaint I remember running across as a TO was when units like the AM quad-mortars or saber platforms where spammed, which generated the unique basis caveat. The FW army lists are slightly different beasts and I generally tended to either disallow them or require pre-approval because I have no way to get all the books or keep current on them. Since pre-approval is much harder to do at an event Nova's size (200+ players versus the 20-25 player RTTs I ran), I'd tend to ban them or create a list of those I'd allow (i.e. the FW chapter tactics for the Marine codex are easy to include since they don't change units and have no unique detachments).

2) Allow 2 detachments and remove the current restriction on CADs. It longer serves a purpose when every book since Orcs has a detachment that is essentially a CAD (Orc Hordes, Nemesis Strike Force, Wolves Unleashed, Sanguinary Strike Force, etc.). Replace the current format with the caveats of each detachment is unique and you can bring either a codex specific detachment or a CAD. Then, disallow self-allying except where the codex specifically allows it to close the loop hole for obtaining a 2nd, mini-CAD. This will reign in some of the wilder spam builds while still allowing plenty of competitive ones.

3) Given the changes to how named characters of Chapter Master equivalency are now presented, you need to allow Lords of War in some capacity. I think an "allowed list" is the way to go. That way you can include all the infantry characters and any vehicles you think aren't too overpowered. Personally, I'd also consider a % point cap in the Adepticon fashion. That would make it a little easier to achieve the same effect.

Here's something that irks me a lot. Allied Codex sources, ie. FE CAD + Tau CAD allow for a perfect mini-CAD situation that benefits the Tau player to a tremendous degree. However, in this light disallowing Same Faction allies for allowing a similar bonus seems disingenuous. Why shouldn't Tyranid/Tyranid be allowed when FE/Tau, Space Wolves/Champions of Fenris, Chaos Space Marines/Black Legion, etc. provide the exact same, if not more powerful opportunities for CAD selections? If when the tournament rules are being finalized, I certainly hope allowing same Faction allies is favorably considered.

AdLance related - I feel Reece said it pretty well about AdLance, last year, AdLance & Knights would have been a lot less impactful with the allowance of other Supers/Gargs and FW. As far as them "not being fun to play against", this is a Tournament, not a pre-school.

1) 0-1 FW is fine

2) 2 Detachments - Full stop is fine. I'd prefer that basically "force org" detachments be limited to 2 and with formations being more opened up but that's a personal bias since I feel like Orks, Nids, and now BA play better with multiple formations and a CAD/Force Org detachment. If you go 2 detachments just say two detachments. Don't 0-1 any particular type of detachment. Just 2 Detachments go.

3) I loathe Ad-Lance as something that is just not fun for some codexes and leads to them either bringing something else or not playing at all. That said I'd hold off on that till about 6 months out or so. We should have 1-2 more codexes by then.

1. 0-1 / unique FW units are great (preferably on a unit by unit basis, allowing a 2 malanthropes brood as a single unit, for instance)

2. It's such a mess I'm not sure what to say lol.

3. I'm not a fan of LOW inclusion or superheavies at all.

I was in the Narrative (white 2nd edition Necrons with the Monolith) and I don't remember anyone complaining about Super Heavies. I think about a third of my games featured them, and they were fine. I didn't play any of the really bad ones, though. A ban list of the large AOE ignores cover weapons wouldn't be inappropriate.

I've been saying this for the past couple of years now, but I'm going to do everything I can to make NOVA this year.

notbriang wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:

I'll take a crack.

1) 40K approved Forgeworld units and characters should be allowed on a unique basis (i.e. every unit becomes a 0-1 selection). I've been playing against opponents using FW units since 6th edition and have used my Whirlwind Scorpio from time to time as well in competitive play. The only real complaint I remember running across as a TO was when units like the AM quad-mortars or saber platforms where spammed, which generated the unique basis caveat. The FW army lists are slightly different beasts and I generally tended to either disallow them or require pre-approval because I have no way to get all the books or keep current on them. Since pre-approval is much harder to do at an event Nova's size (200+ players versus the 20-25 player RTTs I ran), I'd tend to ban them or create a list of those I'd allow (i.e. the FW chapter tactics for the Marine codex are easy to include since they don't change units and have no unique detachments).

2) Allow 2 detachments and remove the current restriction on CADs. It longer serves a purpose when every book since Orcs has a detachment that is essentially a CAD (Orc Hordes, Nemesis Strike Force, Wolves Unleashed, Sanguinary Strike Force, etc.). Replace the current format with the caveats of each detachment is unique and you can bring either a codex specific detachment or a CAD. Then, disallow self-allying except where the codex specifically allows it to close the loop hole for obtaining a 2nd, mini-CAD. This will reign in some of the wilder spam builds while still allowing plenty of competitive ones.

3) Given the changes to how named characters of Chapter Master equivalency are now presented, you need to allow Lords of War in some capacity. I think an "allowed list" is the way to go. That way you can include all the infantry characters and any vehicles you think aren't too overpowered. Personally, I'd also consider a % point cap in the Adepticon fashion. That would make it a little easier to achieve the same effect.

Here's something that irks me a lot. Allied Codex sources, ie. FE CAD + Tau CAD allow for a perfect mini-CAD situation that benefits the Tau player to a tremendous degree. However, in this light disallowing Same Faction allies for allowing a similar bonus seems disingenuous. Why shouldn't Tyranid/Tyranid be allowed when FE/Tau, Space Wolves/Champions of Fenris, Chaos Space Marines/Black Legion, etc. provide the exact same, if not more powerful opportunities for CAD selections? If when the tournament rules are being finalized, I certainly hope allowing same Faction allies is favorably considered.

AdLance related - I feel Reece said it pretty well about AdLance, last year, AdLance & Knights would have been a lot less impactful with the allowance of other Supers/Gargs and FW. As far as them "not being fun to play against", this is a Tournament, not a pre-school.

I'd be ok with restricting allies even further to include supplements (i.e. no Tau/FE) by saying you can't ally with the same faction. You essentially get your CAD or codex specific detachment plus one allied detachment from a different faction. My main concern is that very few books have the ability to exploit the bonus detachments with absurdly cheap troops (i.e. 15 point muclids).

I acknowledge it is a tournament. But people go for different reasons. No one enjoys a curb stomping. Its markedly less fun if your primary purpose isn't winning the tournament but to have a series of enjoyable games. AdLance doesn't really let that happen for the average player.

I'm playing in the Narrative, so for the GT whatever you like is fine by me, but something needs to be done about the Tranny!

I know it is a pipe dream, but single CAD only, no allies, forts or LOW is something I miss to be honest. I think you either do away with all the fat or allow it all. The appeal of going to a complicated mess of restrictions from tourny to tourny is getting low.

Probably explains why I am leaning more toward INFINITY + massive voodoo seminars and skipping the 40k GT I do have that constant 40k itch though

This is a tournament, not a coombiyaa circle. This talk about " not fun to play against" is a pathetic anodyne hyperberbaly. Get off of it. Play your friends if a tournament is not fun to lose in.

You can't make concessions for certain armies and not other. A TO needs to be objective on guidelines. Only non-super hvy/GCs? Why so only Gks, SWs, and Orks have a glaring advantage? Either allow LoWs or don't at all. Hate to break it to ya, a 450 pts Lynx is just as bad as some of the usual list of "offenders". Unfortunately some armies are balanced on their LoW. Allowing potentially 5 IK super-heavies with D Str melee and catastrophic f'yous, is a blatant favoritism. Personally I'm not for or against the inclusions of LoWs in tournaments, but in my mind it's all or nothing or else you are disingenuous.

No self allying because maybe one or two codexes save a few points on compulsory choices? Are you serious? If you think that will determine the shift in balance for a tournament, then competitive play is not for you. Again, certain codexes are measured and weighed on cheap troops for a reason. Maybe it because they lack one thing or another, or other slots are inflated.

Forgeworld is no worse than these new data slates and WD additions. They're all broken to some degree. All or none I say.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe we should ban eldar, tau, and IK armies because they win tournaments? They're not fun to play against....

Tournaments are supposed to be a cocktail of adrenaline, elation, stress, and anxiety. Fun? Not any tournament I've been in. Fun are theme games, campaigns, and apocalypse battles.

Nyghoma you post like a drill instructor man.


Mike!

IMO 1 cad is preferred and allow 2 sources so detachments and formations can be used.

a
AdLance is fine IMO. Has it's disadvantages and advantages. You allowed it at last nova and while a bunch of really good players ran it none of them won and only a couple did "well"

LoW really is fine within reason. Same thing you've heard a bunch I'm sure. Does a hierophant belong in a 1850 game? Prob not. Does a heirodule? Yeah it's pretty ok in general. Limit ranged D and the ignores cover LoW insta death crap on torrent flamers and you are fine!

 Nyghoma wrote:
Tournaments are supposed to be a cocktail of adrenaline, elation, stress, and anxiety. Fun? Not any tournament I've been in. Fun are theme games, campaigns, and apocalypse battles.

This makes me sad...

Yeah I didn't mind most of what was said, some good points. But, the notion that tournaments are not fun is pretty nuts. Some people do have fun experiencing adrenaline, elation, stress, and anxiety. Not all people experience that at tournaments. Some just enjoy playing games in relaxed fashion and getting 6-8 of them guaranteed in a single weekend.

Some good points, then some random personal opinion/experience about tournaments (which is valid for the poster, but not for all or, anecdotally, most).

1) No forgeworld legality.
2) Don't care.
3) All LoW are legal. Ad Lance is legal.

MVBrandt wrote:
Yeah I didn't mind most of what was said, some good points. But, the notion that tournaments are not fun is pretty nuts. Some people do have fun experiencing adrenaline, elation, stress, and anxiety. Not all people experience that at tournaments. Some just enjoy playing games in relaxed fashion and getting 6-8 of them guaranteed in a single weekend.

Some good points, then some random personal opinion/experience about tournaments (which is valid for the poster, but not for all or, anecdotally, most).

More or less agree, but even for those that have fun experiencing adrenaline, elation, stress, anxiety....some lists are not "fun" as in they rob the game of those things (a problem I find in 40k in general at the moment is I feel very little of these things), they make the game one sided, which by definition robs the game of any kind of excitement. Going through the motions in a one sided game is anything but adrenaline filled. Adranaline comes from outplaying your opponent not rolling dice for 2-3 hours, in a game determined in large part by match-up + dice rolls.

Personally won't be playing 40k so I have no dog in the fight for the GT.

But I would go with

Yes FW, the game is crazy as is, let people play with additional toys at this point.

Detachments- I think you either allow double CAD, or allow CAD/Codex detachement + Ally/Formation, disallowing double CAD while allowing CAD + Codex detachment seems off to me.

I would say no to LOW except Character lords of war. I feel they frequently lead to one sided games.

 Nyghoma wrote:
This is a tournament, not a coombiyaa circle. This talk about " not fun to play against" is a pathetic anodyne hyperberbaly. Get off of it. Play your friends if a tournament is not fun to lose in.

You can't make concessions for certain armies and not other. A TO needs to be objective on guidelines. Only non-super hvy/GCs? Why so only Gks, SWs, and Orks have a glaring advantage? .

Did you say GKs and Orks have an advantage? Lmao! This guy makes me cringe!

Back on topic, Id hope to see some logical discussion as to certain bans such as ad-lance. Some people are stating "it has advantages and disadvantages" and I tell you now, it has barely any disadvantages. Extensive playtesting has still put it right at the top in a good players hand, and theres little you can accomplish when you can't take into account the stomp!

KillswitchUK wrote:
Did you say GKs and Orks have an advantage? Lmao! This guy makes me cringe!

He is referencing the fact that currently the only non Super-Heavy/Gargantuan Lord of War units belong to those armies.

as far as the questions go:

1) I like the one unit limit idea for Forgeworld models, seems like it would be a nice easy way to test those waters and see what the inclusion of these models provide.

2) As far as detachments go, I have built lists based on the 2014 Nova Rules and they have done really well...

3) Lords of War are fine in my eyes, as long as they have legal 40k rules, they take a huge risk in taking some of the high cost ones.. yeah they can do alot of damage to un-preped list but this is a tournament and they should come prepared for it and on top of that since they cost so much they won't have much else on the board, using AdLance as an example thats 1110pts minimum... I could live with or without AdLance... they wanna pay the points go for it, you just bring something that can shoot it down, expanding on what I said before it is a tournament and should be expected since it was allowed in 2014.

MVBrandt wrote:
Questions for the 40K prospective attendee:

1) Should we allow Forgeworld in some capacity, given the variety of things now in the game anyway via all the datasheets/formations/white dwarves/etc.?

2) Would you like to see the detachment rules change from "max of one CAD" to simply "2 detachments" as the limit, in light of the fact many of the factions can now 'effectively' get 2 Combined Arms Detachments via their Codex-specific detachments anyway?

3) How do people feel right now about lords of war? They were widely reviled by casual players in our post-event survey. Should we allow a limited LOW list? Should we ban adlance or ban superheavies altogether while allowing Lords of War that are not superheavies/gargantuans?

Feedback is always welcome at NOVA, and we typically perform post-event and sometimes pre-registration surveys. We're contemplating a survey in January prior to registration opening.

Happy Holidays,
- Mike

1) Typically, I'd advocate that if it's "40k legal", then treat 'em no differently than codex units. However, I've ran into my share of massed sabre platforms and such... that a "0-1" Forgeworld unit is a fine compromise. For a SM army, maybe that's Sevrin Loth?

2) Just make each CAD unique and allow any formation/dataslate/white dwarf... it's an 1850 list, you can't cram that much sources to be effective in a large tournament setting imo.

3) Adlance is fine... I'd expect to see these in your tourny if allowed and will adjust my army accordingly. As for the rest of LoW... I'd allow any of them with the fewest restriction as possible. (ie, no Revenant + skyshield, Heirophant, and... ??)

3) Lords of War... yeah they can do alot of damage to un-preped list but this is a tournament and they should come prepared for it.

Couldn't have said it better. Exalt+1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Did you say GKs and Orks have an advantage? Lmao! This guy makes me cringe!

Wasn't really my point, but I'll bite.

Under some of these suggested conditions, what's stopping someone from fulfilling the minimum compulsory requirements in a Nemesis strike force and brandishing a Draigo? A whopping 220 pts to start a Draigostar. Gks dont need to be your primary detachment/investment. Not that it's a prime cut but nevertheless.

 Nyghoma wrote:

3) Lords of War... yeah they can do alot of damage to un-preped list but this is a tournament and they should come prepared for it.

Couldn't have said it better. Exalt+1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Did you say GKs and Orks have an advantage? Lmao! This guy makes me cringe!

Wasn't really my point, but I'll bite.

Under some of these suggested conditions, what's stopping someone from fulfilling the minimum compulsory requirements in a Nemesis strike force and brandishing a Draigo? A whopping 220 pts to start a Draigostar. Gks dont need to be your primary detachment/investment. Not that it's a prime cut but nevertheless.

And how many DraigoStars have won a major GTs in the US since the start of 7th Ed?

All the tournaments Mr. Remedy4389!

Not that it's a prime cut

QFE.

Wanna take anymore quotes out of context? We can play this game all day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The bottom line is this. I can't stand seeing tournaments being dumbed down for the lowest common denominator. What happen? You're 6th edition army didn't translate well into 7th edition? Oh well, go back to the drawing board. Awww your army can't handle WS spam? Suck it up buttercup. Rock, paper, scissors got you in a bind? Welcome to life.

I don't care what the format is, no forge world-forge world. No LoWs-LoWs. No dbl CAD-dbl CAD. Just be consistent and non-partial. Carving out a blatantly tailored restriction list to suit or benefit your personal needs to get a leg up in a tournament is pathetic and shameless. Stop asking God (ie the TO ), to carry your weight or be your crutch. I've seen this done for ages in every competitive game format and media imaginable.

A super heavy is a friggin super heavy. I don't give a crap if it's attack can't ignore cover or if it doesn't have a ranged d attack. I don't care if it has 3 less hull points. You paid 370 pts for it. You got what you paid for. Stop railroading certain metas, l2p.

 Remedy4389 wrote:

 Nyghoma wrote:

3) Lords of War... yeah they can do alot of damage to un-preped list but this is a tournament and they should come prepared for it.

Couldn't have said it better. Exalt+1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Did you say GKs and Orks have an advantage? Lmao! This guy makes me cringe!

Wasn't really my point, but I'll bite.

Under some of these suggested conditions, what's stopping someone from fulfilling the minimum compulsory requirements in a Nemesis strike force and brandishing a Draigo? A whopping 220 pts to start a Draigostar. Gks dont need to be your primary detachment/investment. Not that it's a prime cut but nevertheless.

And how many DraigoStars have won a major GTs in the US since the start of 7th Ed?

It isn't so much a Draigowing build that is winning GT's so much as it is the centurionstar builds being abused.

Let's rephrase. How many GT's has centurion star won?

MechaniCon recently, right? Wasn't a huge event, but it is a GT.

My thoughts would be...

1. Allow forgeworld , go,with whatever is there. Look at updated rules and try not to let people go too far back in case they don't make sense. Don't do this 0-1 limitation. Also consider list that are ready for 7th edition.

2. Put a point limit on lord of war % wise. You don't want Reavers at the table. I would limit right below the ctan and war hound. Those big models for majority of players lop side games too much and makes it un fun.

3. Go with three detachments. This allows other books such as assassins and inquisitors to get play. Really after two detachments and you allow double cad, there is really no reason not too.

Will be there this year

Darkwynn wrote:
My thoughts would be...



2. Put a point limit on lord of war % wise. You don't want Reavers at the table. I would limit right below the ctan and war hound. Those big models for majority of players lop side games too much and makes it un fun.

Ok, I really need to know this. Explain to me which dominant tournament lists are fun to play against? I'm not talking about the rare, oddball list that surfaces when the planets are in alignment. I'm talking about the spam lists.

How are they more fun to play against then a Warhound? Is it psychological because the warhound is extremely visible? Is it because that player decided to entrust all of their firepower in a single model?

Are imperium armies (excluding IK), that much of a threat in the tournament scene because they are curbstomping their way to the #1 position? For that matter, are the Necrons sweeping all the competition?

What if those 2 LoWs are the only hope and chance for those armies to prevail or be top tier competitive? Yeah i know the lip service, "if you need a 900 pt LoW to win a game, you're a baddie"... That's not the point I'm trying to make. Was there some scandal I missed?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ps if you are entering a tournament with the intention of winning, why in God's name are you bringing a list that can't handle a LoW more expensive than Chapter Master?

 RiTides wrote:
MechaniCon recently, right? Wasn't a huge event, but it is a GT.

*grumble* didn't get to play that thing this year. Lost overall to that player by 1 point, well played him and his crew! Had one of the closest matches I've ever played against his buddy in game 3 after one too many beers/headaches and a really fantastic combo he had setup.

But yeah Cent-star it is currently one of those rather strong combos. Again, it's a tournament - plan ahead. Once the rules are locked down, build towards the possible other builds out there. A Cent star can be shot down if you plan for it, same as a penta-flyrant, adlance, flying circus, or bike army. These (generally) one-trick ponies tend to not make it all the way simply because their counters exist and once they get that powerful people react. in the tournament pool.

Serpent spam for instance. It's fun, it's horrible, etc. But tau eat that crap for breakfast. And while not the #1 race statistically on Torrent of Fire, there's a not insignificant chance each WS spamming player will run into a competent Tau (or Tau/Enclave) List over the course of a GT. And then they die if the dice don't go very much their way or they don't have some serious skills (looking at you Klaus)

Really, it's an odds game. But most of these problem-child lists have very hard counters. In the end, you can't run something that has a hard counter.. Ad Lance dies super fast to gating/dropping melta with a strong anchor out front from turn 1, WS has a tough time with volume of fire at S7+ and ignores cover, Psychics just got the mother of all counters out of the newly buffed assassin, Anti-Air solutions now abound for Flying beasties.. and in the end Lords of War are nasty but a S8+ weapon still carves a pretty big hole through them and you potentially give up alpha strike and 3 victory points which is huge in a tournament. So most every take-all comers top-tier list has some answer for WS, Ad-Lance, Flying Circus/Flyrants, etc. Even if it's just to ignore their big hitters and win big on 4 or 5 out of 7 mission types.

Newest question ..


So, this is something we're NOT seriously considering yet, but I'd love to hear feedback as always, as it popped into my head.

What if, instead of banning or allowing lords of war through the creation of an exhaustive and potentially difficult-to-maintain or confusing-for-players list, we instead took a page from the Narrative in 2014 and tweaked certain D results and (optionally) stomps?

These would be two separate questions:

1) Adding a rule that simply prevents D weapons and weapons with a hellstorm template or blast larger than 5" from reducing a cover [1b - or invulnerable save] to worse than 5+

2) Adding a rule that allows models affected by a "6" on the Stomp Table to make an invulnerable save if they have one, at no better than 5+

I don't know that #2 is really necessary ... though Stomp certainly has its opponents (especially the large blast stomps of the Tranny C'Tan). The tweak to the Hellstorm Template and D-track of the C'Tan would still make him fairly preeminent at dissolving magic-powered deathstars, but might substantially reduce his ability to willy nilly remove entire squads of regular joes and other things.

Food for thought.

This is in contrast to a ban-list of certain Lords of War and/or Lords of War weaponry, should they be permitted in the Open.

Keep in mind these things are still being discussed and finalized, and you should offer your input freely, but without fretting that you need to bombastically prevent (or force) adoption of a rule that is not a rule yet (or really more than a pondering).

Edit - note, this would not be crafted, if ever done, in a fashion that would allow people to combo shrouding and/or stealth on top of the reduced save to kick it back up.


Short-hand pros:
More elegant, applies to all future releases without requiring constant list updates and amendments and the like, plus does not require attendees to "know" a ban list, instead just to know 1-2 single sentence rules.
Allows people to play with all of their toys, and frees up those who just want to use their shinies to use their shinies without allowing more powerful abilities to enter the game quite fully.

Short-hand cons:
People are for some reason more OK with utterly eliminating all units/weapons that ignore cover and are hellstorm/apocalyptic instead of allowing them but at a slightly less powerful version
A relatively small % of people will still not like this idea due to wanting full-bore Lords of War / D in the game at all levels / capacities

Both can work Mike the problem is you are going to have people on either side unhappy.

Darkwynn wrote:
Both can work Mike the problem is you are going to have people on either side unhappy.

Since that's generally true either way, my curiosity is whether it would still be better then to go with an elegant rule that applies in perpetuity, rather than a list that needs constant management and editorializing.

 Nyghoma wrote:

Darkwynn wrote:
My thoughts would be...



2. Put a point limit on lord of war % wise. You don't want Reavers at the table. I would limit right below the ctan and war hound. Those big models for majority of players lop side games too much and makes it un fun.

Ok, I really need to know this. Explain to me which dominant tournament lists are fun to play against? I'm not talking about the rare, oddball list that surfaces when the planets are in alignment. I'm talking about the spam lists.

How are they more fun to play against then a Warhound? Is it psychological because the warhound is extremely visible? Is it because that player decided to entrust all of their firepower in a single model?

Are imperium armies (excluding IK), that much of a threat in the tournament scene because they are curbstomping their way to the #1 position? For that matter, are the Necrons sweeping all the competition?

What if those 2 LoWs are the only hope and chance for those armies to prevail or be top tier competitive? Yeah i know the lip service, "if you need a 900 pt LoW to win a game, you're a baddie"... That's not the point I'm trying to make. Was there some scandal I missed?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ps if you are entering a tournament with the intention of winning, why in God's name are you bringing a list that can't handle a LoW more expensive than Chapter Master?

Sure, I can handle the question because I think you are kind of missing a bigger point. Tournaments are suppose to be competitive but there is supposed to be an atmosphere of fun there also. Your top tier and normal players will be able to handle those lords of war... Your majority of players wil not though. The game hasn't matured fast enough for it to happen and the books are coming to fast.

What happens is you have a singular model that goes and decimated three or four units on the other side that can hurt it. Then the opposing player can do nothing. Turns out to be no fun and you have a person who just wants to quit and leave. What good does that too for anyone? Less players and more people leave the game. Now from your tournament list that most players have they can at least interact with that army do some damage and feel like they are playing a game or tactics are being used. There isn't much tactics or thought when you put one model down, turn it to shoot and roll dice and that is your whole army.

Necrons and elder will get a new book and changes will happen by then but if you don't understand why everyone has a huge knee jerk reaction to them ... Then I don't know what to tell you. GT's need to cater to their whole population and make the game fun for everyone.

Agree with Darkwyn, The attitude of "It's a tournament, so suck it up or don't play." Is not one that leads to the long term sustainabilty of the 40k community. A majority of players are not willing to spend hundreds of dollars in the pursuit of winning, and wholesale change their armies to win events. They just are not. They want to be able to play close games, using the army they have invested in with perhaps small modifications over time. Events need to cater to this crowd as it is the largest one. Most don't expect to win a GT (especially a large one), but want to play multiple enjoyable games, against a variety of players and armies. If that is not possible most will save their money and not attend....which leads to events shutting down. We have seen this increasingly since the middle of 6e, where top lists are just not something average lists compete well with, and often turn the game into 2 guys rolling dice, while one removes models, and loses the game accomplishing little. Superheavies increase the chance of this....either the superheavy nullifies threats to it, and dominates, or the opponent can handle it and losing it renders the SH player non-competitive (losing 800 points on say turn 1, will very much take a player out of a game fast.)



As to D weapon changes, those look decent, I still hate the randomness they introduce into the game, but at least this is a bit better.

Ps if you are entering a tournament with the intention of winning, why in God's name are you bringing a list that can't handle a LoW more expensive than Chapter Master?

I think this quote really sums up everything. A vast majority of tournament attendees enter tournaments with no real intention of winning.

What Brendan said is accurate. The 40K tournament community is not the Magic: the Gathering community. Also, 40K is not Malifaux - competitive and casual distinctions exist heavily, because the game is nowhere near balanced. Games like Malifaux can be played no holds barred at all times b/c there is no such thing as a power unit or a weak unit (or, perhaps better said, everything is turned up to 11).

Because of this, if peoples' owned armies cannot be built into something that can deal with popular meta builds, they tend to either not attend or "accept their fate" and attend without regard for the outcome.

This is why the NOVA Open invented its bracketing system - so players who don't have top tier armies don't have to chase the meta dragon, and actually get locked into the right spots for them once the early round bludgeoning occurs. This makes it very hard for the "meta" to cause all your losses at the NOVA's GT.

MVBrandt wrote:


1) Adding a rule that simply prevents D weapons and weapons with a hellstorm template or blast larger than 5" from reducing a cover [1b - or invulnerable save] to worse than 5+

2) Adding a rule that allows models affected by a "6" on the Stomp Table to make an invulnerable save if they have one, at no better than 5+

You know - I dig this idea, however, didn't the S Weapons end up changing in 7th to allow Cover/Invulnerable Saves versus them, depending on the D roll result? Isn't the whole idea of nerfing the Hellstorm and 5"+ Blasts simply the same as saying, "Everything S is just S10 AP1"? Wouldn't a few Supers/Gargs suffer a lot worse than others, Hierodules Vs Tranny C'tans?

The 6 on a Stomp table seems awfully rare to need attention. I could see C'tans being a problem, as they're really powerful in their current state, but knowing a 7th Necron book is in the pipes and that may change drastically in a few weeks (as I recall from 2014, 6th/7th Necrons would be legal for the 2015 NOVA if it remains the same), wouldn't this just be a little premature to be thinking about?

I think perhaps there needs to be some attention paid to it, barring what's been suggested above, I think a points cap on Supers/Gargs might be the most effective way to deal with the inclusion of more Supers/Gargs.

Either way - consider the idea of that a nerf *for* a Tranny C'tan would do to a Scythed Hierodule in this instance. That would provide the best litmus for the decision, no?

This is why the NOVA Open invented its bracketing system - so players who don't have top tier armies don't have to chase the meta dragon, and actually get locked into the right spots for them once the early round bludgeoning occurs. This makes it very hard for the "meta" to cause all your losses at the NOVA's GT.

Which is true, though every event eventually has you find your level in the meta, the great thing about bracketing is that it means you have something to play for once you do.

The 6 on a Stomp table seems awfully rare to need attention. I could see C'tans being a problem, as they're really powerful in their current state, but knowing a 7th Necron book is in the pipes and that may change drastically in a few weeks (as I recall from 2014, 6th/7th Necrons would be legal for the 2015 NOVA if it remains the same), wouldn't this just be a little premature to be thinking about?

To me it being "rare" (though 1/6 is not that rare), is what is wrong with it, it makes it stupidly random. I run into your deathstar and 1/6 times I delete large chunks, the rest of the time we have a relative slap fight....

 Hulksmash wrote:
Let's rephrase. How many GT's has centurion star won?

I don't recall off the top of my head, but that isn't the point.

The point is that the centstar is an abusive army that isn't fun to play against at all (at least for the majority of armies). Just like Adlance knights. Just like the seer council and O'vesa-stars of yesteryear. For example, my centstar (which comes in at about a grand) has Gate, Invisibility and 6 chances for Perfect Timing/Forewarning/Scrier's Gaze (2 GK Lvl 3 librarians). It is near invincible, cannot be locked in combat and just deletes units at a time. The rest of my army is either in reserves or hiding in a denial strategy (troops in stormravens and outflanking land speeders). There just is not much of an interaction in these types of games, besides you removing models. Granted, it's not like that all of the time, but for the less competitive players, it just isn't fun. That is what I mean by abusive. It makes for potentially very bad experiences for the average gamer because it just abuses a lot of the core rules.

 jy2 wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
Let's rephrase. How many GT's has centurion star won?

I don't recall off the top of my head, but that isn't the point.

The point is that the centstar is an abusive army that isn't fun to play against at all (at least for the majority of armies). Just like Adlance knights. Just like the seer council and O'vesa-stars of yesteryear. For example, my centstar (which comes in at about a grand) has Gate, Invisibility and 6 chances for Perfect Timing/Forewarning/Scrier's Gaze (2 GK Lvl 3 librarians). It is near invincible, cannot be locked in combat and just deletes units at a time. The rest of my army is either in reserves or hiding in a denial strategy (troops in stormravens and outflanking land speeders). There just is not much of an interaction in these types of games, besides you removing models. Granted, it's not like that all of the time, but for the less competitive players, it just isn't fun. That is what I mean by abusive. It makes for potentially very bad experiences for the average gamer because it just abuses a lot of the core rules.

An honest question for you. Do you feel your 5 Hive Tyrant list makes for an enjoyable and interactive game for your opponents? I get what you are saying about the CentStar but I feel like the complete randomness of psychic powers now will lead to a slip up at a crucial time which usually hampers a list like that over the course of a 5-7 game GT.

@Jy2

I disagree. There have always been armies unfun to play against. Sometimes more than others but there are always some that either abuse rules or point values of certain units that cause games to be boring.

Selective nerfing of core rules hurts some armies while boosting others. There is no guarantee of more fun had by the majority of players by down grading invis. There is no guarantee of of more fun had by the majority of players by banning Adlance.

I'm in favor of mostly leaving things alone. I think the vast majority of players would be in favor of not allowing super heavies/gargantuan creatures but I could be wrong. My only reason for being fine with them initially was as a counter to deathstars that are slowly disappearing and will continue to do so the more maelstrom is embraced (not BAO maelstrom).

Meh, I mostly showup to hang out with friends and have beers. I'm not to worried about what people change. As long as it's done in a timely manner with plenty of lead time.

 Remedy4389 wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
Let's rephrase. How many GT's has centurion star won?

I don't recall off the top of my head, but that isn't the point.

The point is that the centstar is an abusive army that isn't fun to play against at all (at least for the majority of armies). Just like Adlance knights. Just like the seer council and O'vesa-stars of yesteryear. For example, my centstar (which comes in at about a grand) has Gate, Invisibility and 6 chances for Perfect Timing/Forewarning/Scrier's Gaze (2 GK Lvl 3 librarians). It is near invincible, cannot be locked in combat and just deletes units at a time. The rest of my army is either in reserves or hiding in a denial strategy (troops in stormravens and outflanking land speeders). There just is not much of an interaction in these types of games, besides you removing models. Granted, it's not like that all of the time, but for the less competitive players, it just isn't fun. That is what I mean by abusive. It makes for potentially very bad experiences for the average gamer because it just abuses a lot of the core rules.

An honest question for you. Do you feel your 5 Hive Tyrant list makes for an enjoyable and interactive game for your opponents? I get what you are saying about the CentStar but I feel like the complete randomness of psychic powers now will lead to a slip up at a crucial time which usually hampers a list like that over the course of a 5-7 game GT.

No, I don't think it does make for an enjoyable/interactive game, which is why I don't plan to run my Pentyrant list in tournament play (at least for now, but for my next major tournament, I just may put up a poll to see what people think).

One of my philosophies of list-building is that you should never rely on just 1 aspect or "trick" in your army. If you do, then your army isn't very good because over the course of a 6-7 game GT, the "trick" that your army will rely on will fail. It's a given. Armies need to be balanced enough that they can still survive even when the mechanism that the army works off of isn't working. In the case of my 2 armies, that mechanism is psychic powers. DON'T make it your crutch. Your army NEEDS to be able to work without it, because that time will happen.

My armies are less reliant on psychic powers than you would think. While they may not be spectacular without psychic powers, they can still function without it. My Pentyrant list can actually still do well without the psychic buffs, because the core of the army is still outstanding maneuverability and excellent shooting.

The centstar is still a very dangerous deathstar even when some of their powers aren't going off. No Invisibility? The unit is still durable as hell with a tanking Draigo, majority Toughness 5, lots of 2+ save wounds, potential Forewarning and the ability to Gate out of trouble/assault. Stuck in combat without Gate working? I've still got 4 force weapons, 2 daemonhammers, Draigo's S7 attacks, 1 force axe and Hammerhand to make the attacks S9-10. This unit is actually a close combat beast that can kill Imperial and wraithknights in combat. No Gate? The star should always be advancing 6" each turn for a potential 30" threat radius. It's usually got something to shoot at even if it doesn't teleport around. Didn't get Perfect Timing (or it didn't go off)? It's still got weight-of-fire to take most things down. Playing against daemons or hordes with poor saves? Hurricane bolters work well against these armies. Yeah, psychic powers make this unit abusively broken, but even without them, it is still a very good and dangerous unit to deal with.

Rely too much on any one mechanism and it will fail. Use that mechanism as an enhancement to your army rather than as a crutch and your army will fare much better.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:
@Jy2

I disagree. There have always been armies unfun to play against. Sometimes more than others but there are always some that either abuse rules or point values of certain units that cause games to be boring.

Selective nerfing of core rules hurts some armies while boosting others. There is no guarantee of more fun had by the majority of players by down grading invis. There is no guarantee of of more fun had by the majority of players by banning Adlance.

I'm in favor of mostly leaving things alone. I think the vast majority of players would be in favor of not allowing super heavies/gargantuan creatures but I could be wrong. My only reason for being fine with them initially was as a counter to deathstars that are slowly disappearing and will continue to do so the more maelstrom is embraced (not BAO maelstrom).

Meh, I mostly showup to hang out with friends and have beers. I'm not to worried about what people change. As long as it's done in a timely manner with plenty of lead time.

I agree with your disagreement.

Fun and abuse is highly subjective. Tournament experienced/savvy generals like us usually don't care. That is because we know how to deal with those types of armies and build our lists accordingly.

However, IMO, we are but the minority, probably the 25-33% of tournament goers. The majority of tournament gamers just aren't savvy enough to know how to deal with these types of armies. Now some may like the beating, but most players won't enjoy playing against armies they really can't do anything about.

As for selective banning/nerfing, I don't care one way or another. I will adjust. Most competitive players will. I am not advocating it nor am I against it. I do feel, however, that TO's need to make the decision that they think will best cater to their customers. I don't think they can just run the game as it is currently, it's just too broken. GW isn't doing anything about it, so it's up to the TO's to shape their events into what they feel would cater to the MAJORTIY of their customers. And I re-emphasize the word majority because they will never be able to please everyone.

What happens is you have a singular model that goes and decimated three or four units on the other side that can hurt it. Then the opposing player can do nothing. Turns out to be no fun and you have a person who just wants to quit and leave.

Darkwynn, thank you for the response. Now this is where I'm still confused. I'm not dragging this out just to be obstinate, combatitive or just contrary. If a player spent 900 pts on that model that removes 3 or 4 units on its own, how is that different than 2 cent-stars(w/split fire) eliminating 3 to 4 units too? Or to a lesser extent 3-4 WK/RC'S or a couple of IKs from doing the same cleaning on turn one? Personally I don't see the difference if the same amount of points spent produces the same result.

Let's compare it to the C'tan on turn one, since it's a hot topic. A tricked out c'tan costs 860. That's with WoW, SA, and TS. Turn one, if your opponent doesn't play smart ( or if the c'tan infiltrates), can potentially lose 3 units, one from WoW and one SA. As mentioned, TS only kills something if infiltrate is a factor on both sides, since 18" doesn't cross the breach.

I get the part that templates ignore cover. But so does a few other weapons, legacies, and psychic powers (in addition to regular templates), on their own or with simple combinations. Tigurius and Sevrin almost guarantee these devistating effects. D weapons do stand out, but losing units to a 5" melta blast, a hail of Str 9/10 attacks, or force bullets is still as disenfranchising as a LoW doing a dance on me.

Hell, I rather face a LoW in many cases, since it's a single target I can focus fire and stack effects on, instead of multiple, hard targets spread across the table, dividing my army. You can't ignore the benefit of stacking effects on one target.

At the end of the day, losing 3 units to 1 model or 3 squads on turn one is the same.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ps regarding the "can't hurt it" part. Who doesn't bring big guns to a tournament? There should be no such thing as " can't hurt". If a player doesn't have equipment to deal with MCs or vehicles, I really don't know what to do but shake my head in pity. It's the players own fault. If a player didn't want to invest in heavy weapons, in exchange for a lot of mid Str shooty units, then that's the conscious trade off they made. 20 bolter shots or that one lascannon shot. It's their tactical decision.

In regards to FW units I think the BAO/LVO list is a good place to start. I don't think a 0-1 limit is necessary

Ad Lance is fine in my opinion. I have played both with and against it.

D weapons and stomp are fine since a 6 is needed.

I go to tournaments for the guaranteed games, friends and the stories that come from the weekend. Winning is a bonus.

Mike, Any Bolt Action events? This game has taken off in our area and I didn't see anything listed.

Not presently. Is taking off here with some. We'd need a motivated event lead to step up Pronto.

MVBrandt wrote:

1) Adding a rule that simply prevents D weapons and weapons with a hellstorm template or blast larger than 5" from reducing a cover

This right here... I think that's the "sweet spot" Mike.

Very elegant, too, Whembly. All it does further than the already-extant LVO/BAO ban list is take those very same units and let them be used, but with their reasons for BEING banned taken from 11 down to 8.

 whembly wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:

1) Adding a rule that simply prevents D weapons and weapons with a hellstorm template or blast larger than 5" from reducing a cover

This right here... I think that's the "sweet spot" Mike.

Question for consideration - reducing cover for D Str weapons, Hellstorm templates or 5"+ blasts, doesn't this boost the super-competitive desirability of both Eldar/Tau armies? Whereas keeping this as it is in 7th Edition, which is already nerfed from it's former incarnation, might discourage auto-taking Eldar/Tau or any other mass Ignores Cover army and encourage more balanced choices?

notbriang wrote:

 whembly wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:

1) Adding a rule that simply prevents D weapons and weapons with a hellstorm template or blast larger than 5" from reducing a cover

This right here... I think that's the "sweet spot" Mike.

Question for consideration - reducing cover for D Str weapons, Hellstorm templates or 5"+ blasts, doesn't this boost the super-competitive desirability of both Eldar/Tau armies? Whereas keeping this as it is in 7th Edition, which is already nerfed from it's former incarnation, might discourage auto-taking Eldar/Tau or any other mass Ignores Cover army and encourage more balanced choices?

I'm not sure that it does. Serpents and certain Tau builds are going to be mighty powerful and super desirable no matter where you go, while still respectful of the fact different local metas behave differently. Additionally, if the rationale is that 'large powerful cover save ignoring weapons on superheavies/gargs = bad and in need of banning,' and your rationale is that their inclusion reduces the occurrence of "super-competitive Tau and Eldar armies" ... then by legalizing them while weakening their guns somewhat, we are still pushing away from Eldar/Tau more so than most other events, where these weapons/units are simply outright banned.

Further, by having an elegant cover-all rule (that may require tweaking and eval for sure if adopted at all), we also prevent saying "no" to 90% of the perceived problems while missing new additions that slip under the rug.

Also, keep in mind that there are a hundred things "wrong" or "powerful" about certain things in 40k - few people would argue it's a meaningfully balanced game, and fewer still who've tried a game like ... oh, I don't know, Malifaux. That said, there are still plenty of armies that can compete at the highest level, and very good event format design in terms of Bracketing, etc., that helps with those who don't want to bring them. The rationale behind addressing these particular weapons/abilities is their mass unpopularity and resistance to "letting them in in the first place" ... serpents are in the game, and there's widespread dislike for their potency combined with general resistance to banning or modifying stuff that's "already in." These weapons are banned at nearly every event as is, including the current iterations of the LVO/BAO and NOVA formats, which are the most broadly used. Ipso facto, this rule is both more elegant than a ban list, and takes steps toward opening the game up more .... not restricting it. It targets abilities/weapons/units that are currently not allowed in most places at all.

You move D weapons down to S10/AP1 and you're going to see a number of armies and 'stars get MUCH more competitive. Tau for one benefits immensely because we don't ever use D weapons really anyway (point cost just isn't right to bring ours) and have plenty of fantastic shooting options anyway. Stars and big invuln save models also love this change.

I'd be heavily against changing D weapons to S/AP. Even though my lists would certainly enjoy seeing it, I think it would have an immense change on the meta, and not for the better.

That wasn't suggested / isn't being considered

Fourth NOVA coming up for me...stoked already...It should be said that no matter what the Grand Tournament rules end up being there are an absolute plethora of other things to do at NOVA, 40K or not...The Narrative is absolutely killer...every table you come to at the Narrative, both players are having a blast...I watched the narrative this past year and marveled at how much fun everyone was having...win or lose...Pick up 40k this year, which sounds like a lot of fun if you just can't get enough...not to mention all the other game systems...and the lounge...ohhh...the lounge...the NOVA just rocks...Due to work constraints this year I am getting to attend one event and I choose to drive 10 hours to attend this one...that is how much I suggest it...so...here is my two cents if I get that much to spend...

Forge world opens up alot of cool models, keep it at 0-1 unique and it should do nothing but add fun and variety to the game

I am a fan of 2 detachments...end of story...with that being said I also am on a limb in that I think battle brothers should be gotten rid of...whatever the NOVA brass comes up with will be in the interest of the attendees ...so I am all in on their decisions...

I also see nothing wrong with a limited list of LOW...IMO knights are essentially a LOW...if knights get to play...so should LOW...adlance players should be allowed to play with their toys...and doused with rotten tomatoes from the jeering crowd, all the same...IMO the boys at FLG got a good list to start from...with that being said...once again...whatever the crew comes up with will be in every attendees interest...

As I have stated concerning FLG's tourney format...these gents and everyone on the NOVA crew go to the greatest lengths to put on the best events possible for everyone while risking financial ruin as a result of a failed event...everyone should shake their hands when at one of their events...they put up their hard work and everything else for the attendees...so whatever tourney format they come up generally speaking makes me super happy...cuz well...there is an awesome event to attend and have a blast at...

C everyone at the NOVA...wish it was next week!!

You're the man, KS. How much do I have to pay you for more of your salsa this year?

In good news, in addition to the regular opening of registration on Feb 1 and the flurry of instant SuperNOVA sales and other things, we've got a few things you should keep careful eye on:

Roman Lappat and Raffaele Picca of Massive Voodoo are teaching 4 classes apiece. These classes are being offered twice by each instructor during the con. The best times will sell VERY fast, and we can't expand class size once sold out. Don't miss these.

Also, Frontline Gaming will again be partnering with us to offer their gaming mats for sale through the NOVA Open webstore (Which is receiving a major update). The advantage to acquiring the mats through NOVA is you can pick them up at the con, ready to go and without having to pay for shipping. This should include their new swanky Malifaux mats and other things. Check it out when reg goes live!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
PS / Edit - We're also finalizing details for further expansion to the art and hobby side of the NOVA in the form of a Grex-sponsored speed painting competition. You'll be given a total time of 3 hours (possibly 2, we're in rules discussion now) to paint a tank from start to finish, with free use of a Grex paint station set up at the con for each competitor ... brand new Grex demo airbrush, paints, the works. The competition will be judged by Justin McCoy, Roman, and Raffa to boot!

MVBrandt wrote:
That wasn't suggested / isn't being considered

Apologies Mike, not sure why but I thought it had been mentioned earlier in the thread by another player. I'd have been against it in either case as we might as well just play 6th edition pre-escalation with solutions like that.

Sounds like some fun stuff on the hobby side coming up! I'm normally all on the gaming side, but you're making it awful interesting over there!

GreyDragoon wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
That wasn't suggested / isn't being considered

Apologies Mike, not sure why but I thought it had been mentioned earlier in the thread by another player. I'd have been against it in either case as we might as well just play 6th edition pre-escalation with solutions like that.

Sounds like some fun stuff on the hobby side coming up! I'm normally all on the gaming side, but you're making it awful interesting over there!

The consideration was basically just making it so that "6" results on stomps and d attacks ... as well as any attack from a greater than 5" blast or a hellstorm template, would in total never be able to completely ignore invuls/cover, instead giving units affected by them a single non-rerollable 5+ save against them.

So, wordsmithing needs to be done if we went that way, but it would basically be ...

You have a model with a 5+ or better invul that got stomped and he rolled a 6? You get a 5+ to ignore the effect.
You have a model with a 5+ or better cover save that got hit by a D weapon that rolled a 6? You get your 5+ cover save.
You have a model with a 5+ or better cover save that got hit by a S10AP1 Hellstorm? You get your 5+ cover save.

This would basically legalize everything that to date has been rendered illegal due to fears of big hellstorms/etc., and also slightly soften the blow of widespread superheavy introduction to the East Coast / NOVA meta, without requiring players to keep up with an ever-changing ban/legal list.

It's food for thought at this point at present, but it is NOT being considered to turn D into S10AP1, nor take away multi-wounds, nor anything like that. It would simply make it so that the heaviest hitting, most one-sided/non-interactive "pick up all your models" abilities/effects would be tuned from 11 down to 8.

I just want to chip in and say I now really, REALLY like that compromise.

I'd prefer to just allow 'em all with no adjustments, but you know your participants and you'd have to cater to their desires.

Good idea man and it follows the KISS principle.

So who doesn't play tournaments much, is really into figure painting, but ISN'T coming to NOVA?

Because ... this year ...

The NOVA Open is holding at least 44 distinct hobby seminars. These include classes taught by some of the best artists and teachers on the planet, including Justin McCoy, Roman Lappat, Raffaele Picca, and Caleb Wissenback.

Here's some sneak teasers of class subjects included ...
Airbrushing Miniatures
1-on-1 Paint Your Own Model w/ a Pro
Intro to Competition/Display Painting
Using Pigments on Miniatures
Weathering Techniques
Freehand Secrets
From Primer to Tabletop
Intro to Blending
The Nurgle Effect
Maximize Your Appearance Score
Theory - Contrast, Zenithal Light, Color on Miniatures
Creating Cool Gaming Bases
Wet and Wet Painting Techniques on Gaming Bases and Miniatures
Painting Leather and Metals
Sculpting and Conversions
OSL and Effects
Painting Faster, Better Models Using Focus Areas
Painting Faces
Build and Take Your Display Board
Advanced Display Boards - Build *and Light* and Take Your Display Board
Learn to Build Terrain
Advanced Terrain Building
Cogs and Cobblestones - Steampunkifying Terrain
Corvus Belli - Inside Infinity
Corvus Belli - World First Reveal and Discussion
Malifaux and Game Design
Running a Successful Tabletop Wargaming Open Beta
Introduction to Using LEDs with Miniatures
Build and Light Your Model
The Hitchhiker's Guide to a Successful GT Experience
... and more

In addition to all of these formal seminars, there are also nonstop lounge talks given all weekend long for free in our charity lounge.

You could fill every inch of your schedule, and learn everything above and more, without ever rolling a single dice for a single game. What's doubly cool is you can do both - the seminars are almost all taught more than once, and they are scheduled to allow for either a "seminar-first" convention experience, or a "gaming-first" convention experience.

Registration opens on Feb 1. We'll reveal the formal class schedule and who is teaching what in our Jan 15 newsletter. You'll want to especially take note of classes by Roman and Raffa, and the primetime / ideal time frame classes taught by McCoy ... many will sell out very, very quickly, based upon last year's trends.

MVBrandt wrote:
You have a model with a 5+ or better invul that got stomped and he rolled a 6? You get a 5+ to ignore the effect.
You have a model with a 5+ or better cover save that got hit by a D weapon that rolled a 6? You get your 5+ cover save.
You have a model with a 5+ or better cover save that got hit by a S10AP1 Hellstorm? You get your 5+ cover save.

Perhaps consider adding (or preserving, if the rule already exists):

"Absolutely no re-rolls for these 5+ saves."
"No FNP rolls allowed versus a strength D attack (that rolled a '6')."
"If you fail a 5+ versus a strength D attack (that rolled a '6'), your model is removed from play, whether or not it has the Eternal Warrior Characteristic."

MVBrandt wrote:

GreyDragoon wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
That wasn't suggested / isn't being considered

Apologies Mike, not sure why but I thought it had been mentioned earlier in the thread by another player. I'd have been against it in either case as we might as well just play 6th edition pre-escalation with solutions like that.

Sounds like some fun stuff on the hobby side coming up! I'm normally all on the gaming side, but you're making it awful interesting over there!

The consideration was basically just making it so that "6" results on stomps and d attacks ... as well as any attack from a greater than 5" blast or a hellstorm template, would in total never be able to completely ignore invuls/cover, instead giving units affected by them a single non-rerollable 5+ save against them.

So, wordsmithing needs to be done if we went that way, but it would basically be ...

You have a model with a 5+ or better invul that got stomped and he rolled a 6? You get a 5+ to ignore the effect.
You have a model with a 5+ or better cover save that got hit by a D weapon that rolled a 6? You get your 5+ cover save.
You have a model with a 5+ or better cover save that got hit by a S10AP1 Hellstorm? You get your 5+ cover save.

This would basically legalize everything that to date has been rendered illegal due to fears of big hellstorms/etc., and also slightly soften the blow of widespread superheavy introduction to the East Coast / NOVA meta, without requiring players to keep up with an ever-changing ban/legal list.

It's food for thought at this point at present, but it is NOT being considered to turn D into S10AP1, nor take away multi-wounds, nor anything like that. It would simply make it so that the heaviest hitting, most one-sided/non-interactive "pick up all your models" abilities/effects would be tuned from 11 down to 8.

I gotta say, this compromise is probably the lesser of two evils. It's simple and elegant, compared to the labrynthine and gossamer task of tailoring an objective ban list. This is the scalpel to the hatchet.

/thumbs up

Looks like we will have a full suite of DropZone Commander Events at NOVA Open this year!

Also, quite exciting, but our SuperNOVA Bags, which are already some of the coolest VIP bags on the planet, will now have one of these in EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM:
http://www.hawkwargames.com/products/core-shaltari-starter-army-in-plastic

http://www.hawkwargames.com/products/core-phr-starter-army-in-plastic

http://www.hawkwargames.com/products/core-scourge-starter-army-in-plastic

http://www.hawkwargames.com/products/core-ucm-starter-army-in-plastic

that is pretty sick mike nice job!

iNcontroL wrote:
that is pretty sick mike nice job!

Thanks, Geoff!

In addition all the crazy stuff announced in our newsletter, Cool Mini or Not will be running sales, vendoring, and also running tournaments at the NOVA this year, including Wrath of Kings.

Additionally, most of our event systems have added what we call Critical Mass Events, or CMEs. CMEs are basically 8-man tournaments with a more streamlined and casual feel to them, as well as a smaller cost, that do not require preregistration (in fact, don't allow it). Instead, the "start times" of CMEs are listed on the NOVA schedule, and events fire (or multiple events fire simultaneously) for each set of 8 players ready to go. Registration is done on site with a couple of smart phone clicks, and prizes are streamlined (more than double your money for going 3-0 in the 8-man quick tourney, and getting your money back if you go 0-3). This is meant to increase the opportunity for people to try out different game systems or secondary passions while still participating in major events, seminars, etc., while at the NOVA.

Reminder that registration is very close - basically 10 days away. We'll be opening registration at 9:30AM on February 1, and it's important that you note SuperNOVA registrations will vanish very quickly (they sold out in a few hours last year). This is also true for Roman and Raffa's courses, spots in the Malifaux National Championships, spots in the Narrative Warlord track events, and more. Every year, more and more things sell out pretty much when reg opens - don't miss out!

Well, the SuperNOVA bags just got crazier. There may be yet another game system's $70 starter kit now in each of them ... on top of the Dropzone Commander starter kits ... on top of hundreds of dollars in other custom and unique swag ... on top of the KR BOGO ... on top of the KR bag itself that you get with the SuperNOVA reg ...


So, yeah. Be ready to snag yours at 9:30AM US EST in just a few days. Registration opens February 1.

40k ARMY construction near-to-rules:

http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/01/army-construction-narrowing-40k-gt-army.html?showComment=1422291023083#c4891103543453810598

So we're getting close to finalizing what we want to do for the 40K GT this year.

This has been a LONG process, with a great deal of input. I think it's possible some minor things will change as we get closer. It's also possible we'll get a bunch more input in the next few days. We'll release the final rules the day before registration opens (Reg opens this coming Sunday at 9:30AM US EST Time).

Here's where we're at presently:

On the question of detachments -
Battle-Forged Rules using 2 Detachments, with no caveats or further restrictions

On the question of Forge World -
All Forge World units legal, but all are considered Unique / 0-1*
* - We might develop a very small ban list for some FW units if we go this route, TBD

On the question of Lords of War / Super Heavies / Gargantuans -
Lord of War Superheavies/Gargantuans ... we're leaning toward keeping them OUT. They were almost universally panned by last year's attendees in the events they were allowed in. This included very large samples of more casual attendees. Adding more big, expensive models to the game when more casual players are opposed to them / did not enjoy playing against them seems like a bone to more competitive-minded players who are going to play top tier lists in almost any meta alignment. We did not receive a great deal of positive support for allowing Superheavies/Gargantuans beyond Codex: Knights.

Non-superheavy/gargantuan Lords of War ... definitely will be allowed.

Knights - We are strongly leaning toward BANNING the Adamantine Lance, but otherwise allowing Knights, inclusive of FW Knights subbing into the Knight Detachment per their rules (they'd still be "Unique" and follow the restriction above when trying to use them as Lords of War). The reason for banning Adamantine Lance is similar to the Lords of War question. There's a TON of visceral evidence from Torrent of Fire, NOVA itself, and more that shows AdLance players doing no better or worse for having it at the top tier, but running over players throughout the mid and low tiers of tournament attendees. MOST attendees are not hyper competitive, most are there to have a great time and do their best. AdLance lists are winning between 65-75% of their games, with most of the losses coming in the top tiers. This isn't a trend we see a great deal of momentum to support, and is not nearly so well-reflected among other "power" list styles / codices / etc. (effectively nuking the "well any power list or deathstar will just run through the average and low tiers!).

Further feedback is welcome really to the "buzzer" as we're continuing to refine, discuss, and then correctly phrase these things prior to the opening of registration this weekend.

A perk at NOVA is the hotel and location.

We're a free 5 minute shuttle from Reagan National Airport (DCA). We're on the DC Metro rail, basically in the city proper ... it's less than 15 minutes from the hotel door to find yourself staring at the National Monument.

It's only $91/night at the hotel, which is a really nice Hyatt Regency.

What's NOT nice, I guess, is hotel rooms aren't forever. In fact, many of the rooms in the block are already taken!

We have a ton, so hopefully we won't run out soon, but hotel rooms are free to book and free to cancel, so no reason not to snag yours now while you can; we basically have the whole hotel this year, so there's a limit to how much we can add.

Use this link to snag your room nights:
https://aws.passkey.com/g/40463125?utm_campaign=2014%20NOVA%20Open%20Wrap-Up%20and%20Results

What, if anything, are the thoughts towards the new Necron detachment? It's battleforged but contains a variety of formations.

The current thought process is to stick with the rule simply being "2 Detachments." The Decurion Detachment is just that, even though it is inclusive of a bunch of different formations.

THAT SAID, with regard to new things that GW releases upon us, inclusive of that, new FW combos, etc., we do reserve the right (with substantial lead time) to get more specific on such things.

We won't be changing rules a few weeks out on anyone, however.

Just an FYI: Registration opens in less than 2 days!

In a completely self serving part of the post: It's the Malifaux North American Championships!

Preregister to guarantee your spot!

Registration opens in 7.5 hours ... @ 930. Good luck getting your supernova!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Registration will go live at 9:30 here: http://novaopenstore.com

You won't be able to create a username / register until that time.

Just signed my brother and me up for Supernova passes! They're already at least 2% gone!

All signed up. Man those quickening events sold out CRAZY fast! In for 40k GT and the Nightfighters Narrative campaigns though.

Question about the Narrative campaign, normally I only play in the GTs and I would consider myself a competitive player. Is it appropriate to still make a competitive list as long as it is perhaps more of an oddball or themed army? All infiltration all the time with an army that rarely does it, that sort of thing.

GreyDragoon wrote:
All signed up. Man those quickening events sold out CRAZY fast! In for 40k GT and the Nightfighters Narrative campaigns though.

Question about the Narrative campaign, normally I only play in the GTs and I would consider myself a competitive player. Is it appropriate to still make a competitive list as long as it is perhaps more of an oddball or themed army? All infiltration all the time with an army that rarely does it, that sort of thing.

The Narrative has a lot of checks and balances for people bringing competitive that outstrips attendees; you shouldn't worry at all there.

The Quickening events are CMEs - you can only register for them at the NOVA proper, so no worries there; there'll be as many run as sets of 8 players sign up for at each of the red dotted timeslots on the schedule.

There are only 13 SuperNOVA passes left, 22 minutes into registration.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SuperNOVA are sold out ... 53 minutes.

Great, thanks for letting me know. Didn't want to worry about being a jerk by bringing an oddball power list. Looking at the narrative primer book though I think I may have made a mistake during registration. I put myself down as Virtue but if I'm playing tau I really don't have the models to properly play them. Could I be switched over to Humanity? It looks like there are some slots left.

Also did I miss something in the primer on the points? I'd assume 1850 if not otherwise mentioned, but haven't seen it in the document so far.

You can self drop and add events freely. The system will use your existing purchases like credit if dropped.

Mike, you gotta invent a machine that will slow down the Earth's rotation. I've got a Narrative Warlord ticket and am looking at Seminars, and I just can't quite get in everything I want! Especially since I want to take part in quickenings and the Gathering.

How does the Narrative work with Quickenings, anyway? Doesn't seem like it's possible with the mid day meetings.

It'll most likely be possible; we have a lot of flex and ability to run Quickenings "any time" there's a set of 8 players available to fire one off. It's sorta the nature of CMEs.

We're just still working how best to represent and execute those from a schedule perspective.

The long and short is thanks to the work Neil's done on the webcart and convention management system, which are integrated, is we can basically create, take registrations for, and fire a Quickening at any time of the day or night, presuming there's someone to keep an eyeball on it and hit the go button.

That sounds awesome - I'm going to try and get 8 people from my online community to get together for our own little mini tournament.
I'm always going to kick myself for not doing Supernova in 2012. I had plenty of time and I let myself miss it.

MVBrandt wrote:
You can self drop and add events freely. The system will use your existing purchases like credit if dropped.

Worked like a charm. Thanks Mike!

Lots of good feedback on the cart, and all props to Neil Gilstrap for building it.

Man is a pro.

Some updates ...

SuperNOVA passes sold out in 51 minutes. There's a wait list of 27. Please at least put yourself on the wait list if you want one ... never know.

X-Wing Narrative events are BOTH sold out. X-Wing Championship is on its way to sold out. Nearly every X-Wing Hunger Games event is sold out. People freakin' love X-Wing.

Wyrd's first ever National Championships are selling like hotcakes, as well as the other Malifaux events going on for the weekend.

The NOVA Narrative has EXPANDED spots this year, but it's still half sold out already. This is especially relevant if you want your choice of faction (Human or Virtue).

40K is selling fast, as usual. Many of Roman and Raffa's classes are already running out of spots.

Just to give a good feel for how registration went yesterday, we netted more registrations yesterday in the first 4 hours than in all of February 2014. So, sweet!

Everyone should also snag hotel rooms! It's free to reserve, and a huge chunk of our block vanished yesterday. We have more or less the entire hotel, but rooms aren't limitless and you'll find nights much more expensive in the rest of Crystal City.

Is there any way Airbrushing Class #1 could get pushed a little earlier? I'm in the Narrative and would like to attend, but they overlap like fifteen minutes.

I was interested in playing the X-wing narrative but the sold out too damn fast!

No bother, because I'm playing in the championship which should be a lot of fun. This is my first NOVA Open and I'm really looking forward to it.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
I was interested in playing the X-wing narrative but the sold out too damn fast!

No bother, because I'm playing in the championship which should be a lot of fun. This is my first NOVA Open and I'm really looking forward to it.

Strong chance of the X-Wing Narrative expanding some, so make sure you add yourself to the wait list(s). We won't be able to accommodate everyone, bu t we can accommodate more I *think*, and it'll prioritize based on wait list position.

Master, I forwarded your point to the scheduling team, and we'll see what we can figure out.

MVBrandt wrote:

Strong chance of the X-Wing Narrative expanding some, so make sure you add yourself to the wait list(s). We won't be able to accommodate everyone, bu t we can accommodate more I *think*, and it'll prioritize based on wait list position.

Cool, I put myself on the waiting list. I would imagine that because there is a scheduling conflict with the end of the Narrative and the start of the Championship, dropping out of the narrative would be okay?

Also, what are the restrictions on the "Large Single" category as far as model type? I have some 1/72 scale Star Wars models and I was curious if they would be acceptable in that division/category.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:

Strong chance of the X-Wing Narrative expanding some, so make sure you add yourself to the wait list(s). We won't be able to accommodate everyone, bu t we can accommodate more I *think*, and it'll prioritize based on wait list position.

Cool, I put myself on the waiting list. I would imagine that because there is a scheduling conflict with the end of the Narrative and the start of the Championship, dropping out of the narrative would be okay?

Also, what are the restrictions on the "Large Single" category as far as model type? I have some 1/72 scale Star Wars models and I was curious if they would be acceptable in that division/category.

It is intended by the leads that you drop either the Champs or Narrative on final day at your choice; so, no problems there.

The Capital Palette draft primer has all the info you need, inclusive of "that's totally fine" in answer to your specific question:
http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015-Capital-Palette-Draft-Primer.pdf

MVBrandt I have a question about the KR Bags and the SuperNOVA Pass, I was lucky enough to get one but was confused as to which bag option i would be able to choose. do i have a choice of the the bags listed on the 4th year of that sheet? or since this is my first year obtaining a SuperNOVA Pass am I only able to get the Backpack2?

If i am mistaken is there a way to change the bag I have chosen?

The latter. First year supernova get a free Backpack 2. Second year add K2 to choices, third add K3, fourth add K4 or 2 card cases.

Snagged one of the last supernovas!!!

Update on GT Rulings for 40K:

1 - Only NON-superheavy/gargantuan Lords of War will be legal in the GT.

2 - Forgeworld units will be legal, but will all carry the 0-1 restriction. If you affect a Codex unit with Forgeworld army-wide special rules or item upgrades, it also becomes Forgeworld and thus 0-1 (ipso facto, no applying an army-wide rule to multiple Tactical Squads ... as soon as one gained said rule, it would become 0-1). This will be further elaborated and clarified.

3 - All armies may be built from 2 Detachments. There are no further restrictions on army construction beyond this (i.e. at present the Decurion Detachment is legal, multiple CADs are legal, etc.).

IN all cases, we'll be working over the next month on a selective restriction list on a VERY small # of items, to potentially include the Adamantine Lance formation (as an example). This list will likely be as little as 5 units/formations or fewer.

We'll also be finalizing our draft FAQ and the nuances of army construction / rulings. These statements above are meant to give you more confidence in planning.

Look for FAQ and restrictions by March 1. Look for those to be finalized based upon feedback by April 1.

If you have any specific questions, let us know! More importantly, feedback continues to be most welcome.

(Further discussion here: http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/02/40k-gt-ruling-finalization-plus.html)

I just signed up.

Here's a question, I noticed my Paypal shipping address was incorrect (old address) after ordering, will any registration items be sent to the address provided at Nova website registration or Paypal shipping address?

No problem at all. Everything will be waiting for you at registration.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Record sales.

40K players - Narrative and GT - get on your horse; tickets are selling at a record pace.

X-Wing players ... there's almost no spots left, with over 60 unique X-Wing attendees *already* ... and the X-Wing Narrative sold out ... Hunger Games all nearly sold out (all 4 of them), and Championship only has 20 spots left.

If we can make the room, X-Wing is looking to be a sold out 128-person Championship this year ...

Malifaux National Championships tickets are also selling like hotcakes.

Roman Lappat, Raffaele Picca, and Justin McCoy art classes are also selling out quickly.

Whew ...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mission Updates ...

For those who played last year, we've revised them heavily for improvements.

We'll also be better incorporating Maelstrom.

Early preview of changes =

1) The pool of Secondary Missions will be tailored to be fixed for every round. We dropped the overly confusing KP round, but have made KP a Secondary. Thus, you may select KP and pursue it every round for the standard 2 points per Secondary if you so desire to tailor your list in this fashion. The purpose of making the Secondary pool static for every round and fully available every round is two-fold ... simplification and reliability. You do not need to study, grasp, and adjust for a separate grouping of Secondaries every single Round. Instead, you could feasibly and reasonably select the three that best suit your army and play them every time ... or not. Just up to how much you want to get into tailoring the mission to suit the match-up (which is the intent of the mission design, to reduce the impact of Meta and list build by providing enough twists to enable you to compensate for "Bad match-up" with tabletop and tactical decisions).

2) Maelstrom - There are a LOT of people who do not like Maelstrom. There are also people who DO. We are playtesting the concept of adding an "Into the Maelstrom" option to our Primary missions. At present, players select a standard or alternate version of each Primary mission, typically allowing them to play more standard missions (e.g., capturing objectives at the end of the game) or twists on the standards (e.g., scoring points per turn from objectives). If playtesting pans out well, "Into the Maelstrom" will allow players to pursue that course instead for any Primary, tuned to the same point accrual and cap as the standard primaries. Thus, players who wish to leverage tactical objective bonuses, warlord traits, or even just enjoy that style of mission more, will be able to do so in a fashion that is aligned and balanced with the mission at hand.

More to come, and feedback welcome as we go.

The simplified version of what the missions would then look like, btw ..

In every round, a pool of Secondaries which players select 3 per Round from, each worth up to 2 points (so, 0-6 points for Secondaries).
In every round, a Primary which players pursue a "Standard," "Alternate," or "Into the Maelstrom" version of, worth up to 9 points (so, 0-9 points for Primary).

As with last year, players select these in double-blind fashion after seeing each others' lists, so mission pursuit is inherently asymmetrical and tailored to the match-up at hand ... this reduces the impact of "I hope I get good matchups" on the tournament outcome, and broadens the range of what a "good" army really consist of. Further, it aligns more with the impact of Maelstrom and other aspects of 7th Edition in pushing a more asymmetrical mission experience where it isn't exclusively about "grab more objectives than your opponent at the end of the game."

Changes since 2014 have substantially simplified the presentation and execution of the primary missions while, with these newer changes, greatly simplifying the amount of bookkeeping and "re-study" required from Round to Round.

Update -

Lots of things are nearly sold out, much faster registration pace than in the past ...

To wit, X-Wing Players ..

There are only 18 spots left in the Championships (of 64)
Nearly all of the Hunger Games are sold out, with a total of only 12 of 96 total spots left and 2 of the 4 Hunger Games time slots totally sold out.
The Narrative is sold out, with nearly as many people on wait list as the originally offered # of spots.

40K Players ...
The Trios Team Tournament and 40K GT are selling faster than usual, don't tarry. The GT always sells out sometime in mid to late August, rarely with much of a wait list. The pace this year would infer that may happen much sooner.

The 40K NARRATIVE is running out of spots FAST, especially the Warlords (GT level event, day and night games), and within the Warlords, MOST especially the Virtue faction. The opportunity to leverage 40K to play 4-armed space-faring world-saving immortals is nearly gone ...

Also, Hotel Rooms. Snag yours. It's free. If they run out, they run out. Good luck getting $91/night at a decent hotel in DC outside of the Hyatt!

I'm really looking forward to this years seminars.

Good luck to those NOVA regulars who will be competing at the LVO this weekend! See ya'll in August

http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/02/east-vs-west-2015-round-1.html

And following up ... a sweet congrats to Sean Nayden for taking the LVO 40K event and K. "BOGO" Bogucki from the NOVA's own Monday Night Malifaux event for placing 2nd in the LVO Malifaux GT.

Will the West Coasters be able to take some lunch money back at NOVA?

Registration updates show the X-Wing Narrative events at double their sell-out # in wait listers ... so we might try to find more room for those guys. Narrative Warlords tracks are nearly sold out, with the Virtue only having a couple of spots left.

Hotel Room Nights are nearly HALF GONE ... we're pacing more than 2 months ahead of last year in terms of hotel room night pickup according to the Hyatt's passkey tracking system, so I'd suggest snagging your hotel rooms now (it's free to reserve, after all) if you're planning on attending, rather than missing out.

Passkey and hotel registration went down for a few days, it's back up now.

40K Registration went flying right after LVO - glad to see the excitement being built for our hobby

Make sure you don't miss out on what you want, folks. Seminars are also flying off the proverbial shelves.

40K FAQ is in draft stage, final revision. That will be out for everyone to pull hair over / etc. very shortly.

Do you know when the final (aside from surprise faction updates from GW) Narrative Supplement will be out?

Narrative Supplements are a WIP for March, so we should have those by April.

There's some consideration being given for making the Narrative Supplements "mandatory," but to do so requires us killing a lot of their trade-off-based restrictions and working more on a positive front with what they enable.

For anyone who is trolling the thread, the NOVA team builds and playtests Codex Supplements for every Codex which are meant to broaden the variety of interesting and traditionally fluffy/popular armies that can be fielded. Instead of banning things we think are too powerful or "spammy," we enhance things which are weak. As a result, many things that are unplayable in "Today's 40k" become so (e.g., Deathwing or really Dark Angels in general, Death Company armies as a whole, Veteran-centric guard armies, Tyranid Warriors, etc., etc.). By creating our own Supplements, we empower these units and army build styles without negatively impacting those builds and components GW has made most effective by their own rules. Basically, just as much a set of rules changes as a comp system while being constructive instead of destructive in nature.

I remember feeling a little roll-eyesy last year - I was playing Necrons, and took the Humanity supplement for no real benefit to myself - it made my Monolith slightly better, but completely defanged Tesla. A slightly better Monolith is still a Monolith - I only took it because it was painted nicely and it's the Narrative.

I played against a couple dudes with Eldar, and they choose to not use their supplement, which meant that they were playing with unnerfed Wave Serpents.

I'd say make it mandatory, and make it apply to all detachments.

The question is going out all around -

The NOVA Open's charity lounge is a pair of Hyatt Suites that we convert into a truly radical Bar and Lounge for the duration of the NOVA Open.

In this lounge, we host free talks throughout the weekend by industry experts, fellow gamers, pro artists, and the like. Want to BS with Justin Gibbs, creator of Malifaux, or talk with the guys from the Studio at Corvus Belli? Here's your chance to do it.

Plus, the NOVA Open Charitable Foundation pulls an ABC license to sell beverages for charity all weekend, in support of the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Doctors Without Borders, and the Fisher House Foundation. Plus, they make the beverages quite affordable! So, you can drink, snack, and be merry all while affordably supporting great causes (instead of shelling out mad bucks to the man for overpriced manhattans elsewhere!).

But we want to spruce it up a little more ... so Matt Stanley, one of the Malifaux leads, has been running around asking and I thought I'd ask it here. If epic movies were running in the suite all weekend long ... what would you want to be on the playlist? What would you want to NOT be on the playlist?

Die Hard is my first vote.

300 is a must!

Ultramarines the Movie, and mandatory attendance.

I'm not going to go up to watch movies, so just as long as the Narrative warlord meetings aren't distracted I'll be happy.

Draft 40K FAQ:

http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015-NOVA-Open-Warhammer-40K-GT-Draft-FAQ.pdf

Feedback most welcome!

This may sound dumb, but when selecting forge world everything is 0-1 total. So if I choose a character like Loth is that illegal because he's a model and gives chapter tactics thus is now 2 FW things? Or is he considered the 0-1 and his bonuses just apply?

A Mawloc making use of Terror from the Deep cannot choose to Deep Strike onto an ongoing close combat initially.

Hmm. Reasoning behind this one?

And what about Tyrannocyte shooting?

Chancetragedy wrote:
This may sound dumb, but when selecting forge world everything is 0-1 total. So if I choose a character like Loth is that illegal because he's a model and gives chapter tactics thus is now 2 FW things? Or is he considered the 0-1 and his bonuses just apply?

He is legal, he'd be the 0-1, and his bonuses would just apply.

Thanks

 N.I.B. wrote:

A Mawloc making use of Terror from the Deep cannot choose to Deep Strike onto an ongoing close combat initially. If the Mawloc happens to scatter into a combat, models will be affected as normal

Hmm. Reasoning behind this one?

And what about Tyrannocyte shooting?

This looks like a leftover from a previous edition. This will most likely be updated in the next draft release.

Last year weren't Thunderwolves S10? Why the reversal?

An IC on a Chariot loses his IC status.

I think this one can go; the CCB is a separate choice from the Overlord and the Demon ones have already been GW errata'd.

Chaos / Chaos Daemon units that obtain the Primaris power from their chosen discipline for
free may still gain the Primaris from another discipline due to Psychic Focus if they only
GENERATE powers from that specific tree during psychic power generation.

I still don't get this one. Not sure why they'd get to keep their primaris after they get Chaos Psychic Focus. P58, Psychic Focus:

“If during the course of the game, that Psyker gains a psychic power from a different psychic discipline, he immediately loses Psychic Focus (and the associated primaris power).”

Excerpt From: Games Workshop Ltd. “Warhammer 40,000.” iBooks.

chipstar1 wrote:

 N.I.B. wrote:

A Mawloc making use of Terror from the Deep cannot choose to Deep Strike onto an ongoing close combat initially.

Hmm. Reasoning behind this one?

This looks like a leftover from a previous edition. This will most likely be updated in the next draft release.

Why (except that it's wrong)? The Mawloc wording hasn't changed from the last two codices, IIRC.

FWIW that ruling is gone from the final version already. Was a good catch, imo.

Ok. What about the Tyrannocyte shooting? The ITC enforced a rather controversial vehicle ruling, regarding LOS.

We are not making them into half vehicles. We did add a clarification due to the IC ruling creating a lot of questions about it.

Sounds good, I couldn't find anything about the Tyrannocyte in the FAQ link above.

While NOVA is too far away for me to participate on, the FAQ is being used at tournaments closer to home too, so I'll allow myself to make a few comments and enquiries:

Inquisitor Lord Hector Rex is included in the latest Siege of Vraks book, making these rules the most updated and valid ones. His faction and available psychic disciplines are listed there, so the section on him can be removed to avoid confusion.

Hell Blade/Talon's Baleful Aberration: Your FAQ says that it doesn't have to be moved the full distance rolled, but when I contacted ForgeWorld about this they said:

"The Hellblade and Helltalon must move the full distance rolled if possible. If this is not possible then move the model as far are you are able." (quoting email) - Not a big deal but I just figured you might want to know.

Are the various vehicle upgrades from IA.13 allowed? (Legacies of Ruin) If so, could you specify how the Death of Kasyr Lutien works?*

Are Renegades & Heretics from IA:13 allowed at NOVA? If not, I understand why they are not in the FAQ, but if they are allowed there are a couple of things that could be cleared up. (Random ld and psychic shriek, Salamander vehicles having BS3 in the statline but having an upgrade to give them bs3, meaning the statline is a misprint etc.).

*For what its worth FW says

"The Death of Kasyr Lutien Relic grants a re-roll per hull Point remaining to every friendly Psyker within the specified range"

40K Draft Primer Updated

Newly updated missions, inclusive of a suggested Playtest and Feedback mission amendment.

Highlights of the Mission Changes include removing the overly complex Comparative Missions from 2014, and simplifying Secondary Selection to a static pool of Secondary Choices that remain the same for every round (as opposed to having to study and analyze a new set of Secondaries every round).

Additionally, army construction updates are inclusive within (though not substantially or meaningfully changed from that most recently posted here).

http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015-40K-GT-Invitational-Draft-Primer.pdf

Please note: if you opened this recently on chrome/etc., you might want to refresh. If there is a large red font paragraph explaining the dated nature of the missions, you're looking at an old doc and need to hit the refresh button.

We have also made updates to the FAQ already, but will withhold from constant updates until we do a comprehensive one on April 1. At that point, the FAQ should be finalized until new releases force new FAQ answers between now and the usual 30 day window for the GT.

Please continue to provide feedback, especially on the Missions.

Soooo mike, I was thinking would it be maybe possibly kind sortve ok if I come? I don't want to impose but it would mean so much I me if you allow me to attend this year!

<3 brown

I suppose I'll allow it. But you need to bring me a gift of some sort for missing last year.

Question regarding USR section, for Infiltrate.

Reads: Units or models with the Infiltrate special rule, including those that receive it from a Warlord trait, must infiltrate, and therefore cannot assault on turn one.

What about models like a Lictor, who have both the Infiltrate & Deep Strike USR's. Would the Lictor be restricted to arriving via Infiltrate in this circumstance?

That's in reference to them being set up last. You are still allowed to go into reserves even with infiltrate.

Brad's got it right with his response here.

Yet can a independent character with Deep Strike join a unit with infiltrate in Deep Strike Reserve?

Lol was looking at the 6th edition FAQ!!

There's one thing about the Narrative Supplements I'd like to request. Instead of the Supplement applying only to your Primary Detachment, can it apply to all Detachments with the same Faction as your Primary Detachment?

For example, Jawaballs built this list using two Flesh Tearers detachments:

2 of these:
Priest
3 squads of snipers x5 with cloaks
6 assault squads x5 with melta x2 in Rhinos

The Rhinos in the Primary Detachment will have IWND and BS3, along with other things.

It's kind of weird to build lists and know that some of the models have one set of rules but identical models in a separate detachment have another. Honestly, I'd like to see Narrative Supplements apply to ALL of your detachments, but I don't know if that could be on the table.

We are discussing that, should be about right. Supplements wool be updated soon ish.

Some registration updates ...

40k is starting to fill up on the GT front

On the Narrative front, things are getting very tight, to wit:
There are only 9 spots left in the Warlords GT level Narrative event for players wishing to be on the side of the Virtue.

There are only 11 spots left in the Warlords GT level Narrative event for players wishing to be on the side of Humanity.

Nightfighters has a little more room, but not much, and is balanced pretty perfectly between Virtue and Human spots remaining.

There are over 40 people signed up to play in the Narrative as a whole already.

On X-Wing:
We're probably going to open up X-Wing's Narrative by doubling the room available. That said, this almost means nothing for new registrations, as the wait list was already nearly double. If you are interested in playing in the X-Wing Narrative event (Which can be done alongside the Championship), the Rebel wait list is at 10 and Imperial wait list is at 11 ... we're only opening 12 more spots for each.

The Championships are nearly sold out ... we're hoping we can double them down to 128 spots, but that isn't guaranteed. Snag 'em while you can.

The Hunger games had a total of 96 spots available, which is down to 8. 3 spots in Hunger Games 4, 5 spots in Hunger Games 2.

WM/H is also spiking up ... we cannot make more room than the 64 spots we have for most individual events.

We're down to only about 100 early access CAPs left, which are the ones that guarantee the fullest and swankiest swag bags. Don't tarry!

We've added another parallel / separate-but-equal track to the 40K GT ... to wit:

So, one of the things that makes the NOVA's 40K GT format unique is its refusal to cater to only one player type.

To expound, most formats choose to sacrifice their preference for one personality or player type in favor of another, seeking the most popular compromise. NOVA's GT format does the opposite - it expands and adds parallels within the format to address a broader range of players instead of what we deem to be the broadest single type of likely attendees.

To wit, here's how it works:

W/L track - The NOVA GT is 8 rounds in total. After 4 rounds, players are broken into 16-player sub-brackets and their records "effectively" reset for purposes of the TC track. The 16 players in the top bracket compete for the highest W/L award, with the 4-0 person in Bracket 1 earning it. That said, awards are given to the 4-0 finisher in *each* sub-bracket, all the way down to the bracket populated by those who started 0-4. The purpose here is to give a margin-agnostic award to players who perform the best among their competitive and list peers throughout the event in a simple head-to-head, win or lose category. By re-bracketing, we also allow players who brought softer lists or are more laid back about their game to apply tactics relevant to their level of involvement / interest in the game.

Battle Point track - The NOVA started off very "anti Battle Points." That said, lots of people LIKE BP events. So, it took us a few years, but we realized something we wish every event would realize - you don't have to choose between W/L and BP! Players earn BP in their games toward determining a winner or loser on the W/L track. They also earn these BP toward determining placement in our Battlemaster track. Battlemaster is w/l agnostic, harkening back to the more traditional BP-based generalship awards. Furthermore, Battlemaster allows for ties - in the w/l track, ties on score are broken by a series of tiebreakers. These aren't necessary in the Battlemaster Track; you'll still record them for purposes of W/L, but they're irrelevant for purposes of Battlemaster.

Overall Track - While lots of people really enjoy 8-round GTs that determine a single undefeated winner, that's not representative of EVERYONE, just like Battlemaster. Once again, something we wish more events would realize, we came to the conclusion some time ago that you don't need to pick one or the other in your format. In addition to tracking W/L and BP, the NOVA also awards appearance scores. Our Renaissance Man is the Best Overall player in the traditional GT sense ... and, to reinforce that point, it's a score based 50% upon your artistic score and 50% upon your competitive score ... and it also resolves itself after 6 rounds and 2 laid-back 3-round days of play. Ipso facto, it feels a little more relaxed and like the GW GTs of old if what floats your boat most is playing your best while fielding a truly gorgeous work of art of an army.

AND A NEW TRACK

So you get by now that the NOVA's format is preference-agnostic. We've figured out a way to emphasize the many different styles of grand tournament without forcing people to only play "our way or the highway." But we aren't fully there yet ... because we're still missing the fluff-forward / comp-centric style of play.

Like most organizers do with most of the other formats above, there's a certain thought process off the bat where you figure you can't possibly fit something like narrative or thematic army valuation into a competitive w/l type format. But ... if you actually think about it ... you can. You simply need to establish how it's scored, then track it.

So we don't have a name yet for it, or anything beyond notional percentages, but this year we'll be adding a fifth awards track (to say fifth, I'm including artistic score as the fourth not listed above - the NOVA's artistic track is the painting/conversion/theme side of the coin, whose other side is the W/L track). This track will establish a series of guidelines toward establishing a more thematically coherent and unit-diverse army with which to play. Players whose armies pass established metrics for fluff/composition/theme will become eligible for tracking within this new awards path, which will then evaluate their final position along primarily competitive (but also somewhat along artistic) lines. The goal here is to both acknowledge those who choose to field more thematic armies and also provide a mechanism for players to show off their tactical acumen while playing these forces. This blends very well in with the NOVA's bracketing system, as players who choose this course of play will naturally find their way to brackets with similar combined list/skill-strength players, thus enabling the opportunity to earn strong competitive scores *even if* the harder armies present in the GT issue them a loss here and there.

Input is welcome here, as far as what directions we should go - this concept is very much a work in progress, but it's a work in progress we'll see through to conclusion and inclusion in this year's Warhammer 40,000 Grand Tournament as part and parcel toward continuing its annual improvement attempts toward being the best format available for as many player types and preferences as possible.

Track name suggestions:

Lore-Master
Fidelis
"Cor aut Mors" Award - (cor aut mors, translated as Heart or Death, IE (Your choice is between) The Heart (Moral Values, Duty, Loyalty) or Death (to no longer matter, to no longer be respected as person of integrity.)

Any chance the Narrative supplements will be out by the April 15th newsletter? The KR case deal ends on the 17th, and I'd like to know what I'm bringing so I can order the appropriate cases. Good cross promotion there!

Affirmative, we'll get it done.

We're also working some badass changes to the invitational.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Additionally, the 40K GT and Invitational at NOVA this year will award ITC points for Frontline Gaming's ITC. This does NOT affect the format or FAQ, but should be relevant for those who are looking to boost their score within that annual circuit!

The 40K Invitational is seeing substantial changes this year!

Check out the link for a little early info ... http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/Invitational-Promo.pdf

In other news, the NOVA is excited to be receiving its first ever Show Minis. Sneak peak with a lot more to come in the newsletter ... these will be available *for sure* in SuperNOVA swag bags and for sale at the NOVA store. We're seeing what we can do about getting them in every swag bag (speaking of which, there are only about 50-60 swag bags left for CAP registrants!)

Is that one of the Virtue? Awesome!

Might be!

A more revealing sneak peak at the in-progress CAD work on the NOVA Open Show Miniature ...



Also, thoughts on Eldex and D
http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/04/dealing-with-el-d-ar-pre-codex-thoughts.html

MVBrandt wrote:
Might be!

A more revealing sneak peak at the in-progress CAD work on the NOVA Open Show Miniature ...



Also, thoughts on Eldex and D
http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/04/dealing-with-el-d-ar-pre-codex-thoughts.html

probably for the best on the D rulings.

Thought I still predict that eldar massed str 6 will be gamebreaking, unfun, and fill a lopsided amount of top spots. As well as de-insentvise people from wanting to bring armies like orks or khorne demonkin even more than they currently are.
n
in other words, its really going to do a number o variety, and thus the whole game suffers.

D ruling sounds ok still unsure how this is going to play out for vehicles and transports for other armies even with the nerfed d units. But at least this reduces the elder alpha strike issues a bit.

Keep in mind also that we're open to feedback in general, especially once the dex releases, and we haven't settled on a ruling yet.

I think the nerf d will be ok, especially without access to the under costed wraith knight. Scatter laser overload is going to be a pain but good thing is there will be plenty of time for people to play test the new rules to see if there are any major issues.

Honestly -1 to D solves like 90% of my problems with it. Now if only we could do something about stomps on 6s.....

Thing about stomps ... Wraithknights are Gargantuan Lords of War, which are presently disallowed for the NOVA's GT and Invitational. So, unless we make an exception to allow Eldar an advantage, they aren't legal at present.

IKnights are the only legal Super Heavies at present, and the missions go a long way toward punishing iKnight spam pretty hard (plus, they take up at least one of your detachments, as opposed to being a Lord of War snuck into a more mission-optimal detachment).

So stomps are not *as* big a concern as might otherwise be the case.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Unrelated update -

NOVA Open Beer Mugs give you $1 off draft beer in the NOVA Open Charitable Foundation's Charity Bar & Lounge, where free talks from industry professionals, seminar instructors, game designers, and more accompany good conversation, board gaming, and other activities with fellow gamers from the con. Simultaneously, booze and food are affordably priced and benefit charity (all proceeds to supported charities).

Having a NOVA Open Beer Mug isn't just a commemorative "cool," it's also a discount on draft beer all weekend long.

Last year we had only about 50 for sale at the con, and they sold out in a few hours on Thursday. We aren't likely to have too many there again, so if you want cheaper beer and a cool beer mug, pre-purchase now at novaopenstore.com

I have a couple questions about army construction and inclusion of Harlequins in the Trios Tournament.

For the 1000 point list, would I be able to just run the Masque detachment?

Also, do I have to use my 1000 point list as a base and then have to add to it for the 2000 point game? Like would I be able to switch to running a formation that is 2000 pts instead of the Masque detachment?

 Dude_I_Suck wrote:
I have a couple questions about army construction and inclusion of Harlequins in the Trios Tournament.

For the 1000 point list, would I be able to just run the Masque detachment?

Also, do I have to use my 1000 point list as a base and then have to add to it for the 2000 point game? Like would I be able to switch to running a formation that is 2000 pts instead of the Masque detachment?

Mr. Dude_I_Suck

Good question. I have thought long and worked out a viable solution for Harlequins for the doubles portion (1000 pts) of the TRIOS. As we all know Harlequins do not have a HQ slot and therefore would not be able to be played in a Allied FOC. So what the TRIOS will be doing is allowing the Harlequins to take a single ELITE choice as a dedicated HQ. This way the Harlequins will be able to fit into the allied FOC and still follow the limitations all other factions must follow. Also it will not force the Harlequin player to take units they don't want like the heavy slot or what not. -- So no you will not be able to take the masque FOC in your doubles (1K) list.

Please see the next newsletter for an updated Trios Primer

As for your second question. The only restrictions for the 2k SOLO portion of the TRIOS lists are that the primary faction must be the same as you used for the doubles (1k) army. If you chose to play Harlequins in the 1k doubles portion. The 2k list does not have to have any of the models that are in your 1k list, the only limitations is it has to be the same faction. -- So yes you can choose a formation instead of taking the masque FOC.

Please keep in mind as well the allied FOC changes to Harlequins are ONLY for the 1k doubles games and cant be used in the 2k games.

Thank you for bringing these up as it allows me to prepare better for the TRIOS.

Troy

Formations can definitely be a primary detachment.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
Formations can definitely be a primary detachment.

Oops. Edited original post.

Alrighty, thanks for the clarification.

Some things being discussed in reaction to the new Eldar and their impact include ...

1) Whether to simply make the field 0-1 for Super Heavy / Gargantuan creatures ... thus eradicating the current paradox of "iKnights are OK, take up to 5, but all you other SH/GC are illegal."

2) Especially if #1 gains traction, but regardless, whether to slightly mess with the rules for Stomp and D to make them less "lol pick up all your models" while still retaining some of their key balance functionality vs. things like Re-Roll/Invis stars.

VERY wide feedback from a variety of tournaments, including NOVA, shows that players absolutely detest picking up a bunch of their models because someone rolled a "6." There's also increasing resistance to the game feeling like Apocalypse (which was unpopular broadly in its time) is being forced upon us.

#1 is a good way to ban AdLance without explicitly doing it. I'd be for it, and if that change percolates down to the Narrative I'd like that too. Don't plan on taking one myself, but I feel bad for the guy with the Baneblade.

I kind of like "-1 to D chart except against SH/GC targets" as a D fix, so Wraithcannons do D3 wounds on a 3+ and D Scythes on a 4+. It makes Wraithcannons surprisingly like the 4th edition version. That might be a little too much of a nerf, but probably not.

Downgrading 6's to 5's is a less harsh way to do that as well.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
#1 is a good way to ban AdLance without explicitly doing it. I'd be for it, and if that change percolates down to the Narrative I'd like that too. Don't plan on taking one myself, but I feel bad for the guy with the Baneblade.

I kind of like "-1 to D chart except against SH/GC targets" as a D fix, so Wraithcannons do D3 wounds on a 3+ and D Scythes on a 4+. It makes Wraithcannons surprisingly like the 4th edition version. That might be a little too much of a nerf, but probably not.

Downgrading 6's to 5's is a less harsh way to do that as well.

The one catch here is the unit type hated nearly as much as super heavy/gargantuan D and Stomp in terms of post-event survey and feedback is the re-roll/invis star. 6's on D and Stomp effectively provide a meaningful counter to those within the meta. Simultaneously, we are NOT fans of nerfing Invis or the 2+ re-roll due to the fact better players easily deal with these types of units in terms of final results and they do not experience the same win % as ad-lance armies, for example, in terms of across-the-board play (potentially in part due to games where they fail to generate the correct powers or end up going second and the like).

So it's tricky to figure out a solution that doesn't leave the door open for those.

This is where we came up with discussing the idea of keeping Stomps from rolling 6's on units not directly engaged with them (stomp-walking through armies) and making D shots from beyond 12" count 6 results as 5s.

Appreciate the feedback, MSP.

I know for me personally I like stomp the way it is, but range D 6's is where my problem lies. I can use positioning and other tactics to try and stay away from combat thus having an effective counter to stomp. There is only so much "tactical" positioning that can be achieved when something can fire 36-48" away and roll that 6 however.

I like the thought process of the -1 on D table for ranged stuff. Honestly I don't know enough about game design to really offer any opinion past that.

As an aside limiting Iknights to 0-1 feels weird too. Seeing as its an actual codex. I'm on board with banning adlance as a formation but not knights entirely. Even as a non knight player that feels weird, especially with it seeming like they will be limited because Eldar have ways to deal with them nicely. I guess that leads us more into a rock/paper/scissors game though but aren't we already there kind of? where depending on matchups your odds of winning change and need to be offset by player skill in the bad matchups.

with all that said I'm sure you guys will come up with amicable solutions as you usually do.

MVBrandt wrote:
This is where we came up with discussing the idea of keeping Stomps from rolling 6's on units not directly engaged with them (stomp-walking through armies) and making D shots from beyond 12" count 6 results as 5s.

I always thought that the Nova FAQ said you can only stomp models in CC with the stomper. Never really came up in my games, the Knights usually killed everything before I1 lol.

I think lots of playtesting will be the only way to see if -1D or 6's to 5's is the way to go. Would have been nice if GW had done their job though.

Continuing thoughts for discussion. Keep in mind these changes are not oriented entirely around "what about these new Eldar zomg!?" They are oriented around trying to minimize changes to the game, while enacting changes with a shelf life greater than 1 week (which a change to JUST Eldar would have in the era of constantly changing rules / detachment rules / etc. that we find ourselves in).

0-1 Super Heavy / Gargantuan of any kind (inclusive of iKnights)

Decurion / Guardian Warhost style Detachments, if selected, take up *all* your Detachment Limits

Stomp results of "6" hitting models that are not engaged with the Stomping model are treated as "5"

D results of "6" originating further than 12" away from the affected model(s) are treated as "5"

I would like to see a 3 source limit instead of two.

I cant think of any of the current power houses that would REALLY benefit from this. However many of the lower tier armies would get a significant boost, it would also make it so that you can play more of your models and still have a decent list.

If you think about it the more restrictive sources actually HELP the more powerful armies.

What do Daemons, Eldar, Necrons gain by going from 2 sources to three? Nothing really. But Imperials, now I can bring some skitarii which are not worth losing a slot over. Maybe bring in an assassin or inquistor to help theme my army.

Ill second that Leth I'd love for tournaments to start moving to 3 detachments.

I like 3 detachment limits.
This also alliviates some of the issues for non decorian type armies.

I think stomp and assault str d are fine. They inherently have their own drawbacks. It's nearly impossible to assault turn 1. You need to move and charge 1-2 just to get to your target. Fmc can't assault if they fly or deepetrike the turn they land.
You need to take a round of over watch to the face after a random charge roll. Then stomps and most str d melee still strike last in combat. All of that is the draw back of melee str d and stomps.
Now range str d is a different issue and brings about more alpha strike problems. I believe all range str d should be reverted back to str 10 ap2 with the old distort rules. No one ever said the old distort weapons were underpowered before.

Wraithguard so far under many playtests are still broken even with -1.str d. They are so bad I don't think there is any reason to consider fire dragons which themselves are incredible unit. They should also be reverted back to str 4 ap2 distort weapons.

Regarding the lord of wars superheavies keep them banned that's what people wanted and voted originally. Even if you do a blanket str d nerf across the board you have many lord of wars which are much worse then the wraithknight which honestly doesn't care about range str d since the other 2 variants are just as good on a cheap gargantuan. It sounds like this direction your taking is simply to appease elder players and nothing more. And will open up a giant can of worms forcing you to make changes to many lord of wars because of balance issues. Hell storm templates, apoc blasts, crazy amount of high strength shots like the old transcedant c tan. At that point you are better off just doing a ban list like LVO.

MVBrandt wrote:
1) Whether to simply make the field 0-1 for Super Heavy / Gargantuan creatures ... thus eradicating the current paradox of "iKnights are OK, take up to 5, but all you other SH/GC are illegal."

If this is a response to Eldar, bear in mind that most of the outcry against the wraithknight comes not from its 2 d-weapons or gargantuan creature status, but the fact that it's only 295 pts. iKnights are 370 minimum and inferior in every way except invulnerability to S5.

http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/05/advancing-conclusions-gtinvitational.html

So, we're getting there. Feedback continues to roll in on blog posts, e-mail chains, and the like. Please keep in mind that all of the following are just continuations of the current discussions, not finalized rulings, and we're still fielding enormous discussion and feedback here.

We have survey results from last year's NOVA and community surveys like LVOs to help us with some of our decision making. We're not there yet, but we're working to get there as quickly as possible.

The motivations here are developing as simplistic a set of changes and army construction rules as possible, and also developing a set that anticipates FUTURE releases by GW to better handle them (and avoid being so specific or now-focused that we have to make more changes in another month or two).

For example, one of the proposed concepts below targets both the Guardian Warhost and Decurion Formations. The Guardian Warhost is a slightly larger motivator here, but we can all anticipate similar Detachments comprised of tons of detachments in the future (e.g., w/ Adeptus Astartes in June).

Based upon survey results from NOVA, feedback, and other public polling, there are a few things that stand out as being problematic in the game, many of which were "straw that broke the camel's back" with the new Eldex.

IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER:

1) "Invinsible" Units - Units that either have 2+/3+ type re-rollable invul/cover/armor saves or units that have strong saves/t/wounds and are very easily rendered Invisible. Examples include Screamer Stars and Seer Councils in the case of the former (less durable by model but great saves that are re-rollable), and Centurion Stars or Flesh Hound Stars in the case of the latter (usually do not have re-rollable saves but are more durable / have more wounds, and hard to hit in the first place).

2) Super Heavy / Gargantuan units - Between Stomp and a variety of long range attacks with the "D" rule or high strength / ignores cover, use of these units requires a variety of modifications to the game, as seen in the events that use them. Legalization requires an extensive ban list, though banning comes with a downside of complaint from players that want to see them in the game. The big issue with these units, between Thunderblitz, Stomp, and D, is the extremely negative reaction from the "Average" player to what happens when their opponent rolls a "6" (either from very long range, or from a Stomp that they aren't even in combat with, etc.) and tells them to just pick all their models up off the board. Nowhere was it more evident that "average" players can't stand this than in last year's NOVA Open Narrative, where feedback from a casual / theme-heavy event was, in the case of one quote, something like this: "Why are we allowing Super Heavies and Gargantuans in the Narrative? I thought this was supposed to be a fun event and not one with a bunch of WAAC big units and competitiveness?!"

3) D Weapons [on Eldar basic units] - It would be folly to presume Eldar are the last codex you'll see receiving D weapons on non-SH/GC units. Whether it's the vinDicator or something else, expect to see this start to repeat itself elsewhere. GW really likes abilities that completely eliminate things when you get lucky and roll a 6.

4) Summoning. This is more mission specific, but most missions start to break down when players can add scoring units wholesale to the game, especially late when opponents cannot do anything to counter.


So what do we do to address these things in the simplest way possible, while changing as little of the core game as possible?

First off, army construction:
Detachments
It is looking more and more likely that we will move to a 3 Detachment limit. IN doing so, we will likely make the third Detachment "limited." So you'd have 2 Open Detachment Choices and one Limited Detachment Choice. Limited would most likely just eliminate the selection of a potential third CAD or CAD-like detachment (i.e. the codex-specific CAD-like choice in the SW dex). Additionally, we're considering making "Guardian Warhost" and "Decurion" style detachments take up both Open Detachment Choices (or all 3).

What's the point here? First off, based upon public polling done by the LVO, a higher % of players prefer 3 or more detachments to 2 or fewer. The ITC is going to 3 detachments generally as a result. This doesn't directly impact us, but it's a fool who fails to listen to the largest majority when two groups are at odds.

Secondly, allowing a third detachment dramatically increases the freedom of players - including Xenos - to select Culexus Assassins. This increases the risk in building a psychic-power-based deathstar with super saves (see #1 above) without changing game rules for things like Invisibility, Fortune, etc. We don't like rules changes, and there are good reasons for this. I.E. if you change Invisibility so that it allows units to be hit by Templates and Blasts, the release of Wraithguard with D-Scythes is suddenly WAY scarier to the game as a whole, because they have no direct counters - units that can survive them or prevent their use, for instance.

Super Heavy Vehicles and Gargantuan Creatures
We need to get the Knight Dex in hand, but rumors appear to show images of the new Knight standard detachment being comprised of 1-3 Super Heavy Lords of War. This would imply the new Knights are all SH Lords of War and not just Super Heavies. If that is the case, they would become illegal under NOVA's current rules the moment they are released. Wraithknights experienced this same "fate." So, what do we do about these units? People own AdLance Knight armies and trios of Wraithknights. If we allow all SH/GC LoW to be 0-1, people can bring an iKnight or a Wraithknight. If we allow iKnights to be the exception to the rule, we certainly continue to persist with our double standard. If we changed all our rules to allow Wraithknights, we'd be making a change to something our players wanted and that we decided on just to make Wraithknights happy.

There are a LARGE # of units that are unplayable as a direct result of SH/GC being in the game. The advantage to these models is that Stomp scares Deathstars. Nevertheless, the increased ability to MSU by 3 detachments and the dramatic increase in Culexus likelihood (inclusive of Culexus riding around in Vendettas) does a lot to make Deathstars a riskier buy to begin with.So ... the current lean is increasingly to simply leave SH/GC out. Adding them in mandates a ban list of SH/GC that we do not want (i.e. ones with massive cover ignoring attacks, etc., as per the way LVO/ITC does it) and also blatantly changes an existing GT/Invitational ruling in direct response to Eldar players wanting to be able to field their Wraithknights. This also would mean Eldar players wanting to field D Scythes with WWP or Raider transports or similar would have to field them as Elite selections in Eldar CADs (the formation w/in Warhost that lets them run 6" and shoot all the time requires a Wraithknight), limiting them under the proposed Detachment change above to only 6 units ... and still able to use their Allied Detach to snag a WWP delivery system in there. I know some Eldar players will be unhappy that they cannot field D-Scythe units that no-scatter deep strike out of LOS of interceptors before auto-running 6" and killing w/e they like, but they still just received one of the most powerful codices released since ... well, Eldar, and still will be able to pull off this and many other shenanigans.

Now, onto rules ...
D Weapons
The only thing we're considering changing rules wise in the game is the use of D Weapons. Based upon LVO polling data and survey feedback from our various events, the biggest complaint is about people vaporizing things from across the board with template/blast D weapons and rolling 6's. Easy references are Eldar Lynxes sitting on Skyshields.

The new offenders are Hemlock Wraithfighters, Wraithguard w/ Wraithcannons, Wraithguard w/ D-Scythes, and Distort Platform Artillery.
Wraithguard w/ Wraithcannons are not major concerns; they are single shot units ... and so, as they used to with their previous guns, will tend to kill single model units they shoot at and do very little to any kind of higher model count unit. They are also still Wraithguard, and without flame weapons cannot reliably overwatch to stop even marginal units from pinning them and/or killing them in combat (or simply with shooting).
Hemlock Wraithfighters *do* drop D small blasts, but they are affected by the D-Scythe rule. Thus, they fail to wound 1/3 the time and can never ignore cover/invulnerable saves.
Distort Artillery is a bit problematic, as once you are within 24" you risk them rolling 6's on stacked blast attacks. That said, they are also largely instantly dead once engaged in combat. They are at their most game affecting in a bad way when we talk about their max range, more so than their existence as a fact.
Wraithguard w/ D-Scythes are also a bit problematic, sitting between Wraithfighters and the Artillery. They are quite short-ranged, but they are somewhat more difficult to pin in combat (Requiring a sac unit or LOS blockage to force all the overwatch wounds onto a single model). They are no more difficult to simply shoot to death than Wraithguard have always been. They hit extremely hard against basic units and multi-wound units without strong invulnerable saves, but they also fail to wound 1/3 the time and cannot ignore invul saves.

So what is our thought? We're talking a lot with Reece of LVO/ITC, we're also talking with a lot of players. We're fielding a lot of feedback. The prevailing through right now is to simply rule as follows:
D shots originating from greater than 12" away treat all "6" results as "5" results instead.
D weapons always inflict only D3 Wounds or Hull Points (even on a "6" result)

That would be it. So close range and close combat D would remain as it is, helping moderate Deathstars somewhat (less so with the removal of SH/GC if we go that route). Rolling a "6" at closer range would not be quite the 7+ wound/hull point hit it currently is, but would still ignore invul/cover. Units wishing to ignore invul/cover with their D shots would require being danger close to the enemy to do so (i.e. Distort Artillery is far better moderated, as units can stop 13" away from a potential charge and remain safe from their "6" results).

Missions
There are 2 changes being considered for our Mission layout in order to address some of the concerns above. One would be to make units that Summoned or were Summoned be unable to count toward Mission Points until the next Game Turn. This reduces some of the problems with the missions (both accrual and late game choices) with regard to the Summoning Mechanic. It's a pretty minor change otherwise.

The other would be to add a new Secondary available that awards points for completely eliminating an enemy Detachment. This helps balance some of the issue with people broadly selecting minimal detachments just to add key buffs (i.e. Culexus, WWP DE, Tiggy/5Scouts, etc.) by giving opponents this enables them to outmatch the ability to score an easier 2 points back by targeting their tiny detachment add.



So how does this affect our 4 big player concerns while minimizing the impact on players who like to play those very concerns?
1) Invinsible Units (typo intentional) - We do nothing to change the rules here. These units remain powerfully durable and excellent counters to a number of things. On the other hand, we've increased the risk of relying entirely upon these super units to play by making it much easier for players to tack Culexus Assassins and other tweaks on to the armies they wish to run.

2) Super Heavy / Gargantuan Units - This one might cause the biggest sticking point. The right call *Feels* like sticking to our guns and the broadest player feedback and not making a change to our rules to compensate for GW changes that affect the fieldability of WK and iK within this year's format. Furthermore, Admantine Lance / Knight Primary armies are statistically one of the biggest problems in the game from a parity perspective, holding somewhere around a 65% win-rate in all Torrent recorded games ... this compares to a 45-55% win rate for most of the rest of the field (coincidentally, Eldar are at the top of that higher #). It is a fact that AdLance/Knight spam armies tend to run rampant over average players in the middle tables, despite not winning much on the GT/top table front. There's been a lot of commentary over not allowing people to play with the models they own, but that's a difficult subject to sell in any direction. No matter what your format is, a certain spectrum of owned models will be unplayable within it (either because it isn't legal or because it isn't worth taking). Furthermore, most complaints orient around wanting to take units that people believe they will win with. Those who want to take their Wraithknights typically do not, when told they cannot, take some fancy Eldar models sitting on their shelves that they don't think are any good competitively. Similarly, there'd be almost no complaining or even notice if we banned Pyorovres or Hormagaunts. By leaving SH/GC banned for the NOVA this year, we avoid the major complaints against them from last year while reducing the concern regarding "I rolled a 6 and you picked your models up off the table." The lack of player engagement here and the feel of the game moving away from company-level wargame to more of a skirmish-with-big-bots game is one of the most often-cited complaints we receive from players today.

3) D Weapons - Reducing longer ranged D shots and the massive 7+ damage impact of 6's is our path of least resistance right now. It is also closely aligned with what the ITC is discussing. It would also constitute one of our only changes to the actual rules of the game. Furthermore, it helps address potential future D weapons releases more elegantly than targeting specific units for tweaks one at a time as they come out. If suddenly every Space Marine Lascannon is a D shot, this rule would address it in advance instead of requiring us to specifically rule on each thing as it releases.

4) Summoning - Summoning is less complained about than many things - this isn't an issue with the mechanic in the eyes of the average player. The major issue was the interface of our existing missions with the summoning mechanic. By making our tweak to the missions, we correct for an over-balance problem from last year. Simple.

I am a fan of all of these changes, especially the move to three detachments. Making it a range requirement for the D-Weapons is also a reasonable change while also not targetting anything in particular and addressing future concerns. I hope that the ITC makes the change to three detachments as well. It would be nice to have a semi-standard format that you can build and practice to(at least for army comp purposes)

I am now looking forward to the NOVA this year and hopefully my father will be able to attend with me.

Is there someone/group I should send suggestions for Narrative supplements to, or is the standard novaopen@gmail.com good?

novaopen@gmail.com works perfectly

Mike, I have to say that your post may just have kept me hanging in with 40k... I know I would never have put my models down in a competitive event or for fun even if the atrocity of Eldar that is the Wraithknight was allowed on the table untouched.

I have one suggestion about the 2+/++ rerollable save problem, its one I suggested when the ScreamerStar first hit, make it that the reroll of a 2+/++ save is only successful on a reroll of a 4+. They are still extremely resilient, but become touchable and far more appropriate for a game. I mean, failing a save 1/12 of the time vs 1/36th of the time is reasonable.

Though I do like how three detachments and propagation of the Culexus which would help competitive play and help curb psychic deathstars.

Not allowing SH/GC LoWs in the Invitation and the GT is great, consistent, and paves a roadmap for the future. It's consistant and easily enforced. So be it if the new Knight Dex rules IKs out, they have been extremely problematic as a whole. Allowing Wraithknights would magnify said problems as they are virtually superior to IKs in almost every respect. IKs were allowed on a basic technicality before, no harm no foul.

Ranged D Weapon rule change is appropriate and really goes a long way to fixing the potential problems.

Summoning changes help quite a bit as well, as will the three detatchments and the availability of the Culexus.

X-Wing Fan? Star Wars Fan? Just like really badass showpieces at cons?

The following transmission was sent to the X-Wing Leads last night in regard to their Narrative event ...

Mr. Scales,

We recently received a garbled, brief transmission from our field operatives regarding your event at the NOVA Open this year, along with what appear to be schematics for what looks like a ship of such proportions as we only dreamed of previously. Unfortunately, much of the image seems to have been damaged during transmission. We cannot confirm its actual existence this time, but we've attached the transmission and image for your information.

Atten---n R-- Sc---s,

W- -re exc---d to inf--- you tha- we'-- proc---d pl--s to th- ene---s new st-r des-----r pl--ns and //transmission interrupt

We'll keep you posted as we firm up our intelligence. Please feel free to share this much with your subordinates and constituents as you deem wise, but keep in mind this information is not yet considered fully actionable by the GEO.

- Lord Admiral Brandt, Galactic Executive Office


cc list:
Executive Admiral L. Brandt, GEO
Field Admiral Haines, Fleet Command

Good changes although I doubt the culexus assassin will be the silver bullet of death stars.

For the warhost decorian limit make it Costs max 3 formstions but each included formation costs 1 detachment.
What I mean by this is if someone take a warhost and only adds an aspect host that costs two detachments allowing them to ally a cad. If they take a warhost, aspect host and wind rider host that takes up their three allotment but they can still add as many decorian detachments above the detachment limit as they like.

http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/05/adding-total-wow-factor-to-nova-open.html

gungo wrote:
Good changes although I doubt the culexus assassin will be the silver bullet of death stars.

Its more like tailoring... a player will have to sacrifice a whopping 140 pts of his army for it and for it to be really survivable you'll have to invest in a fly transport which will be another 100+ pts. If its on foot, then gl surviving massive bolter fires, D-scythes, a few vector strikes and/or sweeping attacks by screamstar will gut it in a turn. Its good if you know your local meta has a lot of deathstar reliant armies like Draigostar, but for a major tourney like Nova... your just handi-capping yourself hoping you only get pair up with magic-reliant armies.

Even against non-psyker armies the culex us is not bad. It's shooting attack and cc abilities as well as ability to sit on an objective and not have it taken by normal units since it can kill them is not bad

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

gungo wrote:
Good changes although I doubt the culexus assassin will be the silver bullet of death stars.

Its more like tailoring... a player will have to sacrifice a whopping 140 pts of his army for it and for it to be really survivable you'll have to invest in a fly transport which will be another 100+ pts. If its on foot, then gl surviving massive bolter fires, D-scythes, a few vector strikes and/or sweeping attacks by screamstar will gut it in a turn. Its good if you know your local meta has a lot of deathstar reliant armies like Draigostar, but for a major tourney like Nova... your just handi-capping yourself hoping you only get pair up with magic-reliant armies.

This is a near-perfect description of how 40k works. When you attend a tournament, it is not about taking whatever army you please and having it be automatically take all comers for all time. Investing points in units that are meant to help you deal with various things thrown at you in the current meta is pretty much the definition of designing a balanced list.

So, in a sense, I'm not actually sure what your point is. The proposed changes actually reduce the # of extreme things you have to build into your list for it to be take all comers, putting more power in your hands as the player to take the army you want to take, as opposed to constantly chasing the pink metadragon of the latest d-add or super heavy go-bot. Additionally, in 2 detachment, Culexus is too high a tax for most builds in terms of detachments, so you end up spending far more points to take an iKnight or similar in hopes it will stomp its way over whatever deathstar is roaming about; in a sense, you now have a greater ability to deal with them and other things with a greater % of your force simultaneously dedicated to whatever you personally want it to be. Win win.

Honestly I think invisibility and 2++ rerollable will still be way to strong even with the culexus. However I am not saying it's strong enough for you to do something about it like lvo. I just wish Gw had more abilities in game that increased the chance of perils that didn't require hitting the psycher or his unit. Saying that ordo heretic inquisitor is a sad excuse for an anti psyker unit.

gungo wrote:
Honestly I think invisibility and 2++ rerollable will still be way to strong even with the culexus. However I am not saying it's strong enough for you to do something about it like lvo. I just wish Gw had more abilities in game that increased the chance of perils that didn't require hitting the psycher or his unit. Saying that ordo heretic is a sad excuse for an anti psyker unit.

Meh, I want to see someone bring combat squadded grey knight strikes for the psyk grenade lolz.

MVBrandt wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

gungo wrote:
Good changes although I doubt the culexus assassin will be the silver bullet of death stars.

Its more like tailoring... a player will have to sacrifice a whopping 140 pts of his army for it and for it to be really survivable you'll have to invest in a fly transport which will be another 100+ pts. If its on foot, then gl surviving massive bolter fires, D-scythes, a few vector strikes and/or sweeping attacks by screamstar will gut it in a turn. Its good if you know your local meta has a lot of deathstar reliant armies like Draigostar, but for a major tourney like Nova... your just handi-capping yourself hoping you only get pair up with magic-reliant armies.

This is a near-perfect description of how 40k works. When you attend a tournament, it is not about taking whatever army you please and having it be automatically take all comers for all time. Investing points in units that are meant to help you deal with various things thrown at you in the current meta is pretty much the definition of designing a balanced list.

So, in a sense, I'm not actually sure what your point is. The proposed changes actually reduce the # of extreme things you have to build into your list for it to be take all comers, putting more power in your hands as the player to take the army you want to take, as opposed to constantly chasing the pink metadragon of the latest d-add or super heavy go-bot. Additionally, in 2 detachment, Culexus is too high a tax for most builds in terms of detachments, so you end up spending far more points to take an iKnight or similar in hopes it will stomp its way over whatever deathstar is roaming about; in a sense, you now have a greater ability to deal with them and other things with a greater % of your force simultaneously dedicated to whatever you personally want it to be. Win win.

I'll get to the point... Make 2+/3+ with rerolls at 4+. And at least make CC with invisible units hit on 5's instead of 6's.

That way you can just keep things simple at 2 sources of formations instead of 3 just so some armies can bring a assassin.

 Leth wrote:

gungo wrote:
Honestly I think invisibility and 2++ rerollable will still be way to strong even with the culexus. However I am not saying it's strong enough for you to do something about it like lvo. I just wish Gw had more abilities in game that increased the chance of perils that didn't require hitting the psycher or his unit. Saying that ordo heretic is a sad excuse for an anti psyker unit.

Meh, I want to see someone bring combat squadded grey knight strikes for the psyk grenade lolz.

You can't snap shoot a blast weapon, though such an army would probably stand a good chance of denying invisibility or forcing you to throw enough dice at it to cause perils anyway.
As a grey knight and imperial knight player, I'm sad to see 50% of my armies get banned because Eldar got an undercosted unit, but I understand.

Just going to drop this badassery here ...

https://gfycat.com/SlushyWavyHornedviper

Quick question Mike, if the Space Marines codex drops in August as planned/rumored, are they looking at being legal for the Open? Or when in August for a release would be they be Kosher?

Looks like IK are all LOW now. Going to revisit the LOW rules?

 pretre wrote:
Looks like IK are all LOW now. Going to revisit the LOW rules?

Yeah, looks to be confirmed. But, he addressed it in his last blog post which he copy/pasted a page or so back. Just like the Wraithknight, GC and SH LoW are not in for NOVA, or at least that is what he said and I personally am ecstatic with that ruling.

 Zagman wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Looks like IK are all LOW now. Going to revisit the LOW rules?

Yeah, looks to be confirmed. But, he addressed it in his last blog post which he copy/pasted a page or so back. Just like the Wraithknight, GC and SH LoW are not in for NOVA, or at least that is what he said and I personally am ecstatic with that ruling.

Right, I was just wondering if he would revisit it since things just changed significantly.

We're in heavy discussions and they're ongoing. Feedback on blog, email, here, etc., is very appreciated. The lean presently is not to change our existing rules just to be kind to Eldar players, and the same holds true for the smaller # who ran pure knight armies.

Feedback last year was also extremely negative about SH/GC in general, especially among more casual and narrative players.

So, this is an ongoing discussion.

I have no dog in the fight. Just interested to see how it comes out.

MVBrandt wrote:
We're in heavy discussions and they're ongoing. Feedback on blog, email, here, etc., is very appreciated. The lean presently is not to change our existing rules just to be kind to Eldar players, and the same holds true for the smaller # who ran pure knight armies.

Feedback last year was also extremely negative about SH/GC in general, especially among more casual and narrative players.

So, this is an ongoing discussion.

I hope that stays the ruling. I personally have boycotted any tournament, with the exception of NOVA last year, that has allowed GCs or SHs. I have flat out decided I do not want Apoc in 40k. I know it is one of the major deciding factor for me if I will attend NOVA this year or not.

But, I fully understand having to make the best decision for NOVA when there is great financial risk and stake in the event. I am definitely anxiously awaiting a final ruling.


Any idea when a final decision will be made? A deadline would be appreciated for ticket, hotel, etc. Also, if you are thinking you will be needing fillers for the Invitational, let me know.

 Zagman wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
We're in heavy discussions and they're ongoing. Feedback on blog, email, here, etc., is very appreciated. The lean presently is not to change our existing rules just to be kind to Eldar players, and the same holds true for the smaller # who ran pure knight armies.

Feedback last year was also extremely negative about SH/GC in general, especially among more casual and narrative players.

So, this is an ongoing discussion.

I hope that stays the ruling. I personally have boycotted any tournament, with the exception of NOVA last year, that has allowed GCs or SHs. I have flat out decided I do not want Apoc in 40k. I know it is one of the major deciding factor for me if I will attend NOVA this year or not.

But, I fully understand having to make the best decision for NOVA when there is great financial risk and stake in the event. I am definitely anxiously awaiting a final ruling.


Any idea when a final decision will be made? A deadline would be appreciated for ticket, hotel, etc. Also, if you are thinking you will be needing fillers for the Invitational, let me know.

We'll finalize in the next few here; it's not a far off issue for us. The things mentioned in the Whiskey post were very, very well received community-wide and attendee-pool-wide, so it is fairly likely they will go forward (polished and made precise, of course).

I have no dog in the hunt this year, I'm all Malifaux all day.

That said, I do feel weird about banning units. Even though I really don't like playing with SH/GC, I feel bad for people who have the models and won't get to use them. Though I'm not sure if there is a reasonable compromise.

 Chumbalaya wrote:
I have no dog in the hunt this year, I'm all Malifaux all day.

That said, I do feel weird about banning units. Even though I really don't like playing with SH/GC, I feel bad for people who have the models and won't get to use them. Though I'm not sure if there is a reasonable compromise.

Good man, Chumby. I look forward to seeing you there.

Have you registered yet?

Registered, SuperNoVA, all that jazz.

Yeah, î figured as much, given how enthused you all were on your podcast.

Prodos games has finished production of the NOVA Open Show Miniature this year, based upon the characters created by our attendees in the Narrative over the years, and designed specifically to be usable in other game systems from a scale and cool factor perspective.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-inIr7Etzk8

In other news, we're under a month away from the end of our early bird discount on Convention Access Passes - register now while they're still at their lowest rate!

Pair of quick questions for the NOVA folks in the know:

1) What is the deadline for adding a FAT mat to my cart for pickup at NOVA?

2) Was there ever a decision made regarding those possible changes back in early May? Specifically, are 3 detachments going to be allowed? I've started including a Callidus assassin to my Sisters/SW force and LOVING her, so I would love to know I could build my NOVA list to include one too.

Thanks!

quiestdeus wrote:
Pair of quick questions for the NOVA folks in the know:

1) What is the deadline for adding a FAT mat to my cart for pickup at NOVA?

2) Was there ever a decision made regarding those possible changes back in early May? Specifically, are 3 detachments going to be allowed? I've started including a Callidus assassin to my Sisters/SW force and LOVING her, so I would love to know I could build my NOVA list to include one too.

Thanks!

Third Detachment will be a thing, SH/GC will remain banned per our standing rules, to include Wraithknights/iKnights.

Composite Detachments such as Decurion/etc. will take up your first 2 Detachments. Third Detachment may not include CAD or CAD-like (specific list forthcoming, but CAD-like would simply be things like Wolves of Fenris, Leviathan, etc).

MVBrandt wrote:

quiestdeus wrote:
Pair of quick questions for the NOVA folks in the know:

1) What is the deadline for adding a FAT mat to my cart for pickup at NOVA?

2) Was there ever a decision made regarding those possible changes back in early May? Specifically, are 3 detachments going to be allowed? I've started including a Callidus assassin to my Sisters/SW force and LOVING her, so I would love to know I could build my NOVA list to include one too.

Thanks!

Third Detachment will be a thing, SH/GC will remain banned per our standing rules, to include Wraithknights/iKnights.

Composite Detachments such as Decurion/etc. will take up your first 2 Detachments. Third Detachment may not include CAD or CAD-like (specific list forthcoming, but CAD-like would simply be things like Wolves of Fenris, Leviathan, etc).

Awesome, thanks for the clear, rapid response Mike!

Edit: Got too excited about 3 detachments. Any word on FAT mat order deadlines? I would guess I still have plenty of time, but don't want to assume and miss out. I poked around on the NOVA store website but did not see anything.

quiestdeus wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:

quiestdeus wrote:
Pair of quick questions for the NOVA folks in the know:

1) What is the deadline for adding a FAT mat to my cart for pickup at NOVA?

2) Was there ever a decision made regarding those possible changes back in early May? Specifically, are 3 detachments going to be allowed? I've started including a Callidus assassin to my Sisters/SW force and LOVING her, so I would love to know I could build my NOVA list to include one too.

Thanks!

Third Detachment will be a thing, SH/GC will remain banned per our standing rules, to include Wraithknights/iKnights.

Composite Detachments such as Decurion/etc. will take up your first 2 Detachments. Third Detachment may not include CAD or CAD-like (specific list forthcoming, but CAD-like would simply be things like Wolves of Fenris, Leviathan, etc).

Awesome, thanks for the clear, rapid response Mike!

Happy to Help!

Also, something awesome this way comes ... much work still to be done ... including lights and sounds ....

MVBrandt wrote:
SH/GC will remain banned per our standing rules, to include Wraithknights/iKnights.

Meh, I wasn't planning on bringing any, but I like giant robots and I'll be a little sad not to see them there (the nicely painted ones that is). Although as a DE player, stomps and ranged D don't particularly bother me since I'm used to having my units evaporate whenever they get shot/poked/given a mean look.

MVBrandt wrote:
Composite Detachments such as Decurion/etc. will take up your first 2 Detachments. Third Detachment may not include CAD or CAD-like (specific list forthcoming, but CAD-like would simply be things like Wolves of Fenris, Leviathan, etc).

Don't composite detachments kind of make a detachment limit meaningless? What you have above is essentially just saying that if Necron/Eldar players trade Ob Sec for an awesome rule they can take a functionally unlimited number of formations from their book, plus one from wherever. To me that's getting a little too close to Unbound for my liking. I'd much rather see each piece of a composite detachment take up one of the 3, but then still be able to take a CAD/CAD-like detachment. Otherwise you've got 2 (or 3 if you count khorne) armies that get to take pretty much as many formations as points allow (and subsequently get a ton of free buffs from them), while everyone else is stuck with 2-3.

Alternatively you could make it so that as long as you don't take a CAD, any army can take up to 1 CAD-like and as many non-CAD-like detachments as they want from a single source, plus 1 more non-CAD-like from another (And for those armies without their own CAD-like detachments, they could just take a CAD without Ob Sec). To be honest I hate the way that sounds (even though it's basically what a Decurion/Warhost is) since to me it looks about half a step away from Unbound, and I'd much prefer the first option (since it's simpler and lets everyone take a couple good formations from their books while putting some limits on things), but at least this way everyone can get in on the formation spamming and free rules giveaways if they sacrifice Ob Sec.

Bugs_N_Orks wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
SH/GC will remain banned per our standing rules, to include Wraithknights/iKnights.

Meh, I wasn't planning on bringing any, but I like giant robots and I'll be a little sad not to see them there (the nicely painted ones that is). Although as a DE player, stomps and ranged D don't particularly bother me since I'm used to having my units evaporate whenever they get shot/poked/given a mean look.

MVBrandt wrote:
Composite Detachments such as Decurion/etc. will take up your first 2 Detachments. Third Detachment may not include CAD or CAD-like (specific list forthcoming, but CAD-like would simply be things like Wolves of Fenris, Leviathan, etc).

Don't composite detachments kind of make a detachment limit meaningless? What you have above is essentially just saying that if Necron/Eldar players trade Ob Sec for an awesome rule they can take a functionally unlimited number of formations from their book, plus one from wherever. To me that's getting a little too close to Unbound for my liking. I'd much rather see each piece of a composite detachment take up one of the 3, but then still be able to take a CAD/CAD-like detachment. Otherwise you've got 2 (or 3 if you count khorne) armies that get to take pretty much as many formations as points allow (and subsequently get a ton of free buffs from them), while everyone else is stuck with 2-3.

Alternatively you could make it so that as long as you don't take a CAD, any army can take up to 1 CAD-like and as many non-CAD-like detachments as they want from a single source, plus 1 more non-CAD-like from another (And for those armies without their own CAD-like detachments, they could just take a CAD without Ob Sec). To be honest I hate the way that sounds (even though it's basically what a Decurion/Warhost is) since to me it looks about half a step away from Unbound, and I'd much prefer the first option (since it's simpler and lets everyone take a couple good formations from their books while putting some limits on things), but at least this way everyone can get in on the formation spamming and free rules giveaways if they sacrifice Ob Sec.

Appreciate the feedback; the "long pole in the tent" now is definitely continuing to playtest build options vs. build restrictiveness regarding these types of detachments and how they compare.

For all, additional info here: http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/06/nova-quick-hit-updates-show-mini-pre.html

But basically:
For the next month, you can pre-order the NOVA Exclusive Show Mini, which is gorgeous, done by Prodos Games.
For the next 2 weeks or so, you can still get a Convention Access Pass with swag bag and for $40 instead of $50.
40K Army Construction rules update.

Progress on the epic 11-foot Star Destroyer for this year's X-Wing events continues apace ...

https://www.facebook.com/wargameterrain/videos/656021084531814/?fref=nf

And - true epic completion of the Star Destroyer.

https://www.facebook.com/wargameterrain/videos/656694707797785/

Convention access pass goes up by $10 in a few days, June 16

40k primer finalization in a day or two

We're likely to have a board gaming room this year
We're also in discussions to bring a healthy magic presence to fill your main or off the cuff time

Very excited to attend this year.

I do have a question, is there anything being done to restrict formations with free wargear?

Im pointing to the new Admech formation that allows for hundreds and hundreds of points of free wargear, creating a very imbalanced matchup.

 Iechine wrote:
Very excited to attend this year.

I do have a question, is there anything being done to restrict formations with free wargear?

Im pointing to the new Admech formation that allows for hundreds and hundreds of points of free wargear, creating a very imbalanced matchup.

The admech formation is illegal because it requires a knight, and the gt is keeping sh/gc banned this year based on player feedback.

In a similar vein to the admech question......Space Marine Gladius Strike Force with 2 Demicompanies and an Auxiliary. It does not violate the 3 detachment rule etc, but gives several hundred points of free transports.


Legal or not?

Funny no one asked this question when it comes to the BA formation that gives free power weapons and combi weapons to a bunch of VV & SG...

MVBrandt wrote:
Convention access pass goes up by $10 in a few days, June 16

Mike would considerations be made to those who have reserved a room ? Unfortunatly I wont be able to make a Convention commitment till after August 1st.

-ed

A CAP is only $40, you don't have to commit to an event.

And with the new registration system, you can cancel aND keep the credit for next year.

Sorry if this is the wrong place for this question, but I'm curious on how NOVA will rule the Helfrost/Reanimation Protocols debate.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/635145.page

Con pass goes up by ten bucks tomorrow. Get yours now!

Re the final Narrative Primer, Virtue Grey Knights get a free Aegis psychic power (warp charge 1) that gives everyone in the unit a 3++. They can also choose any psychic powers, so they can choose Sanctuary, and easily increase this to a 2++. Is this intended?

Negatory - we'll add a line that the two can't be combined.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Good catch!

X-Wing Championship sold out ...

But we increased to 96 players! This is the last expansion we can do for X-Wing this year.

Many Roman Lappat and Raffaele Picca seminars are also heading toward sellout. Hurry up and snag em while you can folks.

Mispost!

Another Narrative Supplement question/request. The Necron Warrior/Immortal Phalanxes can improve an Armor Save to a 2+. Orikan the Diviner allows rerolls of 1 on any save. As much as I'd like to have a truly Everliving squad, I don't think you should allow the Phalanxes to reroll their armor saves.

I'd change this line: "For both units, their save does not change until a wound pool has been fully saved against. " by appending "Furthermore, Orikan the Diviner's 'Master Chronomancer' rule will not allow rerolls of a boosted armor save."

 Byte wrote:
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this question, but I'm curious on how NOVA will rule the Helfrost/Reanimation Protocols debate.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/635145.page

So this doesn't deserve consideration for a ruling? Or even a "no concern" post.

Hi Mike, another question for the Narrative primer.

If I want to use codex: Khorne Daemonkin should I use the C:CD and C:CSM supplements together where appropriate?

It would not be as useful for Virtue players since their C:CD bonuses are Slaanesh and Tzeentch but I plan on fighting for humanity anyway.

Maybe we just don't get a supplement?


Also, I noticed that the Codex:Adeptus Astarties has a bonus letting scouts be BS4 till they move the first time, but they are BS4 forever now. And page 18 has some "Error" bits in the middle and the bottom.

 Byte wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this question, but I'm curious on how NOVA will rule the Helfrost/Reanimation Protocols debate.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/635145.page

So this doesn't deserve consideration for a ruling? Or even a "no concern" post.

Deserves a ruling. To be honest, I'm on my honeymoon, so any question I can't answer off the cuff will have to wait until I get back and caught up. Sorry :(


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 WhiteOutMouse wrote:
Hi Mike, another question for the Narrative primer.

If I want to use codex: Khorne Daemonkin should I use the C:CD and C:CSM supplements together where appropriate?

It would not be as useful for Virtue players since their C:CD bonuses are Slaanesh and Tzeentch but I plan on fighting for humanity anyway.

Maybe we just don't get a supplement?


Also, I noticed that the Codex:Adeptus Astarties has a bonus letting scouts be BS4 till they move the first time, but they are BS4 forever now. And page 18 has some "Error" bits in the middle and the bottom.

Thank. The Narrative has over 50 players already and some huge production value, including the Virtue miniatures. We'll correct the little supplement hiccups asap!

Copy, CONGRATS and have FUN!

All this can wait!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/210/652710.page#7912994

How is nova going to rule this formation?

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/210/652710.page#7912994

How is nova going to rule this formation?

what do you mean?

 krootman. wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/210/652710.page#7912994

How is nova going to rule this formation?

what do you mean?

Probably should move any discussion about that train wreck to the thread.

Can careless about how those guys in Ymdc interpret. I wanna know how Nova TO going to rule it. House rules trump all and a lot of people around my area play by Nova or ITC standards.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
Can careless about how those guys in Ymdc interpret. I wanna know how Nova TO going to rule it. House rules trump all and a lot of people around my area play by Nova or ITC standards.

So what is the question?

 krootman. wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
Can careless about how those guys in Ymdc interpret. I wanna know how Nova TO going to rule it. House rules trump all and a lot of people around my area play by Nova or ITC standards.

So what is the question?

Please don't make this a conversation in this thread. Move any questions to the thread that was linked. The question is pretty plainly stated in the biblical amount of pages people have wasted vehemently arguing both sides of that point.

There are several different questions in that thread now. Krootman may be trying to see which one they're seeking an answer to.

MVBrandt wrote:
There are several different questions in that thread now. Krootman may be trying to see which one they're seeking an answer to.

OK... you asked...

Can an IC such as a kitted out Wolf Lord with jump pack(or 4 cause why not) join a Skyhammer Annilation Assault squad and Assault the first turn?

Techmarine with conversion beamer gets relentless by joining the Skyhammer Pod Devs.

Several Terminator Wolf Lords join a void claw formation and deep strike first turn.

Necron HQ joins a unit from the Destroyer cult and gets extermination protocols.

The madness can go on and on.

The debate is special rules don't confer but nothing says formation rules don't. Enter debate.

Need to hear where rules from formations are NOT special rules, since the rb now makes it clear special rules are not relegated to the BRB spec rule sec anymore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the skyhammer even calls them Special Rules.

 krootman. wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
Can careless about how those guys in Ymdc interpret. I wanna know how Nova TO going to rule it. House rules trump all and a lot of people around my area play by Nova or ITC standards.

So what is the question?

Question is in the first page first post, I linked the wrong link. No need for any discussions or arguments, since that can be done in that thread. I just hope MVBrandt can update the Nova FAQ on that formation, I respect whatever decision he makes since its his GT. I just need to know, because if attached ICs can charge with AMs it will be very impactful enough for me to modify my NOVA list.

 SonsofVulkan wrote:

 krootman. wrote:

 SonsofVulkan wrote:
Can careless about how those guys in Ymdc interpret. I wanna know how Nova TO going to rule it. House rules trump all and a lot of people around my area play by Nova or ITC standards.

So what is the question?

Question is in the first page first post, I linked the wrong link. No need for any discussions or arguments, since that can be done in that thread. I just hope MVBrandt can update the Nova FAQ on that formation, I respect whatever decision he makes since its his GT. I just need to know, because if attached ICs can charge with AMs it will be very impactful enough for me to modify my NOVA list.

Nothing formal yet, but it seems to strictly break the rules to do so. It might also break the rules to even attach them in deployment.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Funny no one asked this question when it comes to the BA formation that gives free power weapons and combi weapons to a bunch of VV & SG...

Right, so missing/ignoring one problem prevents us from ever addressing the issue by your implications. Glad your not in a position to make such decisions.

Updated Primer for 40K/Invitational formalizing updates and changes:

http://www.novaopen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015-40K-GT-Invitational-June-22-Primer.pdf


There's also a Malifaux National Championship and 40K GT/Invitational prep tournament on July 18 outdoor with BBQ & Beer ... all for charity.
http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2015/06/charity-bbq-registration-open-details.html

Space for the charity event is VERY limited. There will be cover over all tables in case of rain or sun sensitivity.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
Funny no one asked this question when it comes to the BA formation that gives free power weapons and combi weapons to a bunch of VV & SG...

Right, so missing/ignoring one problem prevents us from ever addressing the issue by your implications. Glad your not in a position to make such decisions.

Woah there tiger. Take a breath. I was just pointing out the silliness and inconsistency of people's feelings. Sorry if I hit a nerve

Honestly it's an expensive formation adding in units you wouldn't normally use (shoot, the captain/chaplain is 180pts I wouldn't want to use in general in an HQ) that gives you a bonus for doing so. Have people fix it with missions if they feel it's broken. Overall it's another internet over-reaction in my opinion.

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
Funny no one asked this question when it comes to the BA formation that gives free power weapons and combi weapons to a bunch of VV & SG...

Right, so missing/ignoring one problem prevents us from ever addressing the issue by your implications. Glad your not in a position to make such decisions.

Woah there tiger. Take a breath. I was just pointing out the silliness and inconsistency of people's feelings. Sorry if I hit a nerve

Honestly it's an expensive formation adding in units you wouldn't normally use (shoot, the captain/chaplain is 180pts I wouldn't want to use in general in an HQ) that gives you a bonus for doing so. Have people fix it with missions if they feel it's broken. Overall it's another internet over-reaction in my opinion.

If the goal is to create an army that spams enormous quantities of ObSec for far less than the printed points when you average it out, the 180 point example, which is used a lot, is largely invalid. Paying 180 points in order to get hundreds more points worth of stuff you DO want for free is actually not paying a tax at all. It's the equivalent of telling someone that in order to get a free car, they have to pay a tax on the value of the car. If it's a car they want, they're still going to be quite happy to get the car for FAR less than it's worth. Said another way, it would be identical to create a 180 point formation that gave you, say, up to 10 dedicated drop pods for tactical, asm, etc. Paying 180 points for 181-XXXX points of stuff is still giving you stuff for free. You know, it also throws you a captain and a chaplain in, too, so do w/e you want with those guys.

I don't know that the formation is broken; there's a lot of stuff in 40k that's broken. The game is not balanced, in any way of playing it, even remotely. That doesn't mean good mission design and a reasonably bound army construction paradigm cannot create a competitive situation where army list isn't as important. So, please don't translate my objection to the "180 point tax" argument as siding with the belief that the formation as a whole is somehow "worse" than other things in the game (I don't have an opinion yet, because I think anyone loudly claiming it either IS or ISN'T overly broken right now is ... well, internet overreacting, to include potentially you).