After an incredibly successful convention this past April, AdeptiCon returns to the Renaissance Schaumburg Convention Center March 31st through April 3rd, 2016!
AdeptiCon 2015 saw several changes, the first being a move to a new venue. The Renaissance Schaumburg, with all its additional space and amenities, proved to be the venue upgrade AdeptiCon needed. We are very excited to announce our return to this fantastic facility in 2016. AdeptiCon 2015 also saw the integration of a new registration system which we will continue to refine and polish going forward.
AdeptiCon 2015 attendance was at an all-time high, as the convention offered the widest and most diverse event list to date. Huge tournaments, the addition of board gaming events, a much larger Vendor Hall, a new area for the Crystal Brush painting competition, and an expanded Hobby Seminar classroom space all made for an exciting and busy convention.
AdeptiCon 2016 will continue to build on our recent successes by refining our existing schedule and adding new and exciting events. Work has already begun, so mark your calendar now!
A couple of additional dates to keep in mind:
Hotel Block: The AdeptiCon hotel blocks will open on May 15th, 2015.
Event Submission: We will begin accepting events on August 15th, 2015.
Convention Registration: Late October/Early November of 2015.
Now get painting…that new army and that Crystal Brush entry aren’t going to paint themselves! See you in 2016!
After an incredibly successful convention this past April, AdeptiCon returns to the Renaissance Schaumburg Convention Center March 31st through April 3rd, 2016!
AdeptiCon 2015 saw several changes, the first being a move to a new venue.
The new venue was leaps and bounds better than the old one. Very good choice!
Also, if you missed it in the other thread, the guys that ran the Horus Heresy Events we great! The tournaments were exactly what I wanted. Fun missions and great TOs. Please pat them on the back for me, and if they ask for more resources, give it to them. Those were the best run tournaments of any genre I've ever participated in.
Last year, with all the additional space gained by relocating the Renaissance Schaumburg Convention Center, we were able to open up event submission to the general public. This saw the addition of some fantastic new tournaments, event games and demos. Once again, we are looking for a few good game masters to run demos, historical events, specialty games, board games, and anything else that makes sense!
AdeptiCon 2016 Event Submission is now open to the public. If you are interested in running an event, please take the time to look over the form and get it submitted as soon as possible. Some things to keep in mind:
Space and schedules are limited. Events that are new to AdeptiCon should be scaled appropriately to justify inclusion in the schedule based on space required and realistic attendance expectations. AdeptiCon will work with you to properly scale your event.
AdeptiCon reserves the right to refuse any event submission due to content or schedule/space saturation.
All required fields MUST BE fully completed when submitting this form. Incomplete submissions or submissions with placeholders will not be accepted.
Spell check your event descriptions!
Event Submission will close at 5PM CDT on October 2nd, 2015.
You will receive an email after the schedule has been resolved in mid-October with your scheduling details.
AdeptiCon is very proud to announce that Angel Giraldez, world-class painter and author of the celebrated Painting Miniatures from A to Z: Masterclass Volume I, has made this year’s convention one of the stops on his international tour. Angel’s skill with the brush (and airbrush) border on the legendary and AdeptiCon is the perfect venue for him to showcase his talents and share his techniques with attendees. AdeptiCon continues its strong focus on quality Hobby Seminars and the addition of Angel’s tour only serves to raise the bar once again!
For a glimpse at some of Angel’s work, please check out his website and Facebook page.
Bolt Action events have been steadily growing over the last several years and we had between 24-32 players involved any given day across 4 days of AdeptiCon.
These events took some great strides last year, we also have a great team involved in running the Bolt Action track and with the U.S. Nationals announcement expecting great things in 2016!
Bolt Action events have been steadily growing over the last several years and we had between 24-32 players involved any given day across 4 days of AdeptiCon.
These events took some great strides last year, we also have a great team involved in running the Bolt Action track and with the U.S. Nationals announcement expecting great things in 2016!
Wonderful tables. Hope I can make it out there this year :O
Mantic Games returns to AdeptiCon 2016 looking for new champions!
As the fell mist began to clear, the Elven bowmen could make out the foe gathered against them. Stretching across the horizon, a vast line of Undead slowly marched toward their lines. Their unholy ranks swelled, emboldened by the dark power of the Necromancer, Mhorgoth. It was a site to drive any mortal man insane, yet the Elves were all of them unmoved. They had faced this foe before. Their chief concern was this: had they brought enough arrows…
AdeptiCon 2016 is proud to host the inaugural Kings of War: Clash of Kings National Championship and Team Tournament! Join this epic clash of armies in what will prove to be legendary tournaments using ManticGame’s set of massed fantasy combat rules.
Preregistration Begins Monday, November 23th at 8PM CST
We are busy putting the final touches on the schedule for AdeptiCon 2016 and it is shaping up to be another fantastic year!
We will be releasing Event Schedule Previews over the next few days followed by a full preview of the webcart. Please be aware that event days and event times are all subject to change. Several new events will be added before registration begins – but these previews should give you a good starting point to begin planning your weekend!
The full schedule should be completed by Friday, November 6th.
Preregistration opens on Monday, November 23rd at 8PM CST. Last year, our most popular events sold out within hours, so act quickly to reserve your spot in the events of your choice!
kronk wrote: I can't remember, but do you register for the badges that day, too? Not just the events?
Thanks for the update!
If you see the guys were that ran the HH events last year, pat them on the back for me. The did a great job.
Badge and events on the 23rd. Fully operational registration station.
Horus Heresy is back in force - same crew. All of their events are little larger this year and they have added a new event for 2016: Knight Spearhead - Assault On Jacobius Landus Prime. You can sign up to bring your own Knight or use one provided by the organizers.
kronk wrote: I can't remember, but do you register for the badges that day, too? Not just the events?
Thanks for the update!
If you see the guys were that ran the HH events last year, pat them on the back for me. The did a great job.
Badge and events on the 23rd. Fully operational registration station.
Horus Heresy is back in force - same crew. All of their events are little larger this year and they have added a new event for 2016: Knight Spearhead - Assault On Jacobius Landus Prime. You can sign up to bring your own Knight or use one provided by the organizers.
Thanks for the clarification! I'll have my credit card in hand on November 23rd!
Also, I'm glad to hear they're running the events again. Can't wait to blow up renegade space marines!
Full Cart Preview is Live! Full cart preview is up! The Event List is 99% complete and contains over 325 events, tournaments and hobby seminars!
If you’d rather sort and filter your way to your favorite events offline, you can use this Basic Event List in Excel format [Last Update: 11.18.15].
Please keep in mind, event days, times, prices and descriptions are still subject to change, but this should give you a great start at planning your AdeptiCon 2016 experience.
Registration opens Monday, November 23rd at 8:00PM CST!
AdeptiCon Talks 2016 Ep1: New Events and Registration Info Dawn & Gianna from Beasts of War have been talking with the minds behind AdeptiCon 2016 for a new series of videos where they talk through the preparation for the event and much more. In this first video they go into depth about the new kind of events AdeptiCon will be hosting this year.
Red 3 Checking In, I’m Going to AdeptiCon AdeptiCon is back, and in greater numbers! After last year’s success, the convention has once again partnered with Fantasy Flight Games to offer an even larger slate of fully operational Star Wars gaming! Highlights include an Imperial Assault skirmish tournament, an Armada tournament and a 3-day X-Wing tournament comprised of two qualifying heats and a finals event! You love prizes? We know. If you thought last year’s prize support was good, then hold on to your mynocks, because 2016 will blow you away like a peaceful planet. More news on prize support will become available over the next few months, so stay on target!
Warhammer 40K Championship and Team Tournament Rules With AdeptiCon 2016 planning in full swing, we have turned our attention to ironing out the army construction rules for our major Warhammer 40K events. First up are the event rules for the Warhammer 40K Championship. There have been several changes to the format including the removal of Maelstrom missions, integration of progressive objectives and updates to Lord of War allowances. Additionally the event will also score participants ITC points! Stay tuned for the Warhammer 40K Championship Primer Missions in the near future!
The event rules for the venerable Warhammer 40K Team Tournament are also available. In the Team Tournament, four players combine forces to compete against opposing teams in a day full of gaming and comradery. While all tournaments are competitive by nature, the Team Tournament encompasses much more than the games played throughout the day. In many cases the day of the tournament is a culmination of months of planning, writing, building, converting and painting. The tournament format challenges and rewards generals, tacticians, hobbyists, fluff-bunnies and casual gamers alike. Additionally, the format enables players to visually realize the immense theme and flavor of the Warhammer 40,000 universe on the tabletop.
Warhammer 40KFAQ Submission Form Have a rules question regarding one of the many Warhammer 40K or Horus Heresy events at AdeptiCon 2016? Then head on over to the AdeptiCon Warhammer 40KFAQ Submission Form and submit away!
The purpose of this FAQ is to give players advance knowledge of how tournament judges will be ruling the myriad of tricky situations that might arise in games of Warhammer 40K at AdeptiCon 2016. Please remember that miniature gaming is meant to be fun. FAQs are not a replacement for common sense and good sportsmanship. Players are always expected to calmly attempt to resolve differences in opinion before consulting with a tournament judge.
Only use this form for questions related to game mechanics and rulebook/codex clarifications. For event-specific questions, please use the contact form.
New Bitz Trading Policy for AdeptiCon 2016 At AdeptiCon 2015, Bitz Trading caused several problems. In order to create a better experience for everyone, we have drafted up some procedures and rules to better help organize and facilitate Bitz Trading.
The new AdeptiCon 2016 Bitz Trading Policy formalizes the process, attempts to accommodate the greatest number of attendees possible and helps the event get back to its roots. Participation in Bitz Trading requires the purchase of an AdeptiCon Badge and will occur between 6:00PM and Midnight on Friday and Saturday evenings only. Attendees who desire a table section will need to reserve the space with AdeptiCon staff prior to the start of the event.
New Bitz Trading Policy for AdeptiCon 2016 At AdeptiCon 2015, Bitz Trading caused several problems. In order to create a better experience for everyone, we have drafted up some procedures and rules to better help organize and facilitate Bitz Trading.
The new AdeptiCon 2016 Bitz Trading Policy formalizes the process, attempts to accommodate the greatest number of attendees possible and helps the event get back to its roots. Participation in Bitz Trading requires the purchase of an AdeptiCon Badge and will occur between 6:00PM and Midnight on Friday and Saturday evenings only. Attendees who desire a table section will need to reserve the space with AdeptiCon staff prior to the start of the event.
Wow, that's great to hear that you're formalizing the bit swap. It's always one of the best parts of Adepticon for me, but it got snarled up last year.
Kronk,
The Bitz trading in previous years was always a bit of a free for all and table grab. It just spilled outside of bounds, and we have some people taking up more space than was required, leaving some others without space, on the floor, etc. We are just taking the next logical step to put a bit more structure and process around bitz trading to make it manageable. IT also should help define when and where exactly bitz trading is suppose to take place. ; )
It didn't really occur to me to think about adjusting it, but in hindsight I would say that was one of the ONLY areas where last year's event didn't seem to run smoothly. We tried to wander into that area and it really was a madhouse. I Really like the idea of restricting it to 75% bits... that's what it's for, after all! I'd love to have the opportunity to buy bits... but there really didn't seem to be all that many bits for sale last year.
So, good idea and I like the change
Also, just sent you a message about ModCube stuff, but we can tackle it after the launch of registration and all the madness that that entails!
You guys really need to pick a better charity. Being a veteran myself there are others that are leaps and bounds better the WWP. Please for the sake of actually helping people do NOT give them money. PLEASE do not support that glorified ad campaign.
Political campaigns are better places to send your money then WWP.
Seriously, if a veteran needs assistance but wont make a good "advertisement" then they are denied. Too many stories I have been told of people denied again and again for assistance from the WWP.
I'm disappointed at the lack of Paypal in the registration process. I was going to use my Paypal credit to register and get my six months to pay it off. A couple hundred dollar expense right before the holidays is a bitter pill to swallow.
So are folks queued up for this . I was the designated member of our team to get team tourney tickets a few years ago, and didn't log on for an hour after the registration launch and ended up wait-listed (thankfully, we got in!).
@hulksmash - That might be the reason it is 8 pm.. Event organizers have kids as well ; ).
@Kronk - Evidently word spread about the Horus Heresy events, as we had roughly 3x the amount of people than slots for those events. The cart is smooth for handling available tickets, and traffic load. The conflict resolution when you have a way greater demand than supply clearly chokes and a conversation we will have to have with the vendor.
From this side of the fence still way better than our previous system. Once we get through the first 24 hours we will take a look at what is feasible so anyone interested get on the waitlist for anything sold out so we have an accurate picture of the demand.
The cart is smooth for handling available tickets,
I disagree 100%
I had the following experience trying to register for events for AdeptiCon 2016. I understand that the Horus Heresy events are getting to be very popular, and I accepted that I might not get into them. However, I had 3 events in my cart and had them ripped out one by one at check out. THAT is the biggest problem with your system. DO NOT allow more people to have an event in their cart than their are slots available to go from step two to step three. Allow me at checkout to adjust my cart so that I still get to keep my events.
Attempt 1: At 8 PM, I registered for the VIG badge and checked the Horus Heresy "quick link" or whatever you call it, that added all 4 events that I wanted to my cart. I really liked that "quick link" or whatever. I then proceeded to check out. I entered my name, my credit card number, and my address. I proceeded to the next step, and on that page, I got a message that 1 of the 4 events was over booked. It did not let me proceed from there. It did not give me the option to drop the one event and get on the waitlist.
Attempt 1 shopping cart (what could have been, MK1): 1 VIG gamer weekend pass 3x Horus Heresy Events 1x waitlist
Attempt 2: I had to go all the way back to step 2. Picked up the 3 events individually. Select "Add to waitlist" on the remaining event. Proceeded to the end. I re-entered my name, my credit card number, and my address. I proceeded to the next step, and on that page, I got a message that 1 of the 3 events was over booked, and the VIG gamer badge was no longer available. It did not let me proceed from there. It did not give me the option to drop the one event and get on the waitlist. It did not give me the option to swap out the VIG badge for a regular weekend badge.
Attempt 2 shopping cart (what could have been, MK2): 2x Horus Heresy Events No badge 2x waitlist
Attempt 3: I had to go all the way back to step 1. Added a regular weekend badge. Picked up the 2 events individually. Select "Add to waitlist" on the remaining events. Proceeded to the end. I re-entered my name, my credit card number, and my address. I proceeded to the next step, and on that page, I got a message that all events were over booked. It did not let me proceed from there. It did not give me the option to drop the events.
Attempt 3 shopping cart (What could have been, MK3): 1 Weekend pass. 4x Waitlist for HH events.
Attempt 4: I had to go all the way back to step 2. Select "Add to waitlist" on all 4 events. Proceeded to the end. I re-entered my name, my credit card number, and my address.
Finally get: 1 Weekend pass. 4x Waitlist for HH events.
For next year: 1. Do not allow more people to select "VIG" pass than there are available to proceed from step 1 to step 2. 2. Do not allow more people to select an event than there are spaces available to proceed from step 2 to step 3. 3. If you still insist on this horrible system, then at check out, allow people to switch an event to "Waitlist" rather than go back through all of the steps again.
I had a great time at the last 2 AdeptiCons. I have praised you here on DakkaDakka and elsewhere, especially on the Horus Heresy events. I have tried talking more of my gaming group to give Adepticon a try. As of now, I am out $50 for the weekend pass, and ~$350 for my share of the hotel room, and I might not get to play in any events. This whole experience left a sour taste in my mouth for you convention. If I did not have a good friend of mine already coming up for the event, I would have stopped after the second try and passed on AdeptiCon 2016. Please fix these issues.
Eek, kronk. I'm sure that is useful feedback and they'll get it tweaked for next year! Hopefully you get in for each of those events, sounds like you will be early enough on the waitlist to do so... or maybe they'll even expand those events based on their popularity - 30K is so hot right now!
I am not discounting that people signing up for the HH events had issues with the webcart.
But we processed over 1300 carts in the first two hours of registration, 500 in the first 2 minutes! The overwhelming majority without any conflict resolution issues. People did not have the lag, the 40 minute wait or SQL database time out issues associated with the older system. I know it was rough for those attempting to sign up for the HH events. But, if you were not one of the 75 people attempting to get into the 24 HH event slots, at the tail end of VIG availability, or a couple of very popular seminars you experienced no issues.
There is definitely work to do with the vendor related to how the system handles conflict resolution, and workflow. Pulling tickets at selection instead of at process, has it's own considerations and issues. It may involve some restructure of how we approach some aspects of the show. As always, we when encounter things that work less than ideal for even a portion of our attendees we look at our options.
I think the simplest suggestion is probably the automatic conversion of an overbooked event to a waitlist selection (along with reducing the shopping cart total by that amount). Seems like that would resolve all of the issues with the HH events (with the VIG badge being a bit of a separate issue).
I registered on my phone and didn't have any issues. got right in for 40k team and got my full swag bag. I did make sure to watch the reg video first so I knew exactly what I was doing and zipped right through. Now I just made sure to get into the team tourney not sure about Thursday or Friday events but I'll pick something up. I guess it's time to start planning and painting
Yeah, that's become my strategy, too - register just for the key event you're worried about selling out first, then add the other events after you've checked out for that.
RiTides wrote: Yeah, that's become my strategy, too - register just for the key event you're worried about selling out first, then add the other events after you've checked out for that.
I was also registering a team for 3(2committed) others.
I believe you can go back and register for more events at any time! I did so last year - this year haven't registered for events as I'm not sure I'll have time since I'm going as a vendor again (and found last year I had to skip the events I did register for - but may find time to fit in some evening ones!).
Using the Already Registered link at the bottom of cart.adepticon.org. Login with your email address and confirmation number and it will then walk you through reg again.
It will show you everything you have already signed up/paid for, so only remove stuff if you want to drop it. The advantage of this system is that it allows the webcart to be attendee managed.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Ritides -
I think the simplest suggestion is probably the automatic conversion of an overbooked event to a waitlist selection (along with reducing the shopping cart total by that amount). Seems like that would resolve all of the issues with the HH events (with the VIG badge being a bit of a separate issue).
Which is something we will look into as an option, given the changes to the waitlist process we requested for this year it might be possible. It sounds simple, but if you have ever had a discussion with an attendee day of at registration with armies in hand, 15 minutes before round 1, over whether or not they signed up for an event, when the web cart has no record of it. Or over things that are clearly spelled out in policy documents, but never read. The sound of automated wait listing events if doable, should be considered carefully. I’m not sure how many people review or confirm the emailed event webcart data. Actually, I am fairly certain a large number of don’t. So while that process might smooth out registration, it will create some potential larger issues onsite.
Every cart solution has advantages and disadvantages. We are still kicking the tires on this one.
muwhe wrote: Ritides -
I think the simplest suggestion is probably the automatic conversion of an overbooked event to a waitlist selection (along with reducing the shopping cart total by that amount). Seems like that would resolve all of the issues with the HH events (with the VIG badge being a bit of a separate issue).
Which is something we will look into as an option, given the changes to the waitlist process we requested for this year it might be possible. It sounds simple, but if you have ever had a discussion with an attendee day of at registration with armies in hand, 15 minutes before round 1, over whether or not they signed up for an event, when the web cart has no record of it. Or over things that are clearly spelled out in policy documents, but never read. The sound of automated wait listing events if doable, should be considered carefully. I’m not sure how many people review or confirm the emailed event webcart data. Actually, I am fairly certain a large number of don’t. So while that process might smooth out registration, it will create some potential larger issues onsite.
Every cart solution has advantages and disadvantages. We are still kicking the tires on this one.
-Hank
Ah, great point! I didn't think about the idea of people not reading carefully (or even checking the amount they were charged) and assuming they had paid and gotten into the event when they hadn't...
In that case, Polonius' suggestion might be better - just a way to quickly delete the event (unless there was a really clear "WAITLIST" popup or the like, as I know in my case personally I would still want to sign up for the waitlist of the event I didn't get into). There's a whole year till this comes up again, anyway
Yeah, I had asked about that too but I think since they are mostly UK-based they unfortunately couldn't make it (at least in an official capacity) to AdeptiCon this cycle. I think Jon Regul will be there, though, so we can pick his brain about the MEdge ruleset at least!
I personally don't like it. It seems to be directed against the Warhound but it catches other LoW. You can't even take 2 Storm Surge but you can take 2 Wraithknight? Seems really lopsided and favors Eldar alot.
Thimn wrote: I personally don't like it. It seems to be directed against the Warhound but it catches other LoW. You can't even take 2 Storm Surge but you can take 2 Wraithknight? Seems really lopsided and favors Eldar alot.
That's what I'm thinking. It seems like it would be better to do 0-1 unit or to lower the point value more so none of the vehicle/gmcs can have more than one of in there. But really it just feels super arbitrary at 700 and (as a quirk of the number) looks like it buffs eldar. I doubt it was intentional to do that though.
Matthias, just curious if you guys have a date in mind for when you're going to roll out rules/faqs on any of the new Tau codices now that both have dropped, as well as if there has been any looking at the 700pt LoW cap. I'm sure it's a number that was picked intentionally to cut off the stronger LoW choices out there, but it feels like it has some very odd effects such as allowing double wraithknight lists while not allowing doubles of things like stormsurges.
Either way, have my list(s) prepped and ready! Just need to figure out what the final choices will be so I can get to work on glitzing up the final contenders and getting a display base made up.
Snagged one of the last spots for the Friendly! Everyone seemed to be having so much fun last year, and I don't have any aspirations of making it to day 2 of the Championship haha.
@Greydragoon - Targeting a draft update to the AdeptiCon FAQ by end of year. People use the holidays to get in a little hobby, myself included so we will try to have a first pass out for people to digest.
muwhe wrote: @Greydragoon - Targeting a draft update to the AdeptiCon FAQ by end of year. People use the holidays to get in a little hobby, myself included so we will try to have a first pass out for people to digest.
- Hank
Great, that should be more than enough time. Thanks Hank!
I have a question about 40k team. Will using a forgeworld unit prohibit the use of the team allowed additional force org slot? Can I bring an extra fast attack and a forgeworld in my foc?
Forge world units occupy the force org slot on the unit profile, you do not need to select a specific upgrade to include a Forge World unit. For example a player with faction Eldar can include a unit of Hornets as their fast attack slot. If that player also wanted to include a unit of Shadow Spectres they could select the additional fast attack upgrade to include that unit.
GreyDragoon wrote: Matthias, just curious if you guys have a date in mind for when you're going to roll out rules/faqs on any of the new Tau codices now that both have dropped, as well as if there has been any looking at the 700pt LoW cap. I'm sure it's a number that was picked intentionally to cut off the stronger LoW choices out there, but it feels like it has some very odd effects such as allowing double wraithknight lists while not allowing doubles of things like stormsurges.
I expect there's lots of support for a limit of five or six hundred Lord of War points. But those eldar players would sure be disappointed.
Even at 600 Eldar can bring 2 Wraithknights. At 700 imperials can only take 2 Gallant Knights with no upgrades ( the melee knight, that is rather lack luster for the points you spend).
Tau are sort of caught in a wierd trap, if the limit was raised to 750 they could atleast buy 2 Storm Surge with the primary weapon everyone uses. The points would leave no room for any other upgrades. 750pts for Imperials atleast means they can bring 2 Imperial knights.
The Problem is the Warhound is 720pts. So either they would need to ban it (I would hope they don't as I think a progressive scoring tournament with those on the table would be very interesting) or leave the points at 700 and just allow Eldar to bring double Wraithknights.
Poor Orks with their 770pt Stompa though, maybe Adepticon will faq it to 500pts
Forge world units occupy the force org slot on the unit profile, you do not need to select a specific upgrade to include a Forge World unit. For example a player with faction Eldar can include a unit of Hornets as their fast attack slot. If that player also wanted to include a unit of Shadow Spectres they could select the additional fast attack upgrade to include that unit.
I mean, I personally would be ok with 1 LoW limit, at least to help the armies that don't really have ways to deal with them. But, if Matthias and the others want to allow double WKs, so be it. It just means you know how to prepare for 90% of Eldar lists that will be in the Championships.
I totally get where their head is at with defining a point limit for LOWs, but yeah.. I'd try and bring it down further to like 500 so you really block any of the big hitters (eldar, Tau, Knights) from having 2 models, or you have to do a flat restriction such as 1 model or 1 unit (decide which makes more sense)
At 700 you're going to see a buttload of double WK lists. And why not right?
GreyDragoon wrote: I totally get where their head is at with defining a point limit for LOWs, but yeah.. I'd try and bring it down further to like 500 so you really block any of the big hitters (eldar, Tau, Knights) from having 2 models, or you have to do a flat restriction such as 1 model or 1 unit (decide which makes more sense)
At 700 you're going to see a buttload of double WK lists. And why not right?
By any chance have you taken a look at the champs missions and assessed them vis a vis the 700 point LoW limit?
GreyDragoon wrote: I totally get where their head is at with defining a point limit for LOWs, but yeah.. I'd try and bring it down further to like 500 so you really block any of the big hitters (eldar, Tau, Knights) from having 2 models, or you have to do a flat restriction such as 1 model or 1 unit (decide which makes more sense)
At 700 you're going to see a buttload of double WK lists. And why not right?
By any chance have you taken a look at the champs missions and assessed them vis a vis the 700 point LoW limit?
I've been practicing progressive objectives against someone running 2 WKs, and it still gives Eldar more than enough points to bulk up on Scatbikes, Dark Reapers, and Warp Spiders, while the WKs go kill the opponents off of the other objectives. They're really not a hindrance in these types of missions by any means.
GreyDragoon wrote: So I'm curious, but what does everyone think of the 700pt lord of war max? Seems a bit odd to have a cap above 2 wraith knights in value.
Definitely not a fan. The Wraithknight is already considerably undercosted (at least, many people consider it that way), and Eldar now get the added advantage of being able to take 2, compared to the 1 SH/GC that other armies can fit. When this is combined with easy access to uncomped invisibility, and armed with uncomped D weapons (or double Hellstorm flamers, or 3+d3 Melta) it feels a bit ridiculous.
A 0-1 restriction would make much more sense, combined with a banlist or even still the points limit.
I've been practicing progressive objectives against someone running 2 WKs, and it still gives Eldar more than enough points to bulk up on Scatbikes, Dark Reapers, and Warp Spiders, while the WKs go kill the opponents off of the other objectives. They're really not a hindrance in these types of missions by any means.
Very much this. They far more than offset the value of what you are reducing from the list with those ~300pts.
Oh I also see they modified the detachment rules to allow Battle Company and probably some other shenanigans.
Automatically Appended Next Post: oh also:
Note: if your opponent has a unit with the Super-heavy or Gargantuan Creature special rule in their army, and you do not, you may add +1 to your Seize the Initiative roll.
Not sure I'd call that balance so much as playing the rules.. it was in the escalation book and is a pretty solid rule to always play with along with the victory points for superheavy hull points/wounds.
GreyDragoon wrote: I totally get where their head is at with defining a point limit for LOWs, but yeah.. I'd try and bring it down further to like 500 so you really block any of the big hitters (eldar, Tau, Knights) from having 2 models, or you have to do a flat restriction such as 1 model or 1 unit (decide which makes more sense)
At 700 you're going to see a buttload of double WK lists. And why not right?
By any chance have you taken a look at the champs missions and assessed them vis a vis the 700 point LoW limit?
GreyDragoon wrote: I totally get where their head is at with defining a point limit for LOWs, but yeah.. I'd try and bring it down further to like 500 so you really block any of the big hitters (eldar, Tau, Knights) from having 2 models, or you have to do a flat restriction such as 1 model or 1 unit (decide which makes more sense)
At 700 you're going to see a buttload of double WK lists. And why not right?
By any chance have you taken a look at the champs missions and assessed them vis a vis the 700 point LoW limit?
GreyDragoon wrote: I totally get where their head is at with defining a point limit for LOWs, but yeah.. I'd try and bring it down further to like 500 so you really block any of the big hitters (eldar, Tau, Knights) from having 2 models, or you have to do a flat restriction such as 1 model or 1 unit (decide which makes more sense)
At 700 you're going to see a buttload of double WK lists. And why not right?
By any chance have you taken a look at the champs missions and assessed them vis a vis the 700 point LoW limit?
I would point out that the Super Heavy/FW/LoW list hasn't been updated yet for 2016, but I don't think anyone expects Adepticon to allow the Tau'nar in. While hilarious (FW would sell a TON of them between now and March) they rarely make mistakes like that.
What is more problematic is the actual point limit and Wraith Knights. 2 Wraith Knights is nothing to sneeze at, they are wonderfully point costed when taken as a pair - and since Eldar can simply go demon summoning to fill up their backboard/take middle the big guys can jump across the board and go straight into assault. Very few lists out there can handle two of them at the same time early game, while not ending up screwed to demon summoning later. With, of course, min squads of bikes ready to seize objectives in the end of the game.
Not saying it's unbeatable.. Just that it's really an odd allowence for Lords of War if you're seeking to limit them through a point cap. Wraiths are currently one of, if not the, best points per LoW decisions out there other than Draigo. (Draigo!!!!)
What is more problematic is the actual point limit and Wraith Knights. 2 Wraith Knights is nothing to sneeze at, they are wonderfully point costed when taken as a pair - and since Eldar can simply go demon summoning to fill up their backboard/take middle the big guys can jump across the board and go straight into assault. Very few lists out there can handle two of them at the same time early game, while not ending up screwed to demon summoning later. With, of course, min squads of bikes ready to seize objectives in the end of the game.
The only ways for Eldar to Daemon summon anymore are 1) Corsairs which are not allowed, and 2) come the apocalypse allies which cost lots of points and every one has access to. Space Marines Daemon summon better than Eldar.
I think people should actually play against 2 wraithknights a few times. It's certainly strong but several of the top armies can handle it readily. Space marines w loads of grav (which is all space marines) give it fits. Daemons spamming psychic shriek give it fits. Other eldar with lots of warp spiders give it fits. Tau can give it trouble if they go first. Necron lychguard units can give it trouble. DA/Thunder wolves give it trouble if the stomps don't come through (which with only 2 they probably won't). Most of the top armies have good answers in what they bring normally. No need to even counter build.
The boogeyman man level of fear ascribed to 2 wraithknights is really unfounded in my opinion. Even if wratihknights were 150 points too cheap (which they aren't) then two of them gets you ~300pts worth of free value. That's still less than Battle Company and War Convocation. Good for sure, not the best (certainly not in progerssive objective missions), and the other top armies have plenty of ways to deal.
The boogeyman man level of fear ascribed to 2 wraithknights is really unfounded in my opinion. Even if wratihknights were 150 points too cheap (which they aren't) then two of them gets you ~300pts worth of free value. That's still less than Battle Company and War Convocation. Good for sure, not the best (certainly not in progerssive objective missions), and the other top armies have plenty of ways to deal.
It's not really a level of fear, moreso that effectively every other army is limited to a single LoW (or two very bad ones), while Eldar get two. Also, keep in mind that there are two new Wraithknights that are going to be available soon by merit of being published in an IA book (why IA is allowed and other FW isn't is still beyond me...) that are comparably nuts/worse.
The boogeyman man level of fear ascribed to 2 wraithknights is really unfounded in my opinion. Even if wratihknights were 150 points too cheap (which they aren't) then two of them gets you ~300pts worth of free value. That's still less than Battle Company and War Convocation. Good for sure, not the best (certainly not in progerssive objective missions), and the other top armies have plenty of ways to deal.
It is not fear - just that it is an unfair advantage for eldar since the WK is so undercosted.
It is not fear - just that it is an unfair advantage for eldar since the WK is so undercosted.
"Fear" should be read as complaining about it being unfair.
Regulating LoW is exceedingly difficult. No rule that I've seen to date is perceived as "fair" for all armies. IMO, 2 WKs are quite a bit weaker than 2 storm surges or 3 imperial knights which are both legal in the ITC format. How is that fair?
There is no perfect answer. I think people need to realize that and try to see the good in any solution presented.
Having a hard points limit of 700 allows at least one of most of the more reasonable LoW in while keeping out most of the crazy stuff. The rule applies evenly to all armies (which is it's own kind of fairness). And the only real oddity from it is 2 WKs which, again, will not run the board in the draft mission packet by any stretch.
ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote: will not run the board in the draft mission packet by any stretch.
You may want to look at the double Hellstorm S7AP4 Monofilament Scathach Wraithknight. Those can basically negate the "hot zones" in the primer missions while likely sitting with a toe in cover
The rule applies evenly to all armies (which is it's own kind of fairness).
This implies that all Superheavies are point-costed appropriately, which is wildly inaccurate. 2 Wraithknights are vastly better than, say, a Greater Brass Scorpion of Khorne. Hell, I'd say one Wraithknight is better.
You may want to look at the double Hellstorm S7AP4 Monofilament Scathach Wraithknight. Those can basically negate the "hot zones" in the primer missions while likely sitting with a toe in cover
Which will do very little to battle company, necrons, tau suits, flying anything, anything that can hide in the zones which is easy given how big they are, etc. etc.
This implies that all Superheavies are point-costed appropriately, which is wildly inaccurate. 2 Wraithknights are vastly better than, say, a Greater Brass Scorpion of Khorne. Hell, I'd say one Wraithknight is better.
It absolutely doesn't. You must also think that because people are different heights it's not fair that the basketball hoop is 10 feet high for everyone.
Which will do very little to battle company, necrons, tau suits, flying anything, anything that can hide in the zones which is easy given how big they are, etc. etc.
...
ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote: It absolutely doesn't. You must also think that because people are different heights it's not fair that the basketball hoop is 10 feet high for everyone.
...
Yep, I got baited. Can't delete my post.
Dozer Blades wrote: Well it is obvious you have a bias in favor of eldar. I would like to see LoW clocking in at 600 points or less to keep it more fair .
AdeptiCon will be producing a limited run of custom gaming mats to match our existing terrain sets and the needs of the convention. Due to minimum print runs, a limited number of these mats will be for sale during the registration period.
These mats will be strictly limited and once they are gone, they are gone!
Features: 4' x 6' water resistant, anti-shine playing surface printed in 300dpi. No logo or branding on playing surface. Neoprene rubber-backed 'mousepad' construction. Nylon zipper bag and tag for transport/storage.
We will be producing two design this year: “Grassy” and “Concrete” and are currently available in 4’ x 6’ ($80) and 2’ x 2’ ($25) sizes.
How do I add or change items after I have registered?
Log into the AdeptiCon Web Cart using your email address and confirmation number. Click the Modify button at the top. This will walk you through the registration process again. Add the event sessions and/or merchandise you are interested in. Please note that everything you have previous registered and paid for will show up, so do not remove anything unless you want to drop an event (last day for refunds is 01.01.16). At the end of the process you will be charged for any new events/merchandise you have added.
You can also you this same procedure to add people to your registration group. If you have any trouble, please contact info@adepticon.org.
With a total of 92 classes, AdeptiCon 2016 is the largest and most varied lineup of Hobby Seminars to date! As expected, several popular classes sold out very quickly after registration opened. To meet the demand, we’ve added six additional classes to the lineup.
The Secrets of the Loaded Brush Ben Komets
Saturday 5:00PM – 7:00PM
Painting Realistic Faces David Powell
Saturday 10:00PM – 12:00AM
This will be your chance to learn that tricks that they and the rest of our seminar instructors have used to win numerous accolades and awards. Don’t miss your chance to squeeze a little more hobby goodness into your weekend schedule!
Tickets for these events are now available in the AdeptiCon 2016 Webcart and are going fast! See the note above if you have questions about how to add an event or modify your registration.
muwhe wrote: We will be producing two design this year: “Grassy” and “Concrete” and are currently available in 4’ x 6’ ($80) and 2’ x 2’ ($25) sizes.
Oh man, 2' x 2'!! I could actually fit that on a plane
I shamefully chopped up my beautiful alpine mat to fit it on the plane in 2012 for our team display... I'm very interested in a smaller mat size.
My only question is, are the 2x2s made such that they can be put together easily to form a larger area (such as 4x4), or do they have rounded corners and so won't look nice when placed together?
If there were any chance you could take a picture of a few laid out, that would be brilliant! Even if I can't put them together for gaming, I might want one just for a display mat (again, I've shamefully been cutting up other mats for this purpose )
@RiTides - The 2x2 is really geared towards the DBA player segment and has a pretty tight radius corner. I'll make sure to post some photos of the 2x2 version but these have certainly exceeded my expectations.
Are the Imperial Armor Legacies of Glory allowed in the Adepticon 40k Championship? I think it's likely because they aren't explicitly excluded, but they aren't explicitly included either.
More specifically, can I include one on my Ravenwing Darkshroud?
Is a photocopy of the relevant pages sufficient to carry?
Sound thy trumpets, tune thy drums and sharpen thy daggers! The 9th Age is upon us!
Due to popular demand, we have added several new Fantasy Battles: The 9th Age events to the AdeptiCon 2016 roster - allowing you to play Fantasy Battles: The 9th Age all weekend long!
The 9th Age is a community driven rules pack for wargaming in a fantasy world environment. Old-time AdeptiCon attendees will notice several similar events from ages past. Spots are limited, so make sure to sign up today!
Fantasy Battles: The 9th Age Big Brawl Thursday
9:30AM - 10:00PM
Fantasy Battles: The 9th Age Singles Tournament Friday
8:00AM - 9:30PM
Fantasy Battles: The 9th Age Team Tournament Saturday
9:00AM - 7:30PM
Fantasy Battles: The 9th Age Warbands Sunday
9:00AM - 4:30PM
axisofentropy wrote: Are the Imperial Armor Legacies of Glory allowed in the Adepticon 40k Championship? I think it's likely because they aren't explicitly excluded, but they aren't explicitly included either.
More specifically, can I include one on my Ravenwing Darkshroud?
Is a photocopy of the relevant pages sufficient to carry?
My first big tournament, thanks for organizing.
The Legacies of Glory can be included in Space Marine detachments, as defined on Page 244 of IA 2 V2. You should be prepared to present the actual book for your opponents if needed.
It seems to me that the missions basically say you can't bring a Decurion or other non-ObSec detachment if you want a chance at winning. Especially the zones in missions 1 and 2, they're just too big for any army without ObSec to score points.
Basically what I'm finding in various playtesting as well. If you aren't spamming obsec (read as: huge amounts of Jetbikes and/or Battle Company) you don't really have a hope of scoring the objectives.
Dozer Blades wrote: Unless you can kill it all which I think is achievable via the given parameters.
Except that with progressive objectives BC will have already scored a large amount of points (and denied you as many) before you make a dent in the numbers.
In the first mission specifically, the primary outweighs the secondary by such an extreme amount that it's not even funny. The second, like any KP mission, depends on both army sizes, but is still dominated by any ObSec spamming list because it's almost impossible to have enough zone control to deny areas of that size.
Dozer Blades wrote: Unless you can kill it all which I think is achievable via the given parameters.
Except that with progressive objectives BC will have already scored a large amount of points (and denied you as many) before you make a dent in the numbers.
In the first mission specifically, the primary outweighs the secondary by such an extreme amount that it's not even funny. The second, like any KP mission, depends on both army sizes, but is still dominated by any ObSec spamming list because it's almost impossible to have enough zone control to deny areas of that size.
Does it help that there are only 1-2 places to go to get points and not 4-6 objective locations. MSU OjSec lists can't spread out as far and will be forced to come to heavy hitters/kill zones.
Does it help that there are only 1-2 places to go to get points and not 4-6 objective locations. MSU OjSec lists can't spread out as far and will be forced to come to heavy hitters/kill zones.
That was my initial thought as well, but because the scoring zone is a 24" diameter circle instead of a 6" diameter circle (3" from objective normally) it becomes somewhat trivial to be in/behind terrain, and Adepticon generally has lots of LOS blocking terrain as well.
Agreed, defending/denying 24" bubbles without obsec is very hard to do. I do applaud the zone mechanics though, they work very nicely otherwise. Could these possibly be turned into 12" or 18" bubbles? Something at least a little more manageable? Otherwise trying to deny msu obsec (looking at you marines) is basically impossible if your opponent is playing at all creatively.
Oh, any word on when the 40kfaq is getting updated? As a Tau player it will have a pretty big impact on me one way or the other and need to plan my list accordingly. Fingers crossed for not itc rules on the contingent.
Does it help that there are only 1-2 places to go to get points and not 4-6 objective locations. MSU OjSec lists can't spread out as far and will be forced to come to heavy hitters/kill zones.
That was my initial thought as well, but because the scoring zone is a 24" diameter circle instead of a 6" diameter circle (3" from objective normally) it becomes somewhat trivial to be in/behind terrain, and Adepticon generally has lots of LOS blocking terrain as well.
It does seem that a 24" diameter circle, nearly 1/3rd the board would be difficult to keep all the enemy units out each turn. I guess Objective Secured units are mandatory.
Any news on updates to FAQ/Army Construction/Missions? I know everyone was probably pretty busy around the holidays, just wondering if there are any planned word soon.
Does it help that there are only 1-2 places to go to get points and not 4-6 objective locations. MSU OjSec lists can't spread out as far and will be forced to come to heavy hitters/kill zones.
That was my initial thought as well, but because the scoring zone is a 24" diameter circle instead of a 6" diameter circle (3" from objective normally) it becomes somewhat trivial to be in/behind terrain, and Adepticon generally has lots of LOS blocking terrain as well.
It does seem that a 24" diameter circle, nearly 1/3rd the board would be difficult to keep all the enemy units out each turn. I guess Objective Secured units are mandatory.
To be fair, the objective circle is only about 13% of the board space.
Still, it's a huge area, and the only area that matters as far as scoring is concerned, which extremely favors certain army types and makes others non-viable by virtue of just not being able to score. Which is pretty poor mission design, sorry to say.
1PlusLogan wrote: Basically what I'm finding in various playtesting as well. If you aren't spamming obsec (read as: huge amounts of Jetbikes and/or Battle Company) you don't really have a hope of scoring the objectives.
I've found the exact opposite.
1 unit of say nurglings hidden in a building denies the entire zone to any number of tac squads, rhinos or jet bike units.
The theory based sentiment here that the zone sizes favor ob sec armies is not what I'm finding.
ANY form of progressive objective favors ob sec, whether it's NOVA, ITC, or ATC missions. The large zones actually reign it in a bit because 1 ob sec unit well placed and well protected can hold up an entirely ob sec army.
My looking at this new faq update, with the changes to how the clarify characters, does that remove any doubt then on Sky Hammer allowing characters to charge turn 1?
I did miss, thanks for the post! I'll take a look today.
At first glance, glad to see that Knight armies are allowed again. While I dislike playing against them, the removal seemed... unnecessary.
ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:
1PlusLogan wrote: Basically what I'm finding in various playtesting as well. If you aren't spamming obsec (read as: huge amounts of Jetbikes and/or Battle Company) you don't really have a hope of scoring the objectives.
I've found the exact opposite.
1 unit of say nurglings hidden in a building denies the entire zone to any number of tac squads, rhinos or jet bike units.
The theory based sentiment here that the zone sizes favor ob sec armies is not what I'm finding.
ANY form of progressive objective favors ob sec, whether it's NOVA, ITC, or ATC missions. The large zones actually reign it in a bit because 1 ob sec unit well placed and well protected can hold up an entirely ob sec army.
Well first, an army full of ObSec can and will clear out a few Troops before the end of the game, so that's kind of a bad example.
The other thing is, and the point people were trying to make, is that any army without ObSec can't even hope to score a single progressive point in that mission unless they go against another like them. That's not just Decurion - KDK, Eldar, AdMech, and Tau all have entire armies that are without ObSec, and will struggle to win either of the first two missions unless they're able to deal major damage extremely quickly.
The difference between this type and NOVA/ITC/ATC is the extremely limited zones. 1 in the first mission, 2 in the second. When there's multiple across the board - you can place them, you can kill off of them, you can bodyblock them. However, with one giant zone in the dead center of the board, you can do none of those things. Oh sure, maybe you can take out all of the Troops of a regular CAD that's not Battle Company, but generally not before they score enough points and then you're still generally not getting any of your own. In other mission types, you can spread around, defend certain points, etc. In these, your opponent basically just needs ObSec nearly anywhere on the board to outscore you without really trying.
This isn't a "I don't like it so change it" whine. I'll probably just end up bringing a different list and playing with that, I have a Necron CAD and a Chaos CSM/Daemon list that I can bring (in fact, I've been working on a Summoning list lately and have been pretty excited about it). This is a bit of "this is pretty poorly designed and invalidates a lot of very popular lists" feedback, which I think is important for any organization that's providing a service to lots of people.
A mission favoring certain list types is fine, no matter how impartial you are some armies will always do better than others at scoring certain types of points. If it was all Kill Point missions with nothing else, Decurion would be among one of the more broken lists out there! But, the missions making it completely pointless to take certain lists doesn't seem ok in my book. Just an opinion.
Well first, an army full of ObSec can and will clear out a few Troops before the end of the game, so that's kind of a bad example.
Not in my experience. The zones are so big, and with player placed terrain it's very easy to put a LOS blocker in but on the edge of the zone. Then you have to go over there, through the other guy's army, and root out the single OS unit.
The other thing is, and the point people were trying to make, is that any army without ObSec can't even hope to score a single progressive point in that mission unless they go against another like them. That's not just Decurion - KDK, Eldar, AdMech, and Tau all have entire armies that are without ObSec, and will struggle to win either of the first two missions unless they're able to deal major damage extremely quickly.
That's more of a problem with progressive objectives. You're almost equally unlikely to score any progressive points vs battle company in NOVA and ATC missions. Perhaps having only 1 or 2 progressive objectives as opposed to 6 exacerbates the problem slightly. But again, having the big zones makes it easier to draw out the objective, so I kind of see these as a wash.
The difference between this type and NOVA/ITC/ATC is the extremely limited zones. 1 in the first mission, 2 in the second. When there's multiple across the board - you can place them, you can kill off of them, you can bodyblock them. However, with one giant zone in the dead center of the board, you can do none of those things. Oh sure, maybe you can take out all of the Troops of a regular CAD that's not Battle Company, but generally not before they score enough points and then you're still generally not getting any of your own. In other mission types, you can spread around, defend certain points, etc. In these, your opponent basically just needs ObSec nearly anywhere on the board to outscore you without really trying.
Again, because of the zone size (and the player placed terrain) it's extremely easy to draw out the zones with only a few OS units.
This isn't a "I don't like it so change it" whine. I'll probably just end up bringing a different list and playing with that, I have a Necron CAD and a Chaos CSM/Daemon list that I can bring (in fact, I've been working on a Summoning list lately and have been pretty excited about it). This is a bit of "this is pretty poorly designed and invalidates a lot of very popular lists" feedback, which I think is important for any organization that's providing a service to lots of people.
A mission favoring certain list types is fine, no matter how impartial you are some armies will always do better than others at scoring certain types of points. If it was all Kill Point missions with nothing else, Decurion would be among one of the more broken lists out there! But, the missions making it completely pointless to take certain lists doesn't seem ok in my book. Just an opinion.
I agree you need a list with at least some OS to compete. But I feel the exact same way about NOVA and ATC (and to a lesser extent the ITC because their maelstrom isn't the same a progressive objectives).
Overall I think your point that 1 - 2 progressive objectives favors all OS armies is partially correct. It makes it impossible for the guy with only a few OS units to score any points from the progressive objectives. But I don't see how that's actually all that different than when there are 6 objectives on the board. The guy with only a few OS units gets 1-2, but the OS spam army gets 3-4. It's still impossible for the guy with only a few OS units to net more points than the OS spammer.
And your critiques that the zone size favors the all OS armies I vehemently disagree with. Many guys in my play group had the same gut reaction and after MANY games they have all changed their minds.
The other thing is, and the point people were trying to make, is that any army without ObSec can't even hope to score a single progressive point in that mission unless they go against another like them. That's not just Decurion - KDK, Eldar, AdMech, and Tau all have entire armies that are without ObSec, and will struggle to win either of the first two missions unless they're able to deal major damage extremely quickly.
That's more of a problem with progressive objectives. You're almost equally unlikely to score any progressive points vs battle company in NOVA and ATC missions. Perhaps having only 1 or 2 progressive objectives as opposed to 6 exacerbates the problem slightly. But again, having the big zones makes it easier to draw out the objective, so I kind of see these as a wash.
This isn't a "I don't like it so change it" whine. I'll probably just end up bringing a different list and playing with that, I have a Necron CAD and a Chaos CSM/Daemon list that I can bring (in fact, I've been working on a Summoning list lately and have been pretty excited about it). This is a bit of "this is pretty poorly designed and invalidates a lot of very popular lists" feedback, which I think is important for any organization that's providing a service to lots of people.
A mission favoring certain list types is fine, no matter how impartial you are some armies will always do better than others at scoring certain types of points. If it was all Kill Point missions with nothing else, Decurion would be among one of the more broken lists out there! But, the missions making it completely pointless to take certain lists doesn't seem ok in my book. Just an opinion.
I agree you need a list with at least some OS to compete. But I feel the exact same way about NOVA and ATC (and to a lesser extent the ITC because their maelstrom isn't the same a progressive objectives).
Overall I think your point that 1 - 2 progressive objectives favors all OS armies is partially correct. It makes it impossible for the guy with only a few OS units to score any points from the progressive objectives. But I don't see how that's actually all that different than when there are 6 objectives on the board. The guy with only a few OS units gets 1-2, but the OS spam army gets 3-4. It's still impossible for the guy with only a few OS units to net more points than the OS spammer.
And your critiques that the zone size favors the all OS armies I vehemently disagree with. Many guys in my play group had the same gut reaction and after MANY games they have all changed their minds.
Agree to disagree, I guess we'll see how things work out!
I personally think the missions are a bit limiting for list building, but if that's the way it's going to be for this year, it won't deter me from going. I'll just go and have fun with a different list, that's the point of these things, is to have a good time, right? I just wanted to give feedback to the people putting it together, voicing opinions is never a bad thing.
DarthDiggler wrote: Looking through the FAQ it states the Castigator's Tempest attack does not stack with it's Deflagrate rule.
However every place that I have seen has shown FW e-mails saying that they do indeed stack with each other.
Chris, Hank is this a rules change on your parts or were you unaware FW has ruled the Tempest attack and Deflagrate do stack.
I do remember Hank coming to me in early Gladiators showing me his latest FW e-mail in order to change the FAQ's.
We in general have never accepted an "Email" as an official response. This ruling was in the FAQ since last year. Should FW publish an official update / FAQ for the model we will adjust accordingly.
Gotta love it on the Tau rule FAQs. So basically no point bringing either formation, since we both don't have ObSec to handle any of the actual missions that basically require you to have ObSec to guard huge swaths of terrain and we won't have the ability to actually attempt to table any remotely competitive list. Sorry but this just remains a joke, are these intended to be actual readings of the rule or simple curbs on expected problems?
From the Updated FAQ:
Use the following clarifications for the Coordinated Firepower command benefit:
o Signature Systems, wargear and other special rules that alter the way that a unit fires (e.g., Skyfire) do not
apply to other units using the Coordinated Firepower command benefit.
o Special rules that allow a model to fire at different target than the one generating benefits from
Coordinated Firepower (e.g., Split Fire) function normally.
o If a model fires at a unit other than the one generating the benefits from Coordinated Firepower then that
model does not receive any of the benefits (though they may still receive benefits applying to the unit
from other sources as normal).
o The +1 BS from the Coordinated Firepower command benefit does not apply to Snap Shots.
Mont’Ka Campaign Supplement
• Models in the Piranha Firestream Wing formation may not leave the table using the Rearm and Refuel special rule
the same turn that they arrive from Reserves or Ongoing Reserves.
• The phrase “at full strength” in the Piranha Firestream Wing formation’s Rearm and Refuel special rule refers only
to regenerating hull points, removing damage effects, and replenishing drones and seeker missiles. Piranhas that
have been destroyed, abandoned due to an Immobilized vehicle damage result, or were never part of the unit to
begin with are not added back to the unit when they return to play.
Oh I see, you guys just copy and pasted in the new ITC rules for the Coordinated Firepower since they finally got around to actually putting text in their FAQ for them since that lame ass vote. What a waste of time. I usually think of Adepticon as the big boys version compared to ITC. Instead it's just adapting the same joke rules. Why not go full bore this year and take their Invisibility rules to flip the bird to Marines and Eldar as well? Since we're in the process of nerf batting builds while we go.
PS The ITC are being a bunch of morons when writing their FAQs - anyone notice that they quote Skyfire (a rule that no wargear gives to unit wide) and Split Fire (A rule the Tau don't have access to AT ALL) as examples of what Coordinated Firepower doesn't share? And we're supposed to trust them people with the game's rules? Admittedly GW has dropped the ball on keeping things up to date - but this is not helpful and rampant balance comping is what over time killed the WHF community leading to AoS which I don't think any of us want to see happen to W40k. Balance comping should be a last resort once we know something is hurting the balance of the game when played as written and intended.
iNcontroL wrote: Any reason why on the atrapos in particular? It is 40k legal and released a solid 3 months+ before the tourney..
I think the idea is that if it's not in a published FW book, it isn't a permitted model.
Castigator was not published in a book last year was it? It was allowed last year.
Agreed, what the hell happened here. I don't recall a Castigator curb stomping last years results or anything. It's a July 2013 model with 40k Approved Lord of War rules. I'm certain I saw them in 2015 during actual play.
GreyDragoon wrote: Oh I see, you guys just copy and pasted that lame ass vote. What a waste of time. I usually think of boys. joke. Why not flip the bird as well?
GreyDragoon wrote: Instead it's just adapting the same joke rules. Why not go full bore this year and take their Invisibility rules to flip the bird to Marines and Eldar as well? Since we're in the process of nerf batting builds while we go.
I don't have much to say in the way of the way ITC or any other organization does things, but this made me actually laugh out loud.
Oh yes, with the nerf, Invisibility is useless and Marines and Eldar are weak. Totally.
GreyDragoon wrote: Oh I see, you guys just copy and pasted that lame ass vote. What a waste of time. I usually think of boys. joke. Why not flip the bird as well?
PS ITC are a bunch of morons.
I bolded the funny parts.
Didn't bold much of anything there, just used quote and removed large sections of what I said to make it sound ridiculous. You may not agree, but please don't misquote/misrepresent what I said.
GreyDragoon wrote: Instead it's just adapting the same joke rules. Why not go full bore this year and take their Invisibility rules to flip the bird to Marines and Eldar as well? Since we're in the process of nerf batting builds while we go.
I don't have much to say in the way of the way ITC or any other organization does things, but this made me actually laugh out loud.
Oh yes, with the nerf, Invisibility is useless and Marines and Eldar are weak. Totally.
Entirely agreed that itc's change to invisibility doesn't fully remove the strength in Marines or Eldar, but it does significantly limit the strength of a number of builds that are much stronger in Adepticon, the ETC, and most east coast tournaments. Not all builds, but certainly those that would want to take invis since it suddenly gives IG and Tau solid blast based responses to invis.
What I'm trying to point out though is that it is massively inconsistent to try and take just the coordinated firepower rule from ITC and not take the rest of their nerf-based decisions that are not FAQs so much as they are rule changes to modify power levels. And I was quite happy with Adepticon and ETC (and many of the midwest and eastern independent groups) keeping faqs only to clarifications and fixes to items that quite literally can break the game as resolution is impossible or totally unclear. ITC has made it clear they care more about the game from the perspective of the casual gamer, I had always thought Adepticon's focus was more on high level play for their GT - which generally means a focus on the RAW with a fallback to RAI. Actual changes to text only being used when a ruling cannot be made using either of those properly.
What I'm trying to point out though is that it is massively inconsistent to try and take just the coordinated firepower rule from ITC and not take the rest of their nerf-based decisions that are not FAQs so much as they are rule changes to modify power levels. And I was quite happy with Adepticon and ETC (and many of the midwest and eastern independent groups) keeping faqs only to clarifications and fixes to items that quite literally can break the game as resolution is impossible or totally unclear. ITC has made it clear they care more about the game from the perspective of the casual gamer, I had always thought Adepticon's focus was more on high level play for their GT - which generally means a focus on the RAW with a fallback to RAI. Actual changes to text only being used when a ruling cannot be made using either of those properly.
I think you're vastly over estimating the clarity of the coordinated fire power rule. To say that your's is the only way a rule could possible be read, and that anyone who disagrees is out to nerf you, is lazy thinking.
GreyDragoon wrote: What I'm trying to point out though is that it is massively inconsistent to try and take just the coordinated firepower rule from ITC and not take the rest of their nerf-based decisions that are not FAQs so much as they are rule changes to modify power levels. And I was quite happy with Adepticon and ETC (and many of the midwest and eastern independent groups) keeping faqs only to clarifications and fixes to items that quite literally can break the game as resolution is impossible or totally unclear. ITC has made it clear they care more about the game from the perspective of the casual gamer, I had always thought Adepticon's focus was more on high level play for their GT - which generally means a focus on the RAW with a fallback to RAI. Actual changes to text only being used when a ruling cannot be made using either of those properly.
[Reposted from a different thread, as it applies here.]
Couple of things (disagree if you will, I won't argue it. I'm just laying out the thought process behind the decisions):
1) The AdeptiCon faq ruling on Coordinated Firepower, despite its similarities in print, is not merely a copy/paste from the ITC faq. The committees driving the 'ITC' and AdeptiCon faqs no longer share members (until recently, they did), and the process by which the AdeptiCon faq committee arrived at its decision did not involve offering a 'vote' to players. Essentially, the following abilities/allowances are expressly made by Coordinated Firepower: Ignore restriction of shooting with one unit at a time. Ignore restriction of markerlights only benefitting one unit (at a time). Gaining a (conditional) +1BS against a nominated target. That is all.
2) The decision regarding restoring units to 'Full Strength' centered around the fact that 'Full Strength' is insufficiently defined. It could mean that I purchase a single Piranha, and then, subsequent to leaving the table, I return that unit with the maximum number of Piranha allowed by the codex (a 'Full Strength' unit). It could mean that I replace 'lost' Piranha up to the number I purchased (as per the Damocles rule, yes?). It could mean that I repair missing hull points, remove damage effects (Weapon Destroyed) and replenish Seeker Missiles and Drones. Of these three options, the first is absurd, the second is not stated explicitly in the formation's rules, and the third still satisfies returning the unit at full strength.
3) The AdeptiCon faq has already ruled that the Piranha from the formation cannot enter from reserves and leave the table on the same turn. The reasoning has nothing to do with an opponent's inability to 'interact' (AdeptiCon abides by Invisibility and 2++ rerollables as written). The reasoning has to do with the following problem: No unit in the game has express permission to enter from reserves and then leave the table in the same turn. Several (Flyers and Swooping Hawks as examples) are expressly forbidden from doing so. The Piranha formation, while describing the conditions by which it can leave the table, does not address whether or not it can exercise that ability on the turn it enters from reserves. So, we can assume one of two things: 1) Any unit with the ability to leave the table may exercise that option on the turn it enters from reserves unless expressly forbidden from doing so (see: Flyers and Swooping Hawks). 2) Any unit with the ability to leave the table may NOT exercise that option on the turn it enters from reserves unless expressly permitted to do so. Influencing the decision between these two options is the understanding of 40K as a 'permissive' rules set (not implying in any way that you are not aware of this, merely including it for the sake of completeness). The committee came down on the side of the second assumption.
GreyDragoon wrote: Oh I see, you guys just copy and pasted in the new ITC rules for the Coordinated Firepower since they finally got around to actually putting text in their FAQ for them since that lame ass vote. What a waste of time. I usually think of Adepticon as the big boys version compared to ITC. Instead it's just adapting the same joke rules. Why not go full bore this year and take their Invisibility rules to flip the bird to Marines and Eldar as well? Since we're in the process of nerf batting builds while we go.
PS The ITC are being a bunch of morons when writing their FAQs - anyone notice that they quote Skyfire (a rule that no wargear gives to unit wide) and Split Fire (A rule the Tau don't have access to AT ALL) as examples of what Coordinated Firepower doesn't share? And we're supposed to trust them people with the game's rules?
Skyfire comes from Mysterious Objectives, and applies to full units. Tau have access to multiple versions of Split Fire which is provided as an example, this is simply ease of wording.
Is there a reason AdeptiCon decided to go with 9th Age for the big fantasy events, rather than Kings of War? I know there are big Kings of War events too, but I was hoping those might expand to fulfill the traditional fantasy role at AdeptiCon... now it almost feels like there will be two competing tracks for the same players with WHFB no more.
I know this isn't AdeptiCon's fault, but rather GW's, but just wondering.
For myself, alas I think my KoW army won't arrive back until just after the tourney... painter queues are loooong! But I am really looking forward to checking out the KoW events regardless
RiTides wrote: Is there a reason AdeptiCon decided to go with 9th Age for the big fantasy events, rather than Kings of War? I know there are big Kings of War events too, but I was hoping those might expand to fulfill the traditional fantasy role at AdeptiCon... now it almost feels like there will be two competing tracks for the same players with WHFB no more.
I know this isn't AdeptiCon's fault, but rather GW's, but just wondering.
For myself, alas I think my KoW army won't arrive back until just after the tourney... painter queues are loooong! But I am really looking forward to checking out the KoW events regardless
The KoW event is pretty big, with a lot of players, two days, and 2500 point armies. Feel free to stop by and watch my Ogres fight it out for the wooden spoon!
RiTides wrote: Is there a reason AdeptiCon decided to go with 9th Age for the big fantasy events, rather than Kings of War? I know there are big Kings of War events too, but I was hoping those might expand to fulfill the traditional fantasy role at AdeptiCon... now it almost feels like there will be two competing tracks for the same players with WHFB no more.
I know this isn't AdeptiCon's fault, but rather GW's, but just wondering.
For myself, alas I think my KoW army won't arrive back until just after the tourney... painter queues are loooong! But I am really looking forward to checking out the KoW events regardless
Hey Steve,
AdeptiCon is working to offer a variety of events so attendees can have the option to pick and choose what they really desire to play. As with the 40K side, former Warhammer Fantasy Battles players have been split on how and what to play. So instead of forcing all pegs into one hole, we are offering a variety of events for KoW, AoS and 9th Age, which appeal to different players.
To expand on what Greg said, we have had a great response to the KoW events, having to expand space multiple times to meet the demand. Then KoW national events at AdeptiCon will be the largest "Fantasy" events at AdeptiCon this year.
With the end of WFB 8th edition, we are looking to KoW, AOS, 9th Age, and Saga to fill the "Fantasy" space. Much like we no longer have one 40k format that appeals to everyone, people will have to look to a variety of events to scratch the "Fantasy" itch.
Quick question - I've signed up for the team tournament, but in years past there was a request for team names & such that I haven't seen yet. Is it just not that time yet or have I missed it?
Just not that time yet, we tend to collect that information later in the process than early these days. Just helps with keeping the information accurate. But those sort of surveys are coming.
Polonius wrote: The KoW event is pretty big, with a lot of players, two days, and 2500 point armies. Feel free to stop by and watch my Ogres fight it out for the wooden spoon!
AdeptiCon is working to offer a variety of events so attendees can have the option to pick and choose what they really desire to play. As with the 40K side, former Warhammer Fantasy Battles players have been split on how and what to play. So instead of forcing all pegs into one hole, we are offering a variety of events for KoW, AoS and 9th Age, which appeal to different players.
To expand on what Greg said, we have had a great response to the KoW events, having to expand space multiple times to meet the demand. Then KoW national events at AdeptiCon will be the largest "Fantasy" events at AdeptiCon this year.
With the end of WFB 8th edition, we are looking to KoW, AOS, 9th Age, and Saga to fill the "Fantasy" space. Much like we no longer have one 40k format that appeals to everyone, people will have to look to a variety of events to scratch the "Fantasy" itch.
-Hank
Thank you for the great answers, guys . It makes sense, and it's why I love AdeptiCon! I definitely would like to meet up again Polonius and see your ogres kick butt although it might just have to be on a lunch break if you're playing during the day, as I'll be helping man the ModCube booth again much of the time!
Going to be making the first test cuts of some custom ModCube tokens for use in one of the events tonight . I can't believe we're already at the 2.5 month mark from the date, it's snuck up on me!
To expand on what Greg said, we have had a great response to the KoW events, having to expand space multiple times to meet the demand. Then KoW national events at AdeptiCon will be the largest "Fantasy" events at AdeptiCon this year.
With the end of WFB 8th edition, we are looking to KoW, AOS, 9th Age, and Saga to fill the "Fantasy" space. Much like we no longer have one 40k format that appeals to everyone, people will have to look to a variety of events to scratch the "Fantasy" itch.
-Hank
I had to laugh because I think this is the first time I've ever seen a historical game, SAGA, described as a "fantasy" game
I wish there were more things that had their main events on Thursday/Friday so they didn't compete with the 40k Team Tourney. That's the only 40k event I'm doing this year but I would have like to see a KoW or a Battle Sized Wrath of Kings event.
As it is it's looking like an Armada event on Thursday and a skirmish event for Wrath of Kings on Friday.
Is there any chance of revisiting the Approved IA units list? I know the Chaos Knights are still listed as Experimental, but given that they're now ITC approved and FW has said on multiple occasions that "Experimental" just means "not in an IA book yet", I was wondering if you would revisit the idea of allowing them in. I don't really think they're much more powerful than anything else that can currently be brought in the LoW slot by any stretch of the imagination.
I had to laugh because I think this is the first time I've ever seen a historical game, SAGA, described as a "fantasy" game
Oh have the times changed.
As I always tell my historical crew .. It is all Fantasy! ; )
Even before AoS released a sizable chunk of the Midwest WFB community got into SAGA. Its a great game! Bolt Action, SAGA and Flames of War get the "not" a historical wargame being to "fantasy" from some segments of the Historical war game community.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AwayFromLife wrote: Is there any chance of revisiting the Approved IA units list?
We are always revisiting the IA allowed listings, as updates and new material become available. However, I think it would be unlikely that we would allow anything marked experimental.
Crystal Brush 2016 Event Schedule and Rules (Revised)
The schedule and rules for Crystal Brush events at AdeptiCon 2016 have been updated. The Crystal Brush will be located in the AdeptiCon Vendor Hall and open for entry and viewing during normal Vendor Hall hours (10:00AM – 6:00PM Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, and 10:00AM – 3:00PM Sunday).
Registration will accept entries from 10:00AM to 5:30PM Thursday and Friday. All entries MUST be submitted by 5:30PM Friday.
Online voting is scheduled to begin at 3:00PM Saturday.
The Crystal Brush Awards ceremony will be held Sunday, April 3rd, at 3:00PM. The location will be posted at the registration table.
Entries may be claimed from 10:00AM to 2:30PM Sunday. Please note, the Vendor Hall will close at 3:00P. Entries MUST be claimed before that time.
When submitting your entry, please include on the entry form, if at all possible, a phone number or e-mail at which you can be reached during the convention. We will try to notify winners so that they will know to be present at the award ceremony. If for some reason you are not able to attend, you can designate someone to accept your award for you.
Crystal Brush 2016 Rules and Categories are available here.
Forge World Pre-ordering Information +++The Age of Darkness is upon us, as Legion clashes against Legion in a hundred different systems. The great factory-worlds of the Adeptus Mechanicus ceaselessly work to equip both sides, churning out the weapons and war engines that will ultimately decide the fate of the galaxy…
Forge World, purveyor of fine resin models and hobby supplies, will be returning to AdeptiCon 2016! They will once again bring with them a wide selection of resin kits, modelling accessories, Imperial Armour and Horus Heresy tomes, and the coveted Event Only models. And with the Horus Heresy raging across the galaxy, we may even see some new releases as well.
In order to ensure you get exactly what you need to bolster your army, Forge World is accepting reservation orders for AdeptiCon 2016. This is the best way to guarantee you don’t miss out on anything. Note that the reservation process has changed slightly to a more streamlined system.
Simply use the Forge World webcart to place your order and, at checkout, select “deliver to a Forge World Event.” But don’t wait – all orders must be placed by February 7th to ensure an AdeptiCon delivery!
It took us a while to extract the information from this R2 unit, but we are ecstatic to announce AdeptiCon’s participation in the X-Wing System Open Series! This spring, Fantasy Flight Games will be running eight events in eight nations, culminating in the Coruscant™ Invitational this July in London, England!
AdeptiCon has been assigned the planetary designation of Hoth™ and will host two qualifier heats on Thursday and Friday (players may only participate in one day, not both). All players will receive a BB-8 promo card and those accumulating 18 or more tournament points on either day will advance to the Star Wars: X-Wing Hoth™ Open finals on Saturday. All participants in the finals will be awarded System Open Spoils based on their performance and the champion receives travel and hotel accommodations to the sold-out Stars Wars Celebration in London this July!
All this set in one of the world’s largest tabletop gaming conventions! AdeptiCon is home to over 350 gaming events, tournaments and hobby seminars over four days – including several other Star Wars events! Participants only coming to AdeptiCon for Star Wars: X-Wing events can take advantage of the AdeptiCon 2016 Board Gaming Weekend Badge, which allows entry into all Fantasy Flight Events at a reduced cost. Registration is open now.
The AdeptiCon 2016 Librarium will be featuring several popular games from IELLO, maker of such hits as King of Tokyo, Dungeon Fighter, Welcome to the Dungeon, Guardian’s Chronicles, and Heroes of Normandie.
Additionally, there will be tournaments for King of Tokyo, King of New York, and Heroes of Normandie throughout the weekend that will feature event kits filled with cool swag and AdeptiCon prizes! Registration closes February 29th, so sign up today so you don’t miss your chance to rampage across a major city or storm the beaches of France!
For event schedules and more information, check out:
For event schedules and more information can be found here. For more IELLO’s quality products, check out the IELLO website.
What's the word on allowing recent 40k rules? With Curse of the Wulfen having Space Wolf and Daemon updates, people might want to run some stuff out of it. Will there be a cutoff date like last year or will it be on a case-by-case basis?
Requizen wrote: What's the word on allowing recent 40k rules? With Curse of the Wulfen having Space Wolf and Daemon updates, people might want to run some stuff out of it. Will there be a cutoff date like last year or will it be on a case-by-case basis?
Cutoff date is listed in the rules:
Codices, Codex Supplements and Warhammer 40K Campaign Supplements that are released prior to February 28th,
2016 will be allowed in this event. Apocalypse War Zone supplements, Apocalypse Formations, Forge World army lists
and material from the Horus Heresy books WILL NOT be allowed in this event.
Over 40 companies will be exhibiting in our Vendor Hall - giving you a chance to purchase their products, try a demo, peruse their new releases and meet the staff behind some of your favorite hobby manufactures and suppliers.
Anvil Eight - www.anvil-eight.com
Badger Airbrush - www.badgerairbrush.com
Battle Foam - www.battlefoam.com
Battlefront - www.flamesofwar.com
Black Knight Games - www.black-knight-games-online.com
Bombshell Miniatures - www.bombshellminis.com
Broken Egg Games - www.brokenegggames.com
Brush 4 Hire - www.brush4hire.com
Cool Mini or Not - www.coolminiornot.com
Covus Belli - store.infinitythegame.com
Cracked Earth Studios - crackedearthstudios.com
DGS Games - dgsgames.com
Dice Head Games - spikey-bits.myshopify.com
Fantasy Flight Games - www.fantasyflightgames.com
Forge World - www.forgeworld.co.uk Frontline Gaming - www.frontlinegaming.org
Games Plus - www.games-plus.com
Games and Gears - www.gamesandgears.co.uk Gaming Nomads - gamingnomads.com
Greenman Designs - www.gdesignsinc.com
Hawk Wargames - www.hawkwargames.com
Impact Miniatures - www.impactminiatures.com
Ironheart Artisans - ironheartartisans.com
Knuckleduster Miniatures - www.knuckleduster.com
Mantic Games - www.manticgames.com
ModCube - modcube.myshopify.com
Muse On Minis - museonminis.com
Ninja Division - ninjadivision.com
Palladium Books - www.palladiumbooks.com
Outlaw Miniatures - www.wildwestexodus.com
Osprey Publishing - ospreypublishing.com
Privateer Press - privateerpress.com
Reaper Miniatures - www.reapermini.com
Red Republic Games - redrepublicgames.com
Reynolds Advanced Materials - www.reynoldsam.com
Secret Weapon Miniatures - www.secretweaponminiatures.com
Steamforged Games - steamforged.com
Tectonic Craft Studios - tectoniccraftstudios.com
The Phalanx Consortium - www.facebook.com/thephalanxconsortium/
The WitchBorn - www.witchborn.com
Toledo Game Room - www.toledogameroom.com
Wargamma - wargamma.com
Warlord - www.warlordgames.com
Keep checking back because this might not be all!
Vendor Hall Hours: 10:00AM to 6:00PM (Thursday, Friday and Saturday) and 10:00AM to 3:00PM (Sunday)
Automatically Appended Next Post: The 13th Legion Warhammer 40K Apocalypse Battle
The 13th Legion will be running a massive Warhammer 40K Apocalypse game at AdeptiCon on Friday evening. Two teams comprised of ten players each will field 100,000 points of mayhem and destruction! The game will take place on a 6′ x 40′ table comprised of fully-painted Games Workshop Battle Boards and a ton of dynamic terrain. Teams will have to work together in order to ensure overall victory, but each player will also earn points individually towards awards.
There are still a few tickets for this colossal game – register today and decide the fate of the galaxy!
Curiousity - when it comes to paint score, how do they count Summoned units? I've been working on my core army, but some of my summoned stuff (Daemonettes, Bloodthirsters, etc) are secondhand or just quick painted because, well, they're just summoned stuff and don't really matter to me. Will they count against my score or will they only score what's on the display board?
Requizen wrote: Curiousity - when it comes to paint score, how do they count Summoned units? I've been working on my core army, but some of my summoned stuff (Daemonettes, Bloodthirsters, etc) are secondhand or just quick painted because, well, they're just summoned stuff and don't really matter to me. Will they count against my score or will they only score what's on the display board?
Summoned models must be painted in accordance with the AdeptiCon Model Policy. That said, they are not required to be displayed along with your army for the purposes of Appearance judging unless you wish them to be.
Requizen wrote: Curiousity - when it comes to paint score, how do they count Summoned units? I've been working on my core army, but some of my summoned stuff (Daemonettes, Bloodthirsters, etc) are secondhand or just quick painted because, well, they're just summoned stuff and don't really matter to me. Will they count against my score or will they only score what's on the display board?
Summoned models must be painted in accordance with the AdeptiCon Model Policy. That said, they are not required to be displayed along with your army for the purposes of Appearance judging unless you wish them to be.
Perfect. They'll be tabletop ready, but not the prettiest As long as they stay in a box while the nice models stand on the table, That'll be good.
Guild Ball by Steamforged Games has blitzed its way into AdeptiCon 2016 with a full line up of awesome events! Ease into a weekend full of Guild Ball with the Kick-off Event and ‘Keger’ Ball Casual Mixer on Friday. The action heats up Saturday afternoon with two back-to-back Scrimmage events that will begin to test your mettle, yet the true test will come Sunday in the first ever Chicago Open US Regional Cup! Prove that your team has what it takes to take be the best of all the Guilds in the Empire of the Free Cities!
Due to the popularity of the inaugural Guild Ball events at AdeptiCon, we have managed to find a few extra tables, expand existing events and even add a few new ones! There are still tickets left for all events, so register today and determine your fortune!
Steamforged Games will also be present in the AdeptiCon Vendor Hall, so swing by the vendor and gaming halls for demos and join us for the madness that is Mob Football!!
Can I suggest that they place some maps with event locations in the main traffic areas? (maybe poster board sized ones on an easel or other type of stand) For the life of me I could not find the bitz trading last year and spent a lot of time wandering around trying to find stuff that wasn't in the main hall. My friend and I accidentally walked into some real estate lecture that was being held on the second floor. Wandering around the old Lombard location wasn't as much of an issue as it was smaller and there were generally signs posted by all the doors. (plus I'd also been there several times before) I had a great time but I was confused as hell where to find certain stuff.
stanman wrote: Can I suggest that they place some maps with event locations in the main traffic areas? (maybe poster board sized ones on an easel or other type of stand) For the life of me I could not find the bitz trading last year and spent a lot of time wandering around trying to find stuff that wasn't in the main hall. My friend and I accidentally walked into some real estate lecture that was being held on the second floor. Wandering around the old Lombard location wasn't as much of an issue as it was smaller and there were generally signs posted by all the doors. (plus I'd also been there several times before) I had a great time but I was confused as hell where to find certain stuff.
We are on it! We will have several new hallway banners in addition to the onsite map/flyer we had last year. There will also be a convention map available online.
AdeptiCon is once again proud to partner with America’s premiere airbrush and airbrush supplies manufacturer – Badger Air-Brush Company!
Badger will once again have a major presence at the convention, with demos and experts on-hand to answer your air-brushing questions. Badger will also have a wide range of their quality products for sale, including some new items for 2016:
*NEW* Complete Air-Brush Maintenance Kit: This kit contains all the tools necessary for comprehensive airbrush maintenance. It includes the same tools, applicators, and “gadgets” used in our factory service department for ’like new’ airbrush cleaning and restoration.
*NEW* FLATitive: FLATitive is a flattening agent for use with water-base acrylic paints, like Badger Air-Brush Co.’s increasingly popular MINITIARE, MODEL/FREAKflex, and Woods & Water paint brands. This additive, FLATitive, when added to a gloss acrylic paint, reduces the paint’s gloss level, from its original gloss to semi-gloss, matte, or flat. FLATitive allows the artist to adjust a gloss acrylic paint to whatever finish they would prefer.
Badger will also have some exclusive convention specials, including, as veteran AdeptiCon attendees know, great show only deals! So plan on making a stop at the Badger Air-Brush Company booth during your AdeptiCon and check out the latest from this long-time partner!
Inquisitor-Judge Vander Tuul, AdeptiCon Exclusive Model
+++The last surviving mutant retreated back into the service passage, the same access corridor he had used to attack the hab-level. But that’s when he had been one of many. Now he was alone, his brethren all dead at the hands of the Hive’s security forces and their leader, the Inquisitor-Judge. That cursed enforcer had almost single-handedly destroyed the trog raiding party. He had been waiting for them, almost as if he knew they were coming. When the last mutant stopped to catch his breath, he heard a voice drift through the ancient passageways. He froze, terrified – it was the Inquisitor. In a cold, calm tone he called, “There is nowhere to run to, abomination. Nowhere to hide.” The last mutant slumped to the floor, dropping his pistol. He began to weep.+++
AdeptiCon 2016 is proud to introduce Inquisitor-Judge Vander Tuul, one of this year’s exclusive convention models. Sculpted by Dark Wolf Studio’s own Jake Schneider, this metal figure will be limited to a run of 1,500 and will be included in as many swag bags as possible!
For the 40k Champs, how much can we expect the missions to change, if at all? I want to start finalizing my list for serious practice mode so it would be nice to know if I should expect changes.
Requizen wrote: For the 40k Champs, how much can we expect the missions to change, if at all? I want to start finalizing my list for serious practice mode so it would be nice to know if I should expect changes.
The core principles embodied in the missions will not change (overall mission design, scoring method). There may be changes to other, minor, aspects. Feel free to engage 'serious practice mode' with confidence.
AwayFromLife wrote: What is the Adepticon ruling on the fire arcs provided by the Obelisk Tesla Spheres? Do they get full horizontal/vertical fire arcs?
Here is the link for the AdeptiCon FaQ Submission Form:
Any particular reason that the Chaos Knight is not allowed and the Cerastus Knights are, even though they're not in books either? Or is it just a bit of harmless Imperial favoring?
The Chaos Knight has Experimental Rules, where the Cerastus Knights are Warhammer 40,000 approved. Experimental units are never included in the Imperial Armour Approved Units list. As soon as Forge World posts approved rules, we will amended the list if appropriate.
Tomb-fire, thought Sister Vasha Fane, as she silently moved deeper into the twisting heart of the Vexxian necropolis. The sickly green light cast shifting shadows ahead of her. Its source, though hidden from sight, was well known to the death-hunter. She had tracked the liche back to its fell lair, though at a terrible cost. Seven Sisters had left the Citadel a week ago, but now only she remained. Vasha turned a corner and drew her sword, Dawnsinger. Before her, in the center of the vaulted crypt, stood the liche, his eye sockets alight with the ghastly tomb-fire. “I bring you your doom, Herr Steinkeller…,” Vasha called, “Again.”
AdeptiCon 2016 is proud to introduce Sister Vasha Fane, one of this year’s exclusive convention models. Sculpted by Bombshell Miniatures, this metal figure will be limited to a run of 1,500 and will be included in as many swag bags as possible!
Iconic Illustrator Mark Gibbons at AdeptiCon 2016!
Games Workshop has long been known for its iconic art, especially during the 1990s. And few artists were as iconic as Mark Gibbons. Mark began his tenure with Games Workshop at their Nottingham HQ in 1992 and the next five years would become known as his “Spiky Period.” During that time, Mark’s illustrations would grace the pages of GW’s best known games, including the 5th Edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battle, the 2nd Edition of Warhammer 40,000, and the legendary Necromunda. After his tour of duty with Games Workshop, Mark spent time working for a number of ground-breaking video game development studios, including Sony and Blizzard Entertainment where he worked as a concept artist on World of Warcraft. Recently, Mark has made triumphant return to his first love- tabletop gaming – and is currently working with Andy Chambers on developing some exciting new projects.
Mark Gibbons will be hanging at the Games and Gears booth during AdeptiCon, so don’t miss the chance to meet one of the hobby’s greatest artists. Make sure to keep up with his work over on Facebook!
BlackorGrey wrote: Any particular reason that the Chaos Knight is not allowed and the Cerastus Knights are, even though they're not in books either? Or is it just a bit of harmless Imperial favoring?
This will be the third year of going to Adepticon, but my first in participating in any of the events. I'm doing the 40k combat patrol, get my feet wet so to speak. So here is what I have, am I forgetting anything that I will need to play the in the tournament. If anyone can let me know if I'm forgetting anything, or point me in the right direction, I would appreciate that.
So I have,
My army, army codex, Mini rules book, dice, templates, measuring tape. I still have to print out my army list, but not sure if I'm forgetting anything else.
Dark Deeds is a darkly humorous card game of skulduggery and suspicion for 2 to 5 players. In Dark Deeds players take the role of minions in service to a powerful, mysterious, and clearly villainous, patron. The Patron wants deeds of infamy, violence and coercion committed and you are the ones who must avoid the authorities, the do-gooders and, most of all, each other to perform them. Rich rewards beckon, along with horrific punishments for failure. So are you the kind of malevolent minion the patron needs?
Designed by the legendary (and nefarious) Andy Chambers and Ryan Miller with artwork by the similarly iconic (and also nefarious) Mark Gibbons, Dark Deeds looks to be an instant classic. And it will make its debut at AdeptiCon 2016! Dark Deeds will be available at the Games & Gears booth a full 30 days before its official release, starting Wednesday night after registration (March 30th). Games & Gears will also be running demos of the game all weekend long and there will even be some AdeptiCon exclusive cards available. All that combined with the fact that Mark Gibbons will be there live in person doing signings means that Dark Deeds will have quite a launch party extravaganza!
DarkKnights44 wrote: This will be the third year of going to Adepticon, but my first in participating in any of the events. I'm doing the 40k combat patrol, get my feet wet so to speak. So here is what I have, am I forgetting anything that I will need to play the in the tournament. If anyone can let me know if I'm forgetting anything, or point me in the right direction, I would appreciate that.
So I have,
My army, army codex, Mini rules book, dice, templates, measuring tape. I still have to print out my army list, but not sure if I'm forgetting anything else.
Thanks
Something to carry the army on, like a display board or a cheap serving tray.
Bring some bottled water and a few snacks.
Cash for food
FAQ
Hey what's the general acceptance on custom/kitbashed models? I don't have the Varguard Obyron model (mostly because I hate working with Finecast) but have a custom Cryptek that I usually use for him. Same size, same weapon, clearly able to be picked out of a group. Is it ok to use that in the Friendly or should I look for one online?
I figured this falls under the "scratch built" portion of the Model Policy, but wanted to be sure.
AwayFromLife wrote: Hey what's the general acceptance on custom/kitbashed models? I don't have the Varguard Obyron model (mostly because I hate working with Finecast) but have a custom Cryptek that I usually use for him. Same size, same weapon, clearly able to be picked out of a group. Is it ok to use that in the Friendly or should I look for one online?
I figured this falls under the "scratch built" portion of the Model Policy, but wanted to be sure.
I believe what you describe is fine. However, you can always send in a picture to info@adepticon.org to verify everything before the event.
At adepticoncon do they let people use count as i.e. I want to make a Culexus for my tau FSE using shadowsun as a base model with the same weapons and huge head as the true model is this kind of thing ok
Oldmike wrote: At adepticoncon do they let people use count as i.e. I want to make a Culexus for my tau FSE using shadowsun as a base model with the same weapons and huge head as the true model is this kind of thing ok
I get to be a robot.
I believe what you describe is fine. However, you can always send in a picture to info@adepticon.org to verify everything before the event.
-Pairings for the first game on Thursday will be randomly determined. Subsequent games will be seeded by Battle
Points first, then by Battle Record and then randomly within those divisions.
-Battle Points, Battle Record and Strength of Schedule from Thursday’s qualifier will determine bracket seeding for
Friday’s elimination round.
-Battle Points: Battle Points are a cumulative total of all mission results throughout the entire tournament and will be used
when seeding subsequent games, determining qualification and seeding for Friday’s elimination round.
-Battle Record: Your Battle Record is a value representing your overall Win-Loss-Draw record, regardless of Battle Points
earned (Win = 10 points, Draw = 5 points, Loss = 0 points). A player’s Battle Record will be used for seeding subsequent
games, determining wildcard qualifiers for Friday’s finals
So is this year a BP tournament, or a W/D/L tournament for seeding? Is your Battle Record (W/D/L) separate from your overall BP?
-Pairings for the first game on Thursday will be randomly determined. Subsequent games will be seeded by Battle
Points first, then by Battle Record and then randomly within those divisions.
-Battle Points, Battle Record and Strength of Schedule from Thursday’s qualifier will determine bracket seeding for
Friday’s elimination round.
-Battle Points: Battle Points are a cumulative total of all mission results throughout the entire tournament and will be used
when seeding subsequent games, determining qualification and seeding for Friday’s elimination round.
-Battle Record: Your Battle Record is a value representing your overall Win-Loss-Draw record, regardless of Battle Points
earned (Win = 10 points, Draw = 5 points, Loss = 0 points). A player’s Battle Record will be used for seeding subsequent
games, determining wildcard qualifiers for Friday’s finals
So is this year a BP tournament, or a W/D/L tournament for seeding? Is your Battle Record (W/D/L) separate from your overall BP?
Battle Points and your W/L/D records are both kept separate. The tournament winners are determined via Battle Points. The W/L/D record (Battle Record) is only used to break ties in seeding, ties in qualifying for Friday's Finals and the Best Showing awards on Thursday evening.
Requizen wrote:
What's the word on allowing recent 40k rules? With Curse of the Wulfen having Space Wolf and Daemon updates, people might want to run some stuff out of it. Will there be a cutoff date like last year or will it be on a case-by-case basis?
Cutoff date is listed in the rules:
Codices, Codex Supplements and Warhammer 40K Campaign Supplements that are released prior to February 28th,
2016 will be allowed in this event. Apocalypse War Zone supplements, Apocalypse Formations, Forge World army lists
and material from the Horus Heresy books WILL NOT be allowed in this event.
Could anyone tell me if Curse of the Wulfen made the cut...basically I can not find an official release date anywhere...thanks
Widowsbane wrote: Requizen wrote:
What's the word on allowing recent 40k rules? With Curse of the Wulfen having Space Wolf and Daemon updates, people might want to run some stuff out of it. Will there be a cutoff date like last year or will it be on a case-by-case basis?
Cutoff date is listed in the rules:
Codices, Codex Supplements and Warhammer 40K Campaign Supplements that are released prior to February 28th,
2016 will be allowed in this event. Apocalypse War Zone supplements, Apocalypse Formations, Forge World army lists
and material from the Horus Heresy books WILL NOT be allowed in this event.
Could anyone tell me if Curse of the Wulfen made the cut...basically I can not find an official release date anywhere...thanks
Made the cut. There are even a section Curse of the Wulfen in the Warhammer 40K Rules Addendum and FAQ .
I got the same email, I guess there might be a lot of demand for rooms?
Totally not cancelling either - going to cut the last several runs of tokens tomorrow, load up the car full of ModCubes, booth stuff, and a few volunteers, and make the 11-hour drive to the best gaming convention known to mankind
Sorry, bit excited, but this is going to be amazing . Loved the extra space of the new venue last year, and guessing it will be even better this time around!!
I think experimental Forge World rules aren't allowed.
See y'all tomorrow!
You are right about experimental FW rules not being allowed, however the Atrapos rules are not experimental. No stamp anywhere that says the rules are experimental.
I think experimental Forge World rules aren't allowed.
See y'all tomorrow!
You are right about experimental FW rules not being allowed, however the Atrapos rules are not experimental. No stamp anywhere that says the rules are experimental.
Probably because it is under Horus Heresy as opposed to Warhammer 40K.
There is some coverage of the frontline guys on their website. It truly shocks me that in the age of democratized media, there is no video coverage of adepticon.
DooDoo wrote: There is some coverage of the frontline guys on their website. It truly shocks me that in the age of democratized media, there is no video coverage of adepticon.
It shocks me there's no social media posting even of a picture of the results sheet. They used torrent of fire a few years ago, don't really understand why they're not using it or another program.
Automatically Appended Next Post: AdeptiCon
Top 16 Qualifiers:
1 Aleong, Aaron
2 Perkins, Brett
3 Nanavati, Nick
4 Giampapa, Frankie
5 Chester, Brad
6 Choquette, Bruno
7 Hanes, Chris
8 Hoerger, Eric
9 Simone, Aaron
10 Hardy, Jhason
11 Townsend, William
12 Lanigan, Thomas
13 Seguin, Baxter
14 Grippando, Tony
15 Rodokanakis, Phil
16 Johnson, Kenneth
Battle Point cut was higher this year 99ish or so out of 120 (compared to 91 last year for top 16 and 85 for top 32).
To the best of my knowledge and going off Evan's stuff from above
1. Aaron Aelong Thunderstar
2. Brett Perkins Double WK eldar
3. Nick Nanavati Daemons with lots of screamers
4. Frankie Giampapa Battle Co
5. Brad Chester Eldar? He won best Xenos I think
6. Burno Choquette ?
7. Chris Hanes ?
8. Eric Hoerger Daemons
9. Aaron Simone Double Wk eldar
10. Jhason Hardy ?
11. William Townsend ?
12 Thomas (TJ?) Lanigan Tyranids
13 Baxter Seguin Necrons?
14 Tony Grippando Eldar/Space Marines/IG 15 Phi Rodokanakis ?
16 Kenneth Johnson Tau?
Tons of list diversity this year. Not as many double WK lists out there as you would expect. Although Mission two was tricky for battle co I would have expected to see many more of them and I saw hardly any.
winning list, was posted on my club's page. Looks illegal as the sanguinary priest should be 121, but i guess that he removed a piece of wargear and was at 1846.
The winner of adepticon had a illegal list, not only was it over points, but you can't take lone wolfs to fill up the mandatory slots. Also it was made clear that he was ignoring the -2 penalty for charging tru terrain and at one point a t.o call him on it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nautica wrote: winning list, was posted on my club's page. Looks illegal as the sanguinary priest should be 121, but i guess that he removed a piece of wargear and was at 1846.
he should have been Disqulified, it's not fair to all the players he cheated.
So this could have been an honest mistake in list building, he might not own a paper codex where it clearly says does not take up a force org slot, might have been using army builder or battlescribe and never looked at the what you did wrong notifications.
Really doesn't matter though honest or purposefully done the list is illegal. If Adepticon does nothing then why not take an illegal list to their tournament.
If nothing is done then there is no line in the sand so just expect this to happen if you go.
Why not ignore rules and be a ass during games, there is no way for an opposing playing to do anything, no sportsmanship score to keep people acting polite.
Does anyone know every rule there is by heart, no, so we all make mistakes but there has been never ending drama with winners since we have gone to the winner is the only score.
Hey im not a big fan of sportsmanship since at a Chicago GWGT I beat two Iron Warriors and a blood angel from the same local chicago game club and they all gave me a zero sportsmanship score. They were heard talking about keeping anyone down who beat them.
So me a guy who has won a best sportsmanship trophy with the 3rd highest battle at a GWGT went at another one in Chicago to the second lowest score of the whole tournament.
So yeah I know chipmunks are out there but something has to be done.
Yes I know not everyone who wins or does well is not a rat bastard, but the few bad apples seem to keep popping up.
maybe some kind of mixture of the (ard boy, zero comp, be an ass) environment we have now with the (Bring The Hobby Back) that the Long War keeps talking about.
just my thoughts, but hey maybe GW will swoop in and run tournament again and influence everyone into a golden age .....LOL....
FWIW, ITC, Adepticon, and NOVA all use broad spectrum award and scoring more in line with classic grand tournaments than with ard boyz. Factual $.02
Basically, don't blame everybody because someone made an error or cheated. It's silly. These things happened back in the GWGT days, too, and being a TO of a very big event is much more difficult than sniping at their calls after the fact from the peanut gallery.
MVBrandt wrote: FWIW, ITC, Adepticon, and NOVA all use broad spectrum award and scoring more in line with classic grand tournaments than with ard boyz. Factual $.02
Basically, don't blame everybody because someone made an error or cheated. It's silly. These things happened back in the GWGT days, too, and being a TO of a very big event is much more difficult than sniping at their calls after the fact from the peanut gallery.
while I understand being a t.o is a thankless job. Cheating is cheating and if t.o's don't do something about it then it will just lead to more people cheating at events. I don't blame the t.o's for not catching it right away but once they were told and reaslized he was cheating he should have been taking out of the top 16, it's not fair to those people that played by the rules
MVBrandt wrote: FWIW, ITC, Adepticon, and NOVA all use broad spectrum award and scoring more in line with classic grand tournaments than with ard boyz. Factual $.02
Basically, don't blame everybody because someone made an error or cheated. It's silly. These things happened back in the GWGT days, too, and being a TO of a very big event is much more difficult than sniping at their calls after the fact from the peanut gallery.
This was not a snipe at them Brant, I'm sure they have already dealt with 100 fires already, this was a question at what is going to happen if a person has a clearly illegal list for what ever reason. (Maybe he dosnt have a calculater to add for him) that was not have not fulfilled his force org.
If they do nothing why not take a unbound list next year and when confronted, if ever , just say SO WHAT??? Or also bring a another list that is within the rules and go MY BAD I will use the legal one now.
ITC , NOVA and Adepticon do have a broad spectrum of awards they give out for Catagorys
But for deciding who WINS it is all battle , win loss style. $.02
I am not saying the old GW tournaments were perfect , they were very fluff heavy but we need something to keep people acting like friendly human beings and not have to question every single rule and thing they do.
And yes I know there were people notorious back in the day for trying to cheat you but maybe something can be done.
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
while I agree with how the judges ruled it and In the end it's up to the T.O's to make the call. Lists should be summited for the top 16 players to be reviewed. Because while he played minus a model (granted a good model) it dosent change the fact that until it was found out he was benefiting from a illegal army list. Take away that model first game and I bet you he dosent make the top 16. Not to meantion he was ignoring the -2 penalty for charging thru cover pretty much the whole event until a t.o called him on it. We all spend lots of time bulding lists and I'd even goes as so far as to say that we spend more time list bulding then we do playing, top table players should know there rules and have legal lists, to say it wasent malicious I think it's wrong, it's not a rule you can just miss, he new and tried to get away with it (speculation) at the end of the day his win is void as far as I'm concerned (not that it matters what I think) and he should send out a apology to all the players that he cheated.
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?
First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?
Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.
The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?
First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?
Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.
The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.
if a T.o. Calls you on something you must be clearly cheating. Second he was using 1pt to many and that in its self is cheating. so idk how you can defend that. He cheated and people know he was cheating, he has no credibility anymore and if I were him I'd give up the award. He cheated players plain and simple
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
LOL........(You can take one lone Wolf for each troops choice or unit of wolf guard or wolf guard terminators in your army. This selection does not use up a force organization slot. So are you saying his DA and white scar troop choice met the troop choice requirement....totally different detachment...wow.....still does not use up a slot.
So he got an e-mail that is not in the FAQ giving him permission to ignore the rules.....that nobody else knows about....that seems FAIR!!!!! So your saying he got explicit permission, so maybe next year there could be an email saying he could play unbound or at an extra 1,000 points.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running. Did that claw kill anything in the previous games?
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event. So if I brought an extra land raider all I would have to do is not use it when the mistake is found?
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event. has it ever been done?
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
Matthias wrote: Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
I'm not sure how the Lone Wolf issue is debatable or vague. This rule itself in the codex couldn't be more clear and straight forward. If Adepticon created a rule stating that a Lone Wolf does take up a FOC slot, the issue still remains that there is no troop, Wolf Guard, or Wolf Guard Terminator unit in the army needed to satisfy the Lone Wolf entry. Another concern is how does Adepticon create a rule against what the codex states and not let any of the other participants know about it except the "said" player. Not publishing changes to rules due to time constraints or what have you is simply not acceptable. A lot of time, money, and effort is spent to attend events like Adepticon, the least Adepticon can do is make the rules as transparent as possible so it levels the playing field for everyone.
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?
First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?
Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.
The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.
Model positioning can't mitigate the -2. From page 47: "If, when charging, one or more models have to move through difficult terrain in order to reach the enemy by the shortest possible route, the entire UNIT must subtract 2 from its dice roll when determining its charge range." That said, I wasn't there and cannot determine intent/degree of malice so I won't speculate as to the appropriateness of the TOs actions. I will simply assume they were made with good faith.
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?
First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?
Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.
The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.
Model positioning can't mitigate the -2. From page 47: "If, when charging, one or more models have to move through difficult terrain in order to reach the enemy by the shortest possible route, the entire UNIT must subtract 2 from its dice roll when determining its charge range." That said, I wasn't there and cannot determine intent/degree of malice so I won't speculate as to the appropriateness of the TOs actions. I will simply assume they were made with good faith.
Right, but those models - bikes and cavalry - ignore the -2" penalty (and technically, it is a unit of bikes because of the Command Squad). So if you can position the unit such that the non-bike/cavalry models do not have to move through terrain when charging the target, then the entire unit doesn't suffer the penalty. However, if the foot-models do have to traverse through terrain, then the unit will suffer the penalty.
Exactly right on model positioning. If the model that is penalized for moving terrain does not in fact move through terrain, you're set. This happens with mixed unit types more than you might think
Matthias wrote: I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.
Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.
In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.
The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.
What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?
First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?
Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.
The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.
if a T.o. Calls you on something you must be clearly cheating. Second he was using 1pt to many and that in its self is cheating. so idk how you can defend that. He cheated and people know he was cheating, he has no credibility anymore and if I were him I'd give up the award. He cheated players plain and simple
Then why did the TO not just disqualify the guy if the TO felt that he was cheating? It isn't so black-and-white because if it was, then we'd all be cheaters in the game, unless you mean to tell me that you have never, ever gotten a rule in the game wrong before?
Bottom-line is the organization was there and they made the call. They then punished him as they felt was appropriate. Whether you thought he cheated or not is irrelevant.
@jy2: It's the opposite man. Any model that touches the terrain triggers the -2 for the unit. If even a single model cannot ignore the -2, the entire unit suffers the penalty. Whether the foot models touch terrain is functionally irrelevant. Their presence alone removes the advantage normally gained by the cavalry/bike models because charge distance is determined by unit, not by model.
PanzerLeader wrote: @jy2: It's the opposite man. Any model that touches the terrain triggers the -2 for the unit. If even a single model cannot ignore the -2, the entire unit suffers the penalty. Whether the foot models touch terrain is functionally irrelevant. Their presence alone removes the advantage normally gained by the cavalry/bike models because charge distance is determined by unit, not by model.
I'll research this some more when I get home later.
Matthias wrote: Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
I'm not sure how the Lone Wolf issue is debatable or vague. This rule itself in the codex couldn't be more clear and straight forward. If Adepticon created a rule stating that a Lone Wolf does take up a FOC slot, the issue still remains that there is no troop, Wolf Guard, or Wolf Guard Terminator unit in the army needed to satisfy the Lone Wolf entry.
ILLEGAL LIST
But I will bet dollars to donuts that they do nothing (JELLYFISH SPINE) .........................................................................or it was a hook up, never see that in Chicago!!!!!!!!!
Matthias wrote: Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.
I'm not sure how the Lone Wolf issue is debatable or vague. This rule itself in the codex couldn't be more clear and straight forward. If Adepticon created a rule stating that a Lone Wolf does take up a FOC slot, the issue still remains that there is no troop, Wolf Guard, or Wolf Guard Terminator unit in the army needed to satisfy the Lone Wolf entry. Another concern is how does Adepticon create a rule against what the codex states and not let any of the other participants know about it except the "said" player. Not publishing changes to rules due to time constraints or what have you is simply not acceptable. A lot of time, money, and effort is spent to attend events like Adepticon, the least Adepticon can do is make the rules as transparent as possible so it levels the playing field for everyone.
There are troops in the army. The rules for the Lone Wolf does not say that the troop has to be from the Space Wolf detachment. It doesn't even have to be a troop from the SW codex. It just has to be a troop in the army. I know that's a technicality, but the RAW is correct, even if the RAI probably isn't.
As for the 2nd part of your comments, there is just too much source material out there that no one will ever know everything exactly. No one can also account for all the rules interactions for all combinations as well. TO's will address/FAQ probably the most common/frequent questions that come up, but on the back end, there are 100's and 100's of lesser questions that most people don't know to even ask simply because they don't know armies other than their own. It's quite common and ironically, the larger the tournament, the longer and harder it becomes for TO's to address these issues. Rather, they do quick replies to people's queries just so that those people can prepare their armies for the tournament. Transparency will always be an issue because TO's simply do not have the time and resources to address every single concern that is asked of them. For example, the TO may address the Piranha Firestream rules in a FAQ (or publicly) because probably 1000's of people ask them the same question over and over, but to the 1 guy out of 10,000 who asks about Lone Wolves filling up an Elite slot, it becomes much easier for the TO to simply answer his email/question directly. In such a large tournament, you need to take responsibility for your own army. If you have a question about your army, you better ask (and ask again if you don't get a response) the TO. DO NOT expect the TO's to address the millions and miliions of rules permutations/list building combinations by him/themselves. NO ONE has the time to do that.
jy2 wrote: There are troops in the army. The rules for the Lone Wolf does not say that the troop has to be from the Space Wolf detachment. It doesn't even have to be a troop from the SW codex. It just has to be a troop in the army. I know that's a technicality, but the RAW is correct, even if the RAI probably isn't.
Wow jy2, that's a bit of a stretch even for you as two of the three unit choices are Wolves. Assuming Troops could be taken from another codex to satisfy the rule leaves me at a loss for words. The list is illegal and Adepticon compounded the issue by not posting to the masses there intent on the rule. And that cannot be debated.
jy2 wrote: As for the 2nd part of your comments, there is just too much source material out there that no one will ever know everything exactly. No one can also account for all the rules interactions for all combinations as well. TO's will address/FAQ probably the most common/frequent questions that come up, but on the back end, there are 100's and 100's of lesser questions that most people don't know to even ask simply because they don't know armies other than their own. It's quite common and ironically, the larger the tournament, the longer and harder it becomes for TO's to address these issues. Rather, they do quick replies to people's queries just so that those people can prepare their armies for the tournament. Transparency will always be an issue because TO's simply do not have the time and resources to address every single concern that is asked of them. For example, the TO may address the Piranha Firestream rules in a FAQ (or publicly) because probably 1000's of people ask them the same question over and over, but to the 1 guy out of 10,000 who asks about Lone Wolves filling up an Elite slot, it becomes much easier for the TO to simply answer his email/question directly. In such a large tournament, you need to take responsibility for your own army. If you have a question about your army, you better ask (and ask again if you don't get a response) the TO. DO NOT expect the TO's to address the millions and miliions of rules permutations/list building combinations by him/themselves. NO ONE has the time to do that.
I agree with you but in this case we are talking about the basics of army list construction, not the interaction of game play between units/models. Before anyone rolls a single die in a tournament, the guidelines for how all armies are to be constructed should be as transparent as glass. If your telling me when can't that right than what's the point.
SonsofVulkan wrote: This means I can bring servitors to fill the elite tax for CoTGW Det base on how Adapticon rule it while having IP as hq
Dunno. By RAW, you can't, but you're going to have to ask the TO's directly how they will be ruling it. They may well have ruled it the same way as Lone Wolves, I really don't know.
SonsofVulkan wrote: This means I can bring servitors to fill the elite tax for CoTGW Det base on how Adapticon rule it while having IP as hq
Dunno. By RAW, you can't, but you're going to have to ask the TO's directly how they will be ruling it. They may well have ruled it the same way as Lone Wolves, I really don't know.
I posted the questions in the Nova thread too. Hopefully we'll get a answer soon. Taking blood claws blows and grey hunters blows
jy2 wrote: There are troops in the army. The rules for the Lone Wolf does not say that the troop has to be from the Space Wolf detachment. It doesn't even have to be a troop from the SW codex. It just has to be a troop in the army. I know that's a technicality, but the RAW is correct, even if the RAI probably isn't.
Wow jy2, that's a bit of a stretch even for you as two of the three unit choices are Wolves. Assuming Troops could be taken from another codex to satisfy the rule leaves me at a loss for words. The list is illegal and Adepticon compounded the issue by not posting to the masses there intent on the rule. And that cannot be debated.
What I think is unimportant. What is important is what the TO's think. It really depends on the tournament format. In the ITC, which is more conservative in nature, they would probably rule it as RAI. However, in a format such as NOVA, who is more strictly-by-the-book-interpretation, they would probably rule it as hardcore RAW. I'm just saying that there is a basis for this interpretation on a purely RAW basis and that it could go either ways depending on the tournament format.
jy2 wrote: As for the 2nd part of your comments, there is just too much source material out there that no one will ever know everything exactly. No one can also account for all the rules interactions for all combinations as well. TO's will address/FAQ probably the most common/frequent questions that come up, but on the back end, there are 100's and 100's of lesser questions that most people don't know to even ask simply because they don't know armies other than their own. It's quite common and ironically, the larger the tournament, the longer and harder it becomes for TO's to address these issues. Rather, they do quick replies to people's queries just so that those people can prepare their armies for the tournament. Transparency will always be an issue because TO's simply do not have the time and resources to address every single concern that is asked of them. For example, the TO may address the Piranha Firestream rules in a FAQ (or publicly) because probably 1000's of people ask them the same question over and over, but to the 1 guy out of 10,000 who asks about Lone Wolves filling up an Elite slot, it becomes much easier for the TO to simply answer his email/question directly. In such a large tournament, you need to take responsibility for your own army. If you have a question about your army, you better ask (and ask again if you don't get a response) the TO. DO NOT expect the TO's to address the millions and miliions of rules permutations/list building combinations by him/themselves. NO ONE has the time to do that.
I agree with you but in this case we are talking about the basics of army list construction, not the interaction of game play between units/models. Before anyone rolls a single die in a tournament, the guidelines for how all armies are to be constructed should be as transparent as glass. If your telling me when can't that right than what's the point.
As with rules interactions, list building nowadays is so convoluted that many TO's really don't know all of the nuances of the lists. Yes, there are published guidelines to what/how you can run your army. However, there are also the "finer points" of list building where TO's probably never even considered. This is one such case and TO's will sometimes make mistakes as well or just interpret it differently from what you do.
And I think some mucloids.. he is a very good player (best dressed 100% of the time) and a nice guy. His losing game he got D 6'd 4-5 times? Flyrant, Dima, Malanthrope and Tervigon that I know of... fun times.
@jy2: By strict raw, if any troops unlocked lone wolves than any troops would make them slot less. Once slot less, they can't fill mandatory selections for the COTGW detachment. Pure RAW would make it still illegal. It's definitely a TO call though. Adepticon had a ruling and stuck with it.
PanzerLeader wrote: @jy2: By strict raw, if any troops unlocked lone wolves than any troops would make them slot less. Once slot less, they can't fill mandatory selections for the COTGW detachment. Pure RAW would make it still illegal. It's definitely a TO call though. Adepticon had a ruling and stuck with it.
Where's the ruling in print PanzerLeader?
Adepticon coming out after the fact to stand by a ruling that was never published to the players seems a bit too convenient. I'm not sure I can justify your statement that Adepticon had a ruling and stuck by it.
There's no basis to support such a claim unless you can support it somehow...
PanzerLeader wrote: @jy2: By strict raw, if any troops unlocked lone wolves than any troops would make them slot less. Once slot less, they can't fill mandatory selections for the COTGW detachment. Pure RAW would make it still illegal. It's definitely a TO call though. Adepticon had a ruling and stuck with it.
Where's the ruling in print PanzerLeader?
Adepticon coming out after the fact to stand by a ruling that was never published to the players seems a bit too convenient. I'm not sure I can justify your statement that Adepticon had a ruling and stuck by it.
There's no basis to support such a claim unless you can support it somehow...
The TOs made a ruling. I assume they made it in good faith. I think it should have been published ahead of time through an email or newsletter but I have seen no evidence that indicates an act of bad faith by the TOs, i.e. Something that indicates a post facto ruling or cover up.
PanzerLeader wrote: @jy2: By strict raw, if any troops unlocked lone wolves than any troops would make them slot less. Once slot less, they can't fill mandatory selections for the COTGW detachment. Pure RAW would make it still illegal. It's definitely a TO call though. Adepticon had a ruling and stuck with it.
Even with all the negativity, he supposedly did email the TOs before adepticon. The way the book worded the rule sucks, but this is starting to sound like a witch hunt until someone can contact him, the TOs, and the finalists that he played to confirm what he did in game and what verifications were made by email. With that said, I admit that it sucks the way the event happened. People discover loop holes in the rules that they can exploit, and yeah it's frustrating but it does appear RAW not RAI until faqed
luke1705 wrote: Witch hunt aside, where can we get more info about the top lists?
It's weird that in tournaments so big the lists are not posted. I searched for last year top players too, only main list and Independant posts. It seems that as big as Adepticon is, the lists are only posted independently. Tastytaste is pretty reliable obtaining lists when he goes to tournaments he lists off the army list winners on BoK tournament list compendium, but his most recent was the LVO top players. (Not sure he went to adepticon)
luke1705 wrote: Witch hunt aside, where can we get more info about the top lists?
It's weird that in tournaments so big the lists are not posted. I searched for last year top players too, only main list and Independant posts. It seems that as big as Adepticon is, the lists are only posted independently. Tastytaste is pretty reliable obtaining lists when he goes to tournaments he lists off the army list winners on BoK tournament list compendium, but his most recent was the LVO top players. (Not sure he went to adepticon)
I didn't go, but I will try to hunt them down as best I can.
In the technology age with various programs to generate lists, how can you not calculate point costs correctly? I assume you generate the list using a program and then double check manually the points. But ultimately the punishment for breaking the rules will determine the diligence with which a player checks this.
Aleong is clearly a great 40k player, but if you can leave "no doubt" then you earn the respect of your peers. Last year at Nova it was the same thing (witch hunt, or not) he failed to win without controversy.. This year and again he leaves doubt amongst his peers via rules lawyering, FOC and gameplay. As far as the Organizers, I do think it shows poor planning to not post specific rules changes, or rulings so all players can benefit. The fact the Organizers didn't, lends to the "good ol' boy" conspiracies that plague competitive 40k-either you're in the club and can get favorable decisions, or you're not..
Ravenous D wrote: Gotta love that LVO and adepticon have both been won by people carrying special emails.
Oh and as for the bikes and the -2 rule, its right in the bike section they ignore that while charging but take dangerous terrain.
Hey don't get me involved!
I checked with the TO and head judge the ruling for the wraithknight which was confirmed and the head judge was given a copy. So don't get me involved in all this thanks.
I was running the Tau list in the top 16. Was a good run of it, and honestly it came down to if Nick or I went first and if the winds of fate gave him a double fail on his grimoire T1 or T2. None of this happened, so such is life. He did eat an egregious triple 6 on stomps later in the match, but it was too little too late as with Adepticon mission formatting the star really didn't count for much at that point in the game.
I won't get into the conversations re: Aaron's list - other than to say that at the end of the day once you're in a tournament the TO's rules stand. They can be frustrating, they can be wrong, but they are the TO and it's their tournament. You live and learn and go onto the next GT if you get screwed up by a big ruling in your opponent's favor.
Great time seeing a playing everyone out there this year!
You should have a legal army list for events plain and simple. If it's to complicated for you to make a list that is legal then don't come to the event. Future events if your list is found to be illegal then you are eliminated. I really don't understand why people defend people that cheat.
I was running the Tau list in the top 16. Was a good run of it, and honestly it came down to if Nick or I went first and if the winds of fate gave him a double fail on his grimoire T1 or T2. None of this happened, so such is life. He did eat an egregious triple 6 on stomps later in the match, but it was too little too late as with Adepticon mission formatting the star really didn't count for much at that point in the game.
I won't get into the conversations re: Aaron's list - other than to say that at the end of the day once you're in a tournament the TO's rules stand. They can be frustrating, they can be wrong, but they are the TO and it's their tournament. You live and learn and go onto the next GT if you get screwed up by a big ruling in your opponent's favor.
Great time seeing a playing everyone out there this year!
I'm not of the list posting type. If one of my opponents wants to share they can, but I prefer to keep playing lists with a slightly different take on Tau (they're not completely off the wall) and publishing them as netlists never helps that. So I would prefer they not as well.
General outline of it was Tau CAD, FE Allies, Riptide Wing, Inq.
GreyDragoon wrote: I'm not of the list posting type. If one of my opponents wants to share they can, but I prefer to keep playing lists with a slightly different take on Tau (they're not completely off the wall) and publishing them as netlists never helps that. So I would prefer they not as well.
General outline of it was Tau CAD, FE Allies, Riptide Wing, Inq.
Double Surge, Riptide Wing, Guessing FSE Crisis of some kind but did it come in Allies Detachment or Retaliation Cadre variety and the Inq.
Well if you feel like shooting me a pm I'll respect your privacy and not share it with anyone. Otherwise cool and hope you can cook up a better list next time.
There are troops in the army. The rules for the Lone Wolf does not say that the troop has to be from the Space Wolf detachment. It doesn't even have to be a troop from the SW codex. It just has to be a troop in the army. I know that's a technicality, but the RAW is correct, even if the RAI probably isn't.
If this was the justification presented to me by an opponent at a tournament, and it was allowed to stand by a TO, I would concede and leave the event then and there. That there was another ruling allowing them to take up an FoC slot in direct contravention of the printed text, on top of an issue with the list going over on points, is a whole lot to simply hand-wave away. I won't get into the -2" charge issue since I have no idea how that went down, but to have three distinct issues with the army list should have been more than enough to put a player out of contention. I certainly would expect myself to be removed from contention if I ran such a list at a tournament.
If TO's are having issues sorting out lists like this, perhaps it's time to start limiting them more forcefully, particularly the allies and detachment shennanigans.
Great event! Just breaking down our booth and getting ready to shut it down. Thanks to everyone that came by and said hi, had a beer with us and to all of my opponents in the 40k champs!
ALso, huge thanks to the Adepticon crew for all their hard work in throwing such an awesome event.
. I was the designated member of our team to get team tourney tickets a few years ago, and didn't log on for an hour after the registration launch and ended up wait-listed (thankfully, we got in!).
)
