Registration opens at 8PM US EST on Monday, February 1, 2016. This will be the primary info and QA thread for Dakka, which is often a major site for such things.
Convention Overview and Information -
The NOVA Open is a Washington, DC area Tabletop Wargaming Convention with a strong focus on organized play, charity, hobby seminars, and social connection. 1,200 gamers attended in 2015.
2016 will be the 7th year of the NOVA Open, whose origins lie in a 32-person outdoor charity BBQ tournament held in 2009 in Springfield, VA.
The NOVA's legacy events include a 256-slot Warhammer 40,000 GT, but it now hosts 100+ player events in X-Wing, Warmachine, Malifaux, and large organized play tracks in numerous other game systems.
NOVA hosts some of the world's best hobby instructors - Justin McCoy of Secret Weapon Miniatures, Roman and Raffa of Massive Voodoo, Jessica Rich of Brush Mistress, Caleb Wissenback, and many more. Seminars are offered all day, every day of the con, and include new 4-hour hands-on workshops as of 2016.
NOVA partners with a sister organization, a formal 501(c)(3) charitable foundation known as the NOVA Open Charitable Foundation to raise funds and awareness in fighting critical causes around the world. We especially focus on leveraging the compassion of fellow wargamers and hobbyists to raise funds for Doctors Without Borders, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Fisher House Foundation. We primarily achieve this through an international consortium of brilliant miniature figure artists who collaborate to create world-class pieces of miniature art, including full armies, display boards, and individual show pieces. These are raffled and auctioned off through a combination of world-wide online raffles and at-NOVA raffles and silent auctions. Entering its 4th year, the NOCF raised over $25,000 for charity in 2015.
Interested attendees, partners, and vendors with questions should contact novaopen@gmail.com
For all events overviewed below, check out novaopen.com for event primers containing detailed information, schedules, and more
New Game Systems for 2016 -
Warhammer 30,000 / Horus Heresy - Led by some of the same personnel who've brought acclaimed Heresy era events to AdeptiCon in recent time, NOVA is proud to present a full suite of Heresy-era organized play opportunities throughout the NOVA weekend, inclusive of an escalation tournament, multiple campaign-style opportunities, and multiple mega-battle styled opportunities.
Star Wars: Armada and Imperial Assault -
With nearly 130 X-Wing attendees last year, it was only a matter of time before these two exceptional games joined the growing range of star wars-related activities available at NOVA. All Star Wars events occur in a major ballroom, with the gaming tables wrapped around a gorgeous centerpiece developed purely for the enjoyment of attendees at NOVA - a to-scale (X-Wing "big ship" scale), 11.5 foot Imperial Avenger-class Star Destroyer, complete with lights and sounds. It has to be seen to be believed, capable of dominating a 20,000 square foot gaming hall on its own.
Event-Specific Overview Information
Warhammer 40,000 - NOVA offers numerous distinct events for Warhammer 40,000 players and enthusiasts. We host a 256-slot, 8-round Warhammer 40KGT; a 30-team "Trios" team tournament pitting 3-man teams in alternating 1v1 and 2v2 games vs. opponents in a very casual and laid back setting; a 32-player Invitational for a $1,000 cash prize; a weekend-long Narrative that combines world-class gaming and terrain with social, team-building wargaming both on and beyond the tabletop (think war councils, planning sessions, and the like in places like our charity bar and lounge). We also offer a "Nightfighter" track for those who spend the day in other activities to join in on some of the Narrative battles at night.
New in 2016, the 40KGT is shifting its army construction rules to better align with the structures of the widely-used ITC format, enabling players who participate in primarily ITC events to attend NOVA without major force alterations. We've also taken our highly regarded missions to the next level, further refining them after their best year yet (95% attendee approval in post-event survey).
Warmachine/Hordes - NOVA hosted over 120 Warmachine players in 2015, participating in 8 distinct events (besides iron arena / open play). We expect that to increase substantially this year, due to increased demand and popular feedback, as well as the addition of a 9th event to the schedule and a cleaned up events calendar (that, for the health of all WM players, now actually includes a set-aside "sleep, for the love of Hordes" time).
Malifaux - NOVA proudly hosts Wyrd's North American National Championship for Malifaux. This will be our third consecutive year offering expanding Malifaux events, and the 2nd year of the National Champs. Last year's initial offering of 54 slots sold out, and we expect the same to happen this year. We've also added a more diverse array of other Malifaux gaming opportunities, including Shifting Loyalties campaign components. We'll once again be joined by Wyrd personnel, including their design team lead (Aaron Darland) and the designer of Malifaux himself (Justin Gibbs).
Age of Sigmar - Age of Sigmar will be in Year 2 at NOVA, including both narrative/casual and organized/competitive gaming opportunities throughout the weekend.
Infinity - Infinity is one of our most comprehensive event offerings on an annual basis, though space is always limited and in high demand. This year we'll be joined by Carlos of Wyrd, and we're adding a selection of narrative events to the already-busy ITS schedule.
Star Wars Gaming - X-Wing saw nearly 130 unique attendees last year, with more expected in 2016. We have some special announcements and surprises from FFG in store for attendees as well (Though we can't quite mention them yet!). We are also proudly bringing several Imperial Assault and Armada events to the tables for 2016. A full-on Shipyard is in the works as a new terrain production item to go along with last year's 11.5 foot long star destroyer!
Lord of the Rings - NOVA has the best Lord of the Rings terrain anywhere on the planet, including GWHQ. Seriously. It also hosts one of the larger LOTRGTs Stateside, attended last year by players from as far away as London and Quebec. We host a full range of LOTR events at NOVA, with over 50 unique LOTR players in 2015.
Blood Bowl - About 14 people came to play Blood Bowl in 2014, and nearly 30 different players participated in BB events in 2015! We look to grow yet again, with our third annual exciting year of Blood Bowl ahead.
Dark Age & Wrath of Kings - Cool Mini or Not is bringing its booth, demos, and more back to NOVA in 2016. Along with this, they'll be running another series of events for Dark Age and Wrath of Kings. SuperNOVA bags are also likely to once again include some pretty swanky goodies, courtesy of CMON.
Drop Zone Commander / Drop Fleet Commander - NOVA will very possibly be the first site of Drop Fleet Commander events, and we'll be allowing pre-registration to reserve spots for DFC. While you'll be able to get your first spot on the list, we will not charge for DFC events until confirmation of on-time delivery / fulfillment of kickstarter promises.
Magic the Gathering - A variety of MTG events will go on at NOVA in 2016, including a number of events catering to the timeframes and availabilities of our tabletop gamers.
Capital Palette - The NOVA Open's incredible juried miniature figure art competition and exhibition is getting a revamp this year, including moving to an Open Forum format (each Category will win a Best in Category, but there are unlimited #'s of potential Gold, Silver, and Bronze finishers in each category). There will still only be a single mini to win the coveted Best in Show and its accompanying Crystal Monument. This year's event is being directly organized, judged, and run by none other than Justin McCoy, Roman Lapatt, and Raffaele Picca! It is their and NOVA's paint competition for 2016!
Seminars - The list of seminars offered at NOVA this year is exhaustive, highlighted by courses from McCoy, Roman, Raffa, Wissenback, and RIch. Check the website for exhaustive details as we put them up, and don't miss out! Many seminars sold out last year - these teachers are in extremely high demand, and it looks like NOVA is likely to be one of the only places you can take courses taught by Roman and Raffa!
The NOVA Open Charitable Foundation Lounge - In addition to charitable activities with miniature figure art, armies, and more, the NOCF also converts an awesome set of suites at the Hyatt Regency into a Bar and Lounge, with all proceeds benefitting the charitable causes supported by the NOCF. Discount beverages and snacks are available all weekend long amidst a highly energetic, fun, social environment. Every night in the lounge is a night to remember, full of some of the biggest and brightest stars of the hobby having a beer or a cocktail (or just a soda, water, or coffee) with you and talking about whatever suits you. Last year also saw the addition of impromptu live music to the bar, and we're looking to expand that as well in 2016. It's one of the coolest places to be in our hobby, and everything you do is not only cheaper than most bars and restaurants ... it benefits great causes! Room 1850 in the Hyatt, all weekend long, through the end of the con on Sunday night after the award and closing ceremony.
Vendors - We can already confirm some of our best vendors are returning for 2016, and we're hard at work locking the rest and more in. Already good to return are:
KR MultiCase
The Toledo Game Room ("That Bits Guy" you always see in the halls at AdeptiCon)
Atlantis Comics and Games
Cool Mini or Not
Grex Airbrush
Secret Weapon Miniatures
Greenman Designs
Tectonic Craft Studios
Stiff Neck Studios
and more!
Get ready to sign up at 8PM on Monday, February 1
Let us know here or elsewhere if you have any questions!
Fully expecting to attend this year. And by attend I don't mean pay for it an have yet another life changing crummy end of summer that makes it so I can't go and all I'm doing is yet again goosing the prize pool for others 2 years in a row is more than enough of that!
Registration opens in just a couple days, on Monday at 8PM US Eastern.
If you haven't done a SuperNOVA yet, here are the basics:
We still only have 100, which sold out in under an hour last year.
KR sweetened the pot further this year, for those who don't get a SuperNOVA in time, but still register early. The first 400 NON-SuperNOVA registrants have a shot at a golden ticket from KR, ranging from 50% off items to $300 valued Kaiser4 bags, redeemable at the KR MultiCase booth at NOVA. So get in on being one of the first 100 SuperNOVA or 400 Swag Bag recipients on Monday evening.
Registration is in less than 9 hours from the time of this post, at 8PM US EST. SuperNOVA, Malifaux National Champs, all X-Wing events, and much more will all sell VERY quickly. Do your schedule / event description homework and get set for reg to open.
Don't miss out on what you're looking for!
Seminars are also fully updated, including the addition of Jessica Rich's classes, some of which are epic sounding.
Just in case folks are trolling here as well, early registration rush broke PayPal. The site captured all SAP registrations and wait lists in the first half hour, when they were all gone, so we will work to post-resolve that. PayPal seems to be fixed now, so you should go in and register, inclusive of CAP, for any events you want. The store-side will handle any SAP upgrades deducting the prior CAP cost, once we can move back to the captured list of those first 114. We will likely tackle cases where people lost their SAP pole position on an individual basis, and procure additional SAP as needed to resolve those early birds who were messed over by the errors.
Yeah I was having some distinct problems on my mobile device and had to put it down for a business call. Thankfully when back it seems the site had gotten over that hiccup but the SAP's were taken. Threw myself on the Wait list (no 33!) though so hopefully that gets expanded if possible. Would love to finally get my multi-year benies lol!
Basically, PayPal thought the high # of registrations that went flying through in the first 60 seconds was some kind of error or attack, and turned off the coms between the store and PayPal for "xx" minutes. Fortunately, as the store didn't break, we had a clear record of exactly who clicked purchase and when. So, resolving.
Having dealt with homebrew webcarts and PayPal API integration for the better part of a decade, I feel your pain. I know Matt used to spend countless hours dealing with this. The most important lessons I recall were:
1. Make sure you have the correct type of PayPal account. We would notify Paypal well in advance to expect a high rate of activity, if you set that up properly and notify PayPal so they flag your account, that should help.
2. Carts that process, but do not complete payment, are a problem with the cart proper. PayPal is always updating their API rules, and having a cart that really only gets used once a year means it is easily to miss stuff.
We had our fair share of registration issues and growing pains over the years, and the blame was always on our end (a database that couldn't handle the number of connections, limits on email per hour on our web host, etc). PayPal processes 9500 transactions a minute. We were able to do 900-1000 an hour a few years in a row only hindered by our server's inability to keep up with the volume.
While it is too late to fix the web cart issues for launch this time, the best advice I can give you is to move away from PayPal and self-hosted the web carts. It will cost a little bit but a proper Merchant Account costs less per transaction than PayPal fees. It will be well worth it in the end, just make sure that you find a service that will charge per user not per ticket sale and has flexibility to scale as you grow.
Ultimately, you are doing the best thing and working to make it right for your attendees. That is all you can do so keep your head up!
Happy to discuss our experiences further after you've had a chance to breathe, .. it does get better.
As we hit 75% of our room block filled up, and as we're down to under 100 "first 400 swag bags" (on top of the 100 SuperNOVA), wanted to give people that update.
Hotel room booking and registration is at the same place today as it was in July of last year. Recommend not waiting.
The FAQ team is still figuring out some of these questions, though we traditionally do not outright change rules due to balance perceptions. But that is going to be the call and purview of the 40KGT/Invitational lead and the FAQ group.
We are also tweaking our missions up, to address some perceptions of the scoring system permitting collusion. We want to avoid the traditionally poor GT situation with Battle Points where a closer game yields fewer battle points due to a differential-type/pool-points situation. We'll also have some minor tweaks to the 40K missions as a whole in terms of secondaries/etc. to further improve them.
While we plan to ask the hotel for whatever remaining rooms they can spare us, last night's newsletter release pushed our hotel room block up to 85% of the initial block filled. So I'd snag a room while possible.
Also, Roman and Raffa's classes in particular have begun to sell out, but several of the classes taught by all of the different instructors only have a couple spots left.
The 100 SuperNOVA bags sold out in 6 minutes. The 400 first registrants thereafter (for Convention Access Passes) receive SWAG bags, inclusive of the potential for KR Multicase golden tickets. We are down to only a very few of these, sub-100.
Sold out events ...
Roman's Blending School (4 Hour Class)
Horus Heresy Asymmetrical Campaign
At least one of Jessica Rich's "TNA: The Art of Painting Hot Chicks"
SuperNOVA, of course
The following events are nearly sold out:
Horus Heresy Escalation
Malifaux - Treacherous Ties
Malfiaux North American National Championship
X-Wing Narrative (Both Rebel and Imperial)
X-Wing Championship
Horus Heresy Big Blam
Both X-Wing Hunger Games events
Star Wars Armada Championship
Malifaux Narrative
Several of the live-action speed painting compteitions
And a lot more are at half sold out or beyond
We are also tweaking our missions up, to address some perceptions of the scoring system permitting collusion.
Yeah, there seemed to be way too much of that last year. Even if all the results were genuine it left a bad taste in mouth for a bunch of players.
Just my perspective, but really didn't see/hear of any. A couple of us joked, in hindsight in poor taste, about it, but didn't come across instances of people in the top bracket who had. Again, just from they people I interacted with.
Yup - the original purpose was to deal with some of the Rock Paper Scissors of the game (i.e. if you are both going after the same objective(s) without choice, you're more likely to get screwed on match-up, which is an increasing problem in an increasingly unbalanced game) and to not penalize people in seeking Battlemaster / Bracket shift-ups because of closer games. The obvious "well, great player A barely beat great player B while great player C crushed newbie D in round 1, yet great player C gets the most points???"
BUT perceptionally or otherwise (it certainly did happen at least on some tables, though we had very few 19-18 finishes across the entire tournament), it was certainly possible for players who were already established in terms of who was going to win or lose to ask their opponent to make it 19-19 (or just give them a few extra by "talking through" the last few turns) and calling it a W or L on tiebreaker.
We're discussing some fixes for this, which currently include (in no particular order):
Giving in to making it differential based
Making it linear - a Win on game points = "2" battle points, a Tie on game points = "1" battle point, and a Loss = "0" (you'd still break ties on points destroyed for purposes of W/L pathing).
Making the various subcomponents of the mission (i.e. Primary, Secondary, Tertiary) linear/all-or-nothing, so if you win Primary, you get "x" points, lose Primary, get "y" points, tie Primary, get "z" points, again using the points accrued as a simple determiner for whether you w/l/t the P/S/T, then awarding points based upon that outcome.
So ... TBD, though input and discussion always welcome. What it will not remain, however, is as it was - where you simply earned Battle Points equal to the # of in-game points earned, aka 0-19.
We are also tweaking our missions up, to address some perceptions of the scoring system permitting collusion.
Yeah, there seemed to be way too much of that last year. Even if all the results were genuine it left a bad taste in mouth for a bunch of players.
Just my perspective, but really didn't see/hear of any. A couple of us joked, in hindsight in poor taste, about it, but didn't come across instances of people in the top bracket who had. Again, just from they people I interacted with.
Add-on: Evan, there were a few guys, frankly some of the better known players, who were kind of a mess to watch as they went running around bouncing up and down about it and shouting at organizers and the like. The reaction surprised me, b/c what was said out loud was that "everyone" was just giving their opponent 18 or 19 points and taking 19 of their own. The stats completely refuted this, as folks could have looked upon Torrent. The results aren't littered with magical 19-18 and 19-19 finishes.
BUT what *DID* happen were at least a few occasions of people trying to get this to happen and being turned down by their opponents, probably at least once where it did happen, and - much more commonly - people "talking through" the last couple turns once both players knew who was going to win, and "talking through" how many points each thought they'd get. As you can imagine, if Player A thinks he's got the Win and Player B tells him it's his win either way, but can we talk through how many points we should get, Player A is probably going to be generous about whatever B says he'd have earned by end-game. So, you had situations where time would be running out, and the score might be 12-3, let's say, and the player who admits he'll lose and initiates the "let's just talk through the rest" ends up in a final score of, say, 16-12. If they'd played to time or played 'genuinely' to the end, the score in these cases were often likely to have actually been more like 13-5. So you had players getting +6-7 extra BP, through semi-scurrilous means (often pretty innocent, but incidentally still wrong).
These more realistic cases are why we're adjusting, as opposed to the overreactions and exaggerations of the few who were screaming bloody murder about it.
I'm intrigued by the idea of all-or-nothing primaries; Phil mentioned the idea of playing both primaries as an all or nothing and a friend and I tried it out. The score felt a lot more lopsided than the game was. That said, having them all-or-nothing pretty solidly sidesteps the situation you mentioned, Mike, of the winning player "giving" the losing player free BPs.
We are also tweaking our missions up, to address some perceptions of the scoring system permitting collusion.
Yeah, there seemed to be way too much of that last year. Even if all the results were genuine it left a bad taste in mouth for a bunch of players.
Some local tournaments use NOVA missions and sometimes I let my opponent grab objectives in the last turn if it won't affect my own score. But it sounds like y'all are talking about making up numbers?
Easy solution there: make scoring zero-sum. Adepticon uses differential scoring: Your score = Your Victory Points +plus+ 15 -minus- Your Opponent's Victory Points. So both player's scores always add up to 30. And you only get zero points if your opponent gets 30 more than you do (or you concede.)
Zero-sum scoring inherently is poor, and done far too often. It basically says a closer game is a worse performance by the winner. The problem there is this:
If I beat Nick Nanavati by one point, I get the lowest possible winning BP total.
If I beat Joe "First tournament Ever" Fluffarmy 30-0, I get the highest possible winning BP total.
The system just rewarded me for getting an easy matchup, and punished me for winning a hard match-up.
It's basically inverse strength of schedule scoring. It would be fine if the field was ranked or all players were roughly equal, but in modern 40K tournaments it is exactly the opposite case. The field isn't ranked, the first round(s) are basically random paired, and the player skill differential is dramatic.
It"s not popular to say, but from a fairness perspective, differential scoring in large, open 40k tournaments is outright bad, and TOs should seek better solutions (which is what we're trying to solve).
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit/Add -
One leading idea being tossed about right now is to basically add a bonus for diff, instead of making it differential-based, and thus minimizing the aforementioned diff issue while also solving the incidental collusion issue.
This solution would do something like this:
"Winners earn Bonus BP equal to the number of BP more than their opponent they score, to a max of 6."
So a 12-6 win becomes an 18 for the winner, 6 still for the loser. A 19-18 win becomes a 20 for the winner, still 18 for the loser. But allowing your opponent to creep up closer to you in points that he didn't actually earn would directly subtract from the max you could score.
It"s not popular to say, but from a fairness perspective, differential scoring in large, open 40k tournaments is outright bad, and TOs should seek better solutions (which is what we're trying to solve).
wow those are great points. you've changed my mind, thank you.
I feel like the tertiary mission always being destroy a unit is sort of bland and encourages people to bring deathstars. Considering TWC won both the invite and open last year I would hope that tertiaries would be somewhat more varied.
Awesome and please for the mother of god, make us aware of important FAQ updates (unlike some other large GT that recently happened). Thanks for the timely response and I am beyond ecstatic to be attending NOVA, its been a few years for me.
Awesome and please for the mother of god, make us aware of important FAQ updates (unlike some other large GT that recently happened). Thanks for the timely response and I am beyond ecstatic to be attending NOVA, its been a few years for me.
Hi! I'm Phil and I'm a Co-Lead of the GT. Every time I've added/changed/generally updated the FAQ I've been posting a change log to here: http://40kfaq.com/
Awesome and please for the mother of god, make us aware of important FAQ updates (unlike some other large GT that recently happened). Thanks for the timely response and I am beyond ecstatic to be attending NOVA, its been a few years for me.
Hi! I'm Phil and I'm a Co-Lead of the GT. Every time I've added/changed/generally updated the FAQ I've been posting a change log to here: http://40kfaq.com/
Hope this helps
Yeah definitely need a ruling on the Piranha Wing before people start buying bunch of drones and Piranhas for the Drone Factory.
Awesome and please for the mother of god, make us aware of important FAQ updates (unlike some other large GT that recently happened). Thanks for the timely response and I am beyond ecstatic to be attending NOVA, its been a few years for me.
Hi! I'm Phil and I'm a Co-Lead of the GT. Every time I've added/changed/generally updated the FAQ I've been posting a change log to here: http://40kfaq.com/
Hope this helps
Yeah definitely need a ruling on the Piranha Wing before people start buying bunch of drones and Piranhas for the Drone Factory.
From discussions on the FAQ council, it was felt there was no need for an FAQ Entry - the rules are clear on how to play the Piranha Firestream Wing. I think what you're looking for would be better addressed by this line of the FAQ document, under Rules Changes:
Please note that the NOVA Open will play by what the rules say unless enough people in the community say otherwise. This section is where these rules changes will be addressed. If you feel an ability/mechanic is too powerful please see the section above about how to submit questions and arguments for the FAQ.
Keep in mind NOVA traditionally does not implement many rules changes, and only in the above case. For instance, NOVA currently has rules change entries for Ranged D, and how Stomping out of Combat works. Comparatively, there are no changes to items like Invisibility, 2+ rerollable, and other common items.
I'd use the contact form listed in the FAQ to send over an email expressing your concerns.
What Target said is the best way to let us know how you feel about something like the Piranhas in terms of attempting to lobby for a change in the rules.
Bad news - block sold out
Good news - we got the hotel to open it back up again with most of the rest of the rooms in the hotel
Good/Bad news - The increased block is still now 75% sold out
Long / short - you can cancel up to 48 hours in advance if something comes up with the hotel; snag a room now: https://aws.passkey.com/g/55247835
Malifaux update;
Update for all - Down to under 20 spots left for the Malifaux National Championships
Additionally, only 14 spots remain for the Narrative
6 spots remain for the Enforcer Brawl
6 spots remain for Hardcore
8 spots remain for Treacherous Ties
12 spots remain for the Trios Team event (12 team spots)
Also, while you can cancel your hotel room as long as it's 48 hours before the time of, we already sold the hotel block out and had to ask the Hyatt for an increase. They gave us all the rooms left in the hotel, but THAT larger block is now 75% gone.
In response to anecdotal reports of collusion last year, where players who were winning would give the opponents extra points up to 1 or similar below them, we've made the following change to how Battle Points are awarded per round at NOVA's 40KGT.
In addition to being able to earn 0-9 points for Primary, 0-6 points for Secondary, and 0-4 points for Tertiary, winners will also earn 0-6 points for Differential. Every point you exceed your opponent's score by, to a maximum of 6, is added to your final score.
Example 1 - John beats Bob via tiebreakers, tying on BP 19-19. Since the differential is Zero, John's final BP for the round remains a 19.
Example 2 - John beats Bob 19-13 on BP. The differential is 6, so John's final score for the round is 25.
Example 3 - John beats Bob 19-10 on BP. The differential is 9, but you cannot score more than +6 for differential. John's final score for the round is 25.
Hey Mike, have you guys ever given any thought to adding a Kings of War event? It seems to be picking up a little steam now with its 2nd edition and with former WFB players.
Still time for meta to shift, but I doubt more than two tau dominant lists make top 16. Also predict Eldar to have the highest representation, followed by Imperial power armour
Automatically Appended Next Post: Should amend, my guesses are partly based on popular power lists and partly on what top players are playing and planning. A significant number are running Eldar. For tau, only know of a couple.
FTGTEvan wrote: Still time for meta to shift, but I doubt more than two tau dominant lists make top 16. Also predict Eldar to have the highest representation, followed by Imperial power armour
Automatically Appended Next Post: Should amend, my guesses are partly based on popular power lists and partly on what top players are playing and planning. A significant number are running Eldar. For tau, only know of a couple.
I wonder how many warp spider spam lists start appearing as is the case with net listing. It's already pretty dominant in Europe and building in the US.
I'm not sure it will require a rules change like one jump a phase like ITC does with its conservative interpretation of flicker jump equals warp jump but I guess we will see after Nova.
People complain of drone spam and hunter contingent or experimental rules or Superheavies or scat bikes or Death Stars but it seems this is the main unit that dominates most tourney scenes, currently.
True and not true. True because yes, and nicely that changes most years.
Not true b/c every year, we get skilled players in the Top 16 with unusual lists, like last year's all khorne daemon list.
The missions help a great deal to offset certain things, and help - somewhat - to remediate bad matches and the like. This can ease the ability of more fringe (But still inherently more power) builds to do well.
1. If a army has zero troop choices it automatically gives up 2 pts for Strike the Rank and File?
2. Slay Them All and Let the Emperor Sort Them Out: For Decurion type armies, do you have to destroy the whole decurion to achieve this or you can just destroy one formation inside that decurion (i.e. one Canoptek Harvest)?
Should check out our FAQ. Most Tau players seem to like it
Oh my goodness it's great to see some sanity in the rules about Tau. Bless you. I kinda hope the Nova keeps its own FAQ and rules so Frontline has competition. Don't want all the eggs in one basket.
I wouldn't call it competition. We partner with LVO as one of their major ITC scoring events, and cross-promote each other. We're also happily hosting Frankie, Reece, Geoff, and others this year at NOVA (they've beaten a bunch of lazy East Coasters to registering).
We just operate our own FAQ, our own missions, etc., with similar intent to produce the most engaging and fair gaming experience possible. Easy peasy.
As a caveat, some of it is that we have a lot of faith in the value of asymmetric missions with choice-based mission customization to balance the game in ways that rules changes inherently cannot; some of our lack of change is a direct result of not wanting to compound some of the finer instrumentation within the mission design, entering the 8th year of its evolution and at a very healthy, very engaging place. I.E., I am not a fan at all of 2+ re-rollables, but the mission design already provides avenues around dealing with that sort of unit; to further add a rules tweak on top of that might over-load balance in the wrong direction, so we don't do it. This isn't reflective of a fundamental disagreement with ITC changes - something must be done for some of the more extreme "NPE" elements within the game; we use mission design to do it, they use rules tweaks. Same intent, and a partnered outlook on the value of that.
EDIT - Generally speaking, we want asymmetric mission design to introduce risk to players for taking certain extreme build elements. In almost all cases, whether it's 0-troop, MSU, super deathstar, etc., you'll notice the missions give opponents of those armies opportunities to select secondaries that award easier or automatic points. I.E. 0 troop choices.
MVBrandt wrote: I wouldn't call it competition. We partner with LVO as one of their major ITC scoring events, and cross-promote each other. We're also happily hosting Frankie, Reece, Geoff, and others this year at NOVA (they've beaten a bunch of lazy East Coasters to registering).
We just operate our own FAQ, our own missions, etc., with similar intent to produce the most engaging and fair gaming experience possible. Easy peasy.
As a caveat, some of it is that we have a lot of faith in the value of asymmetric missions with choice-based mission customization to balance the game in ways that rules changes inherently cannot; some of our lack of change is a direct result of not wanting to compound some of the finer instrumentation within the mission design, entering the 8th year of its evolution and at a very healthy, very engaging place. I.E., I am not a fan at all of 2+ re-rollables, but the mission design already provides avenues around dealing with that sort of unit; to further add a rules tweak on top of that might over-load balance in the wrong direction, so we don't do it. This isn't reflective of a fundamental disagreement with ITC changes - something must be done for some of the more extreme "NPE" elements within the game; we use mission design to do it, they use rules tweaks. Same intent, and a partnered outlook on the value of that.
MVBrandt wrote: I wouldn't call it competition. We partner with LVO as one of their major ITC scoring events, and cross-promote each other. We're also happily hosting Frankie, Reece, Geoff, and others this year at NOVA (they've beaten a bunch of lazy East Coasters to registering).
We just operate our own FAQ, our own missions, etc., with similar intent to produce the most engaging and fair gaming experience possible. Easy peasy.
As a caveat, some of it is that we have a lot of faith in the value of asymmetric missions with choice-based mission customization to balance the game in ways that rules changes inherently cannot; some of our lack of change is a direct result of not wanting to compound some of the finer instrumentation within the mission design, entering the 8th year of its evolution and at a very healthy, very engaging place. I.E., I am not a fan at all of 2+ re-rollables, but the mission design already provides avenues around dealing with that sort of unit; to further add a rules tweak on top of that might over-load balance in the wrong direction, so we don't do it. This isn't reflective of a fundamental disagreement with ITC changes - something must be done for some of the more extreme "NPE" elements within the game; we use mission design to do it, they use rules tweaks. Same intent, and a partnered outlook on the value of that.
EDIT - Generally speaking, we want asymmetric mission design to introduce risk to players for taking certain extreme build elements. In almost all cases, whether it's 0-troop, MSU, super deathstar, etc., you'll notice the missions give opponents of those armies opportunities to select secondaries that award easier or automatic points. I.E. 0 troop choices.
Interesting. I like it. I didn't look at the mission part of the FAQ except a brief glance but you have intrigued me enough to go and give everything an in depth read at some point. Also thanks for clarifying.
MVBrandt wrote: I wouldn't call it competition. We partner with LVO as one of their major ITC scoring events, and cross-promote each other. We're also happily hosting Frankie, Reece, Geoff, and others this year at NOVA (they've beaten a bunch of lazy East Coasters to registering).
We just operate our own FAQ, our own missions, etc., with similar intent to produce the most engaging and fair gaming experience possible. Easy peasy.
As a caveat, some of it is that we have a lot of faith in the value of asymmetric missions with choice-based mission customization to balance the game in ways that rules changes inherently cannot; some of our lack of change is a direct result of not wanting to compound some of the finer instrumentation within the mission design, entering the 8th year of its evolution and at a very healthy, very engaging place. I.E., I am not a fan at all of 2+ re-rollables, but the mission design already provides avenues around dealing with that sort of unit; to further add a rules tweak on top of that might over-load balance in the wrong direction, so we don't do it. This isn't reflective of a fundamental disagreement with ITC changes - something must be done for some of the more extreme "NPE" elements within the game; we use mission design to do it, they use rules tweaks. Same intent, and a partnered outlook on the value of that.
EDIT - Generally speaking, we want asymmetric mission design to introduce risk to players for taking certain extreme build elements. In almost all cases, whether it's 0-troop, MSU, super deathstar, etc., you'll notice the missions give opponents of those armies opportunities to select secondaries that award easier or automatic points. I.E. 0 troop choices.
Interesting. I like it. I didn't look at the mission part of the FAQ except a brief glance but you have intrigued me enough to go and give everything an in depth read at some point. Also thanks for clarifying.
1. If a army has zero troop choices it automatically gives up 2 pts for Strike the Rank and File?
2. Slay Them All and Let the Emperor Sort Them Out: For Decurion type armies, do you have to destroy the whole decurion to achieve this or you can just destroy one formation inside that decurion (i.e. one Canoptek Harvest)?
1. Yes.
2. No, just a formation. So if you're playing a Gladius with double Demi Companies and the Scout Formation as its auxiliary, if you destroy the Scout Formation you achieve the secondary.
I can only imagine how many angry emails you've gotten. Almost got me except I followed th newsletter and clicked the link to actually check the primer updates ;p
So adapticon rule that Lone wolves can satisfy the force organization tax without telling everyone, would this be the case for Nova? And also what about servitors satisfying the elite tax with Iron Priests for tCoTGW Det? I've been trying to figure this out since the new SW release.
Phil, the 40k head to and faq lead, is playing at adepticon right now, but sure he'll get on it soon after return. Lone wolf thing is probably a big no. TBD.
SonsofVulkan wrote: So adapticon rule that Lone wolves can satisfy the force organization tax without telling everyone, would this be the case for Nova? And also what about servitors satisfying the elite tax with Iron Priests for tCoTGW Det? I've been trying to figure this out since the new SW release.
SonsofVulkan wrote: So adapticon rule that Lone wolves can satisfy the force organization tax without telling everyone, would this be the case for Nova? And also what about servitors satisfying the elite tax with Iron Priests for tCoTGW Det? I've been trying to figure this out since the new SW release.
In my hotel room after a long day and my eyes are crossing so if this is a bit abrupt please forgive me.
I'm the Phil Mike is talking about, so I can respond.
SonsofVulkan wrote: So adapticon rule that Lone wolves can satisfy the force organization tax without telling everyone, would this be the case for Nova? And also what about servitors satisfying the elite tax with Iron Priests for tCoTGW Det? I've been trying to figure this out since the new SW release.
In my hotel room after a long day and my eyes are crossing so if this is a bit abrupt please forgive me.
I'm the Phil Mike is talking about, so I can respond.
No and no.
Haha ok, I guess adapticon messed up bad... So un-professional for a major GT.
Another question: the slay rank and file secondary, do the conjured troop units also have to be destroyed to score this objective?
SonsofVulkan wrote: So adapticon rule that Lone wolves can satisfy the force organization tax without telling everyone, would this be the case for Nova? And also what about servitors satisfying the elite tax with Iron Priests for tCoTGW Det? I've been trying to figure this out since the new SW release.
In my hotel room after a long day and my eyes are crossing so if this is a bit abrupt please forgive me.
I'm the Phil Mike is talking about, so I can respond.
No and no.
Haha ok, I guess adapticon messed up bad... So un-professional for a major GT.
Another question: the slay rank and file secondary, do the conjured troop units also have to be destroyed to score this objective?
Yes, they're still considered troops regardless of them not being apart of a detachment.
MVBrandt wrote:You gotta know just because we rule differently doesn't mean adepticon is somehow a screw up.
Yep! Just because we interpret things differently doesn't mean they screwed up at all. Formats rule on things differently all the time.
General question: Can you attach ICs to the Vanguard Squad from Shadowstrike Kill Team and retain assault from deep strike provided the ICs are from the same detachment? I.E. can I attach the Captain from the demi-company and still use the Shadowstrike rules since both would exist as part of the Talon Strike Force?
PanzerLeader wrote: General question: Can you attach ICs to the Vanguard Squad from Shadowstrike Kill Team and retain assault from deep strike provided the ICs are from the same detachment? I.E. can I attach the Captain from the demi-company and still use the Shadowstrike rules since both would exist as part of the Talon Strike Force?
This is a special rule that doesn't specifically say it confers to the IC that joined, so the IC doesn't get the benefit of it. We handle this the same way we handle the Skyhammer assault formation as well.
PanzerLeader wrote: General question: Can you attach ICs to the Vanguard Squad from Shadowstrike Kill Team and retain assault from deep strike provided the ICs are from the same detachment? I.E. can I attach the Captain from the demi-company and still use the Shadowstrike rules since both would exist as part of the Talon Strike Force?
This is a special rule that doesn't specifically say it confers to the IC that joined, so the IC doesn't get the benefit of it. We handle this the same way we handle the Skyhammer assault formation as well.
So by extension, a necron IC from a CAD attached to a unit from a Reclamation Legion within 12" of the overlord wouldn't benefit from Enhanced Reanimation Protocols? And ICs attached to wulfen would negate bounding leap?
PanzerLeader wrote: General question: Can you attach ICs to the Vanguard Squad from Shadowstrike Kill Team and retain assault from deep strike provided the ICs are from the same detachment? I.E. can I attach the Captain from the demi-company and still use the Shadowstrike rules since both would exist as part of the Talon Strike Force?
This is a special rule that doesn't specifically say it confers to the IC that joined, so the IC doesn't get the benefit of it. We handle this the same way we handle the Skyhammer assault formation as well.
So by extension, a necron IC from a CAD attached to a unit from a Reclamation Legion within 12" of the overlord wouldn't benefit from Enhanced Reanimation Protocols? And ICs attached to wulfen would negate bounding leap?
PanzerLeader wrote: General question: Can you attach ICs to the Vanguard Squad from Shadowstrike Kill Team and retain assault from deep strike provided the ICs are from the same detachment? I.E. can I attach the Captain from the demi-company and still use the Shadowstrike rules since both would exist as part of the Talon Strike Force?
This is a special rule that doesn't specifically say it confers to the IC that joined, so the IC doesn't get the benefit of it. We handle this the same way we handle the Skyhammer assault formation as well.
So by extension, a necron IC from a CAD attached to a unit from a Reclamation Legion within 12" of the overlord wouldn't benefit from Enhanced Reanimation Protocols? And ICs attached to wulfen would negate bounding leap?
Correct.
Ok. I'm following so far. So if a regular IC joins an Objective Secured unit, the unit would loss Objective Secured since it does not specifically confer?
PanzerLeader wrote: General question: Can you attach ICs to the Vanguard Squad from Shadowstrike Kill Team and retain assault from deep strike provided the ICs are from the same detachment? I.E. can I attach the Captain from the demi-company and still use the Shadowstrike rules since both would exist as part of the Talon Strike Force?
This is a special rule that doesn't specifically say it confers to the IC that joined, so the IC doesn't get the benefit of it. We handle this the same way we handle the Skyhammer assault formation as well.
So by extension, a necron IC from a CAD attached to a unit from a Reclamation Legion within 12" of the overlord wouldn't benefit from Enhanced Reanimation Protocols? And ICs attached to wulfen would negate bounding leap?
Correct.
Ok. I'm following so far. So if a regular IC joins an Objective Secured unit, the unit would loss Objective Secured since it does not specifically confer?
Ah I didn't explain it correctly, my apologies. Just because the IC joins the unit doesn't mean the unit loses the special rule, it just means the special rule doesn't confer to the IC unless it specifically says it does. In some instances it means the unit can't use their special rule.
Skyhammer and Bounding Leap are an example of they still have it but cannot use it because not all models in the unit have the special rule allowing them to assault after a condition that normally doesn't allow them to assault.
The Reclamation Legion and Objective Secured rule will still be in effect, just not on the IC that joined the unit. So that means if your Necron IC joins the unit, the unit still gains the benefit of Enhanced Reanimation Protocols, the IC that joined does not. The Objective Secured unit still has Objective Secured, the IC that joined them does not. Meaning if the IC is the only model within 3" of an objective it can still be contested by a non-Objective Secured unit.
Ah I didn't explain it correctly, my apologies. Just because the IC joins the unit doesn't mean the unit loses the special rule, it just means the special rule doesn't confer to the IC unless it specifically says it does. In some instances it means the unit can't use their special rule.
Skyhammer and Bounding Leap are an example of they still have it but cannot use it because not all models in the unit have the special rule allowing them to assault after a condition that normally doesn't allow them to assault.
The Reclamation Legion and Objective Secured rule will still be in effect, just not on the IC that joined the unit. So that means if your Necron IC joins the unit, the unit still gains the benefit of Enhanced Reanimation Protocols, the IC that joined does not. The Objective Secured unit still has Objective Secured, the IC that joined them does not. Meaning if the IC is the only model within 3" of an objective it can still be contested by a non-Objective Secured unit.
I hope this clears it up a bit.
I think so. One last hypothetical: if an IC starts on the board (and thus could normally launch an assault) and moves into coherency with a Vanguard Vet unit that arrives from deep strike, could the unit still assault since all models have permission to assault under normal circumstances?
axisofentropy wrote: I think an IC model would secure an objective because he's "part of the unit" for all purposes, and it's the unit that has the Objective Secured rule.
The Vanguard Veteran unit in the Kill Team has a rule allowing them to charge and an IC model would be "part of the unit" for all purposes there too. I don't agree with El Philo's interpretation but I do appreciate his reasoning and his consistency in applying it to different rules.
Edit: For additional clarity, I fully respect his right to make the decisions as the judge and one of the T.O.s. I'm mostly asking for my own understanding ahead of time here so I'm aware of what I'm getting in to.
PanzerLeader wrote: General question: Can you attach ICs to the Vanguard Squad from Shadowstrike Kill Team and retain assault from deep strike provided the ICs are from the same detachment? I.E. can I attach the Captain from the demi-company and still use the Shadowstrike rules since both would exist as part of the Talon Strike Force?
This is a special rule that doesn't specifically say it confers to the IC that joined, so the IC doesn't get the benefit of it. We handle this the same way we handle the Skyhammer assault formation as well.
So by extension, a necron IC from a CAD attached to a unit from a Reclamation Legion within 12" of the overlord wouldn't benefit from Enhanced Reanimation Protocols? And ICs attached to wulfen would negate bounding leap?
Correct.
Ok. I'm following so far. So if a regular IC joins an Objective Secured unit, the unit would loss Objective Secured since it does not specifically confer?
-"Objective Secured: "All Troops units from this Detachment have the Objective Secured special rule. A unit with this special rule controls objectives even if an enemy scoring unit is within range of the objective marker, unless the enemy unit also has this special rule"
-"While an Independent Character is part of a unit, he counts as part of the unit for all rules purposes, though he still follows the rules for characters." "
-"When an Independent Character joins a unit, it might have different special rules from those of the unit. Unless specified in the rule itself (as in the Stubborn special rule), the unit’s special rules are not conferred upon the Independent Character, and the Independent Character’s special rules are not conferred upon the unit."
-"Enhanced Reanimation Protocols: You can re-roll Reanimation Protocols rolls of 1 for the Overlord from this Formation (or the model taken in place of the Overlord) and units from this Formation that are within 12" of him."
-"Vanguard Veterans Squads from this Formation can charge on the turn they arrive from Deep Strike..."
As such, the rules for Reclamation Legion or the Vanguard do not apply when an IC is attached due to the rules for characters; those rules do not work because a) [Necron]he is not part of the formation for re-animation, and b) [Raven Guard] while he counts as part of the unit, he is not a Vanguard Veteran from the Formation, and and as such does not have access to the special rule. Therefore, the requirements for the rule are not met and the abilities do not work because of that.
Objective Secured still applies, attaching the IC to a unit does not remove them from being Troops, therefore the unit meets the requirement to be Objective Secured. The IC, while being part of the unit does not preclude them from still being Troops. In essence, he is a unit unto himself (which is why you can get First Blood for killing an IC in a unit while the unit is alive).
@djdarknoise: That is an inconsistent reading. The full rule from the Kill Team says "Vanguard Veteran Squads." Attaching an IC does not stop the unit from being a "Vanguard Veteran Squad." Attaching a Necron IC from a CAD does not preclude the unit from being part of a Reclamation Legion.
Elphilo is 100% consistent in his application of the Special Rules section of the IC section with his call on objective secured. It is a special rule given to the squad that does not have permission to confer. While I might disagree about whether this should take precedence over "part of the unit for all rules purposes," I thoroughly appreciate his reasoning and his consistency.
Ah I didn't explain it correctly, my apologies. Just because the IC joins the unit doesn't mean the unit loses the special rule, it just means the special rule doesn't confer to the IC unless it specifically says it does. In some instances it means the unit can't use their special rule.
Skyhammer and Bounding Leap are an example of they still have it but cannot use it because not all models in the unit have the special rule allowing them to assault after a condition that normally doesn't allow them to assault.
The Reclamation Legion and Objective Secured rule will still be in effect, just not on the IC that joined the unit. So that means if your Necron IC joins the unit, the unit still gains the benefit of Enhanced Reanimation Protocols, the IC that joined does not. The Objective Secured unit still has Objective Secured, the IC that joined them does not. Meaning if the IC is the only model within 3" of an objective it can still be contested by a non-Objective Secured unit.
I hope this clears it up a bit.
I think so. One last hypothetical: if an IC starts on the board (and thus could normally launch an assault) and moves into coherency with a Vanguard Vet unit that arrives from deep strike, could the unit still assault since all models have permission to assault under normal circumstances?
Yes. All the models in this scenario do have permission to assault and may do so.
axisofentropy wrote:I think an IC model would secure an objective because he's "part of the unit" for all purposes, and it's the unit that has the Objective Secured rule.
We've interpreted that Command Benefits are special rules and since Objective Secured dosn't specifically say it confers to the IC we believe the IC won't get Objective Secured.
Hey guys I just wanted to let you all know that we've updated our packet (located here: https://goo.gl/CDOMls). We've created an experimental mission that we'd love to hear feedback for either in this thread or in an email sent to novaopen@gmail.com
I've also updated the mission clarification section and I need to apologize to what I said earlier with strike the rank and file and summoned troops in this thread. After some serious thought and discussion with people, we've decided to make it so that summoned troops DO NOT need to be destroyed in order to gain this secondary. We've also made it so ICs in a unit only count as one unit for Points and Regions.
First time ever war gaming event for me and the gf, are there any open tables for casual 40k or AOS? Wanting to know if I should bring my armies or not, not signing up for tournaments, we aren't competitive at all and can hardly remember the basic rules let alone pages of tournament specific instructions lol!
I did sign up for the LOTR narrative for 5 bucks to dip my toes in, but other than narrative games, is there any open tables we could use to play?
Reaper, you may want to seriously consider the kill teams missions for the narrative. They're a decent way to dip your toes in and have some fun with time inbetween to roam, see people's armies, watch matches, etc.
You might certainly find some people for open play, but if they're anything like me, 3+ serious games in a day leaves me too mentally drained for more non-serious 40klol. Usually for a few days after the tournament as well.
Reaper, I pretty much echo GreyDragoon. Almost everybody at the convention has a basically full schedule lined up and in their open periods desperately needs a nap or just some quiet downtime. Players also don't tend to congregate in one place outside of actual events. People are off in the vendor hall, at the bar, food trucks, checking out other gaming halls, etc. So just walking in with models in hopes of getting in a totally open pick-up game would be a bit tough.
A few of the game systems though have what are essentially scheduled, semi-organized, pick-up games. That way there's a time and a place for those people who just want a couple loose, more casual games to get together and battle. For 40k those are the Narrative Recon Squads. There's two such events on both Friday and Saturday, and you can sign up for them individually, picking and choosing when you're available. They're small, quick-playing skirmish games, so they're pretty beginner friendly. Recon Squad/Kill Team is based around 200 point armies with restrictions on armour/wounds/etc.. Each model operates on its own so it's a very different way to play 40k, but uses all the usual core rules and mechanics so there's no real learning curve. The missions will be tied into the larger NOVA40k Narrative track, but these will be very casual games. You can check out the details in the event primer. I'm the organizer for those events, so I'd be happy to answer any questions about the rules, army construction, etc..
Personally I think you could have a pretty good day, well worth the registration, by signing up for one or two of those Recon Squad matches, maybe a seminar, and otherwise wandering around the halls and vendor area.
The Age of Sigmar facebook page has made the announcement that we'll be getting tournament rules this summer (emphasis mine):
Finally, Matched Play is something we know a lot of you have been keen to see. We’ve put these rules together in association with some of the world’s biggest tournament organisers, to create a new standard for balanced competitive play. And yes, it includes points values. Okay Internet, go nuts.
All signs are pointing to this being the SCGT setup. I know the current plan is to use Clash comp at NOVA, is that likely to change in light of this news?
Can't say for sure yet but I imagine so. As the age of sigmar event is nearly sold out, I could see us confirming with paid up attendees first, but TBD until I can chat with the event leads.
Fishboy wrote: Mike are you guys play testing/considering the new psychic marine powers and if so can you let us know where you stand on those?
From the ever evolving FAQ;
● Geokinesis Discipline
○ Shifting World Scape -
■ Fortifications purchased by players may not be the target of this psychic power
■ Objectives do not move with terrain.
○ Earth Blood -
■ If a psyker is killed by Perils of the Warp while attempting to restore wounds to itself with the Earth Blood psychic power, the psyker does not regain the wounds and remains dead. Note that the psyker's unit does continue to benefit from the It Will Not Die special rule for the duration of the power.
Fishboy wrote: Mike are you guys play testing/considering the new psychic marine powers and if so can you let us know where you stand on those?
What djdarknoise said. We've addressed a couple things with the powers. We have them on our radar and are seeing how they work in a live setting. So far they are a go, but if that changes I'll post them up here and on 40kfaq.com
Thanks for the quick response guys. I missed those in the latest FAQ somehow when I checked this weekend. Good to see nobody can get their grubby mits on my gunrig heh. Next it comes down to how many models get broken from moving terrain hehe.
As a bit of an outside observer compared to years past, I'm waiting for folks who field units that move 48" a turn with 2+ rerolls and hit only on 6s to start complaining about moving terrain.
As usual I dont know this far out if Ill be able to take leave for the tournament, but I had a great time last year and would like to go again. I dont know if this information is readily available, but how are the number of 40kGT slots looking?
Heh...that's funny Mike. I say anyone that complains from that camp has to buy everyone a drink from the charity bar....keeps complaints down and serves a good foundation (c:
Dr_Keenbean wrote:The Age of Sigmar facebook page has made the announcement that we'll be getting tournament rules this summer (emphasis mine):
Finally, Matched Play is something we know a lot of you have been keen to see. We’ve put these rules together in association with some of the world’s biggest tournament organisers, to create a new standard for balanced competitive play. And yes, it includes points values. Okay Internet, go nuts.
All signs are pointing to this being the SCGT setup. I know the current plan is to use Clash comp at NOVA, is that likely to change in light of this news?
MVBrandt wrote:Can't say for sure yet but I imagine so. As the age of sigmar event is nearly sold out, I could see us confirming with paid up attendees first, but TBD until I can chat with the event leads.
The upcoming Newsletter will have a whole piece on this! But, succinctly, it all depends on how quickly we can get our hands on the General's Handbook. "Summer" is a big potential release window, so when it is formally released (NOT when we get additional rumors) will determine whether or not we switch systems - especially as a number of folks who have already registered have built rather fun and interestingly themed armies around Clash's pool system. All I can say for now is that until we have more concrete details please just keep an eye on the Newsletters in the coming weeks!
FYI for all; Convention Access Pass discounts end on June 15, changing their rate from $40 to $50. Snag one now if you haven't yet and are planning on attending!
Interesting note. Someone asked me how I would distill down the NOVA experience.
You will have more fun here than almost any hobby experience you can go to, other than some of the other well-run similar type events. It's a weekend of gaming in whatever style you like while enjoying snacks and beverages in support of charity, learning way more about the hobby, meeting a thousand new people, and having a fantastic time in our nation's capital.
There are tons of tournaments, and details about all of them, but this is a professionally-run, yet family-run con with an enormously positive social buzz throughout much of the weekend.
30K Asymmetrical Campaign was expanded in size to 36, but only has 2 spots left
The Age of Sigmar Tournament has only 1 spot left
30K Escalation only has 6 spots left (Was also expanded)
The following events are all at 80% sold out or greater:
X-Wing Championship
TNA: The Art of Painting Hot Chicks
30K Big Blam
40K Trios (only 4 team spots left)
Star Wars: Armada Championship
Malifaux North American National Championship by Wyrd
X-Wing Hunger Games
Malifaux Treacherous Ties
Many other events are approaching sold out
Many events already are sold out
We're excited to say we've added the following events as well to the schedule:
Glowpocalypse
Guild Ball
Firestorm Armada
Check it all out at novaopen.com (or directly to novaopenstore.com)
greyknight12 wrote: Didn't see it on the FAQ (maybe I just missed it), but is NOVA using the new GWFAQs or Death from the Skies?
Believe the FAQ was mentioned in the newsletter, but it will not be used if it's not finalized 30 days prior (Aug 2). DftS is, I'm pretty sure, in, seeing as it's official GW rules published
greyknight12 wrote: Didn't see it on the FAQ (maybe I just missed it), but is NOVA using the new GWFAQs or Death from the Skies?
Believe the FAQ was mentioned in the newsletter, but it will not be used if it's not finalized 30 days prior (Aug 2). DftS is, I'm pretty sure, in, seeing as it's official GW rules published
What Evan said.
Here's what I said in the recent newsletter:
So we've got a little bit of an update for our primer. I'd like to thank everyone that has tested and given us feedback on our experimental mission. Through this testing, we were able to determine that the mission does not stand up to the NOVA Open standards. As a result, we have removed it. Once again a big THANK YOU for those that have been testing.
We have also been getting a lot of questions asking if we're going to be using the GWFAQ/Errata that is available on GW's Warhammer 40k Facebook Page. I just wanted to restate that if they're officially available on their website AND it's released 30 days before the event (So before or on August 2nd) then NOVA will be using them. Until then we'll continue to use our FAQ which can be found here.
Thought I might be stepping away from tournament play...but...I could not bring myself to miss the NOVA...Cuz it's ballin....anyways
40K open tournament question:
The fortification rules seem pretty inclusive...parlaying that with forge world inclusion as opposed to exclusion...it would seem that the necron tomb citadel is a legal choice...but...I have my doubts...so I thought I would throw it out there...
Thanks for a reply
But...especially thanks to everyone that pours their time into making the NOVA by far the premiere event east of the grand Mississippi...it does not go Unappreciated even though most/all hours are volunteer and probably oftentimes seem thankless...here's a big thanks from Kentucky!!
greyknight12 wrote: Didn't see it on the FAQ (maybe I just missed it), but is NOVA using the new GWFAQs or Death from the Skies?
Believe the FAQ was mentioned in the newsletter, but it will not be used if it's not finalized 30 days prior (Aug 2). DftS is, I'm pretty sure, in, seeing as it's official GW rules published
Not trying to be obtuse, just that Dreadnought attacks and Blood Angel Scouts WS/BS are official on GW's FB page (technically I suppose those are errata however). And DFTS hasn't been addressed either.
greyknight12 wrote: Didn't see it on the FAQ (maybe I just missed it), but is NOVA using the new GWFAQs or Death from the Skies?
Believe the FAQ was mentioned in the newsletter, but it will not be used if it's not finalized 30 days prior (Aug 2). DftS is, I'm pretty sure, in, seeing as it's official GW rules published
Not trying to be obtuse, just that Dreadnought attacks and Blood Angel Scouts WS/BS are official on GW's FB page (technically I suppose those are errata however). And DFTS hasn't been addressed either.
If it's not on their website as a PDF I don't think it's being considered official and final. That's my understanding anyway.
Widowsbane wrote: Thought I might be stepping away from tournament play...but...I could not bring myself to miss the NOVA...Cuz it's ballin....anyways
40K open tournament question:
The fortification rules seem pretty inclusive...parlaying that with forge world inclusion as opposed to exclusion...it would seem that the necron tomb citadel is a legal choice...but...I have my doubts...so I thought I would throw it out there...
Thanks for a reply
But...especially thanks to everyone that pours their time into making the NOVA by far the premiere event east of the grand Mississippi...it does not go Unappreciated even though most/all hours are volunteer and probably oftentimes seem thankless...here's a big thanks from Kentucky!!
So after just a quick search the "Necron Tomb Citadel" seems to be the realm of battle fortification, a 2'x2' square. If that is the case, then it won't be a legal choice as its just too big to with NOVA Terrain!
I'll be sure to update the Fortifications with that. Thank you for pointing it out!
greyknight12 wrote: Didn't see it on the FAQ (maybe I just missed it), but is NOVA using the new GWFAQs or Death from the Skies?
Believe the FAQ was mentioned in the newsletter, but it will not be used if it's not finalized 30 days prior (Aug 2). DftS is, I'm pretty sure, in, seeing as it's official GW rules published
Not trying to be obtuse, just that Dreadnought attacks and Blood Angel Scouts WS/BS are official on GW's FB page (technically I suppose those are errata however). And DFTS hasn't been addressed either.
DFTS will be used since its an official update/replacement of the base flyer rules. And now we don't have to worry about what to do with FW flyers since FW just recently updated their flyers, you can find that here.
As to the Errata, once that's official on their website it will be used as long as its before the 30 day mark. Just like their FAQ.
Blackmoor wrote: Really? DFTS? From what I hear it went over like a turd in the punch bowl at the ATC.
Honestly it wasn't that big of a deal. I played against Nick Rose's list which isn't legal now because FW came out with an update. It was totally legal there because ATC had to come up with rules so FW flyers can work.
It just felt like playing against FMC spam, which is currently a thing.
Blackmoor wrote: Really? DFTS? From what I hear it went over like a turd in the punch bowl at the ATC.
Honestly it wasn't that big of a deal. I played against Nick Rose's list which isn't legal now because FW came out with an update. It was totally legal there because ATC had to come up with rules so FW flyers can work.
It just felt like playing against FMC spam, which is currently a thing.
Blackmoor wrote: Really? DFTS? From what I hear it went over like a turd in the punch bowl at the ATC.
Honestly it wasn't that big of a deal. I played against Nick Rose's list which isn't legal now because FW came out with an update. It was totally legal there because ATC had to come up with rules so FW flyers can work.
It just felt like playing against FMC spam, which is currently a thing.
So you beat Nick Rose?
It was 11-9 his win. But once again, his list (and the Chicago Kamikaze's lists) is illegal as of Friday
There is definitely a minimal amount of smack talk. Yet there's over a thousand souls signed up. The nova staff is feverishly at work on final details. Looking forward to seeing you, brother!
So while pictures are still forthcoming, news today that Games Workshop over in the UK is crafting custom trophies for our GW events this year! These will combo with the usual NOVA plaques.
Moreover, GW donated an INCREDIBLE STUDIO MINI to the Charitable Foundation for raffle!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, check out our finalized Vendor List for the con!
Fallout Hobbies
Soda Pop Miniatures
Mod Cube
Stiff Neck Studios
Muse on Minis
Secret Weapon Miniatures
Greenman Designs
Grex Airbrush
Broken Egg Games
KR Multicase
Powered Play
Trenchworx
Atlantis Comics & Games
Cool Mini or Not
Tectonic Craft Studio
Mini Duels
Fantasy Flight Games
Toledo Game Room
Finished our prize packaging day today, so much still to do before NOVA!
Events are selling out at rapid fire pace as we're getting close. With nearly 1,100 people pre-registered as of today, this is the largest NOVA Open by several hundred pre-registrations yet ... again.
We've added an unprecedented # of "comes with your badge" activities to the con, from live music to board game tournaments and events. We've got our largest and most diverse vendor list yet, including a late add of a gaming T-Shirt company!
Sign on up! Come on out! I can't believe it's only 9 days before we're moving into NOVA Open 2016!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, the 40K Invitational Bracket is open and accepting predictions!
Was looking forward to what would have been my 7th Nova Open attendance...unfortunately I wont be there this year. I am truly going to miss being there and seeing Mike and tons of the great people who help out at Nova and play 40K.
I am already looking forward to next years Nova .. which I plan on attending.
Hopefully I will see some of you guys in October at BFS or at some other future events.
zedsdead wrote: Was looking forward to what would have been my 7th Nova Open attendance...unfortunately I wont be there this year. I am truly going to miss being there and seeing Mike and tons of the great people who help out at Nova and play 40K.
I am already looking forward to next years Nova .. which I plan on attending.
Hopefully I will see some of you guys in October at BFS or at some other future events.
-ed
Aaaannnnddddd....my hotel room costs just doubled hehe. At least I don't have to hear you snore this year hehe. Gonna miss ya bud!
Mike who do we talk to if we have questions about the painting competition?
ToF is working great for tracking but im a bit confused by the pairings. It seems like undefeated is vs undefeated but not most battle points vs 2nd most battle points. Can someone clarify? Thanks!
I know there is a bracket system later. Maybe earlier as well?
We don't consider battle points to be a meaningful metric always, since it's impossible to know the skill delta between opponents in a random first round event. We use it as a last resort for bracket tiebreakers and the like.
Plus, win-path-pairing helps drive far superior sportsmanship.
Heard a pretty disturbing story from the event on the mistreatment of a Disabled Vet and his Service Dog. And since I have met the dog several times I know this animal to be absolutely well behaved. Have to say that this story was very disappointing to hear.
Cult of My Boy Blue wrote: Heard a pretty disturbing story from the event on the mistreatment of a Disabled Vet and his Service Dog. And since I have met the dog several times I know this animal to be absolutely well behaved. Have to say that this story was very disappointing to hear.
This story has gotten pretty out of hand due to being put on social media - I know the guy in question, and he is a nice guy, but I also was maybe 30-40 ft away and saw when the event in question happened with the dog - and it did happen. I don't know why the choice was made to put this all over social media, but I'll say for something "real" like this (beyond all of our toy soldier nonsense :-p ) social media is rarely the best place to handle these things for either side.
Guess there are two sides to the story. Not being there gives me no right or wrong story. Would hope that if you were there and saw it that would be enough to find out if the events are true.
Cult of My Boy Blue wrote: Heard a pretty disturbing story from the event on the mistreatment of a Disabled Vet and his Service Dog. And since I have met the dog several times I know this animal to be absolutely well behaved. Have to say that this story was very disappointing to hear.
This story has gotten pretty out of hand due to being put on social media - I know the guy in question, and he is a nice guy, but I also was maybe 30-40 ft away and saw when the event in question happened with the dog - and it did happen. I don't know why the choice was made to put this all over social media, but I'll say for something "real" like this (beyond all of our toy soldier nonsense :-p ) social media is rarely the best place to handle these things for either side.
Where can I find it on social media so I can decide for myself whether or not it belongs on social media?
Unfortunately, the individual related a story on social media that is unsupported by extensive witness report, including the report of one of his personal friends at the event.
As he later removed most of his comments on facebook and replaced them with something more moderated, i see no reason to draw attention or exaggerate the issue by calling for said testimony. Suffice to say the staff member who approached him is a service dog trainer, and asked him to follow appropriate protocol for a dog out of service (barking and needing to be forcibly held to the ground by its owner due to over excitement). The event was not major. Hotel security included a service dog expert, who - independent of nova - later met said individual at the door when he returned from walking his dog to attempt to get him calmed and back in service. My understanding is the individual presumed nova called security on him, became frustrated, and left.
Personally, my experience includes dolphin training and therapy dog certification, among other credentials. The dog in question was often under visible stress at the convention, and out of service. Service dogs are not to bark in excitement, or need to be physically restrained or suppressed by their handlers. It also has some challenges around other dogs, as the owner and others at ATC indicated to me prior to nova.
Nova includes staff with both service and therapy dogs, including the owner's mother's dog, which is both a family pet, certified therapy dog, and certified fema crisis response dog. The owner in question wished to let us know of the problem at ATC since he knew service and therapy dogs attended nova. I thanked him and said no problem, with the exception that the aforementioned fema/therapy dog's safety was obviously important to us.
I'll refer the broad peanut gallery to ADA and other references with regard to correct protocol when dealing with service dogs, how they must behave, etc. The interaction between nova staff and this individual occurred in front of his personal friend, a vendor who knew the dog well. Said vendor affirmed to me afterward that the nova staffer handled it very well, and that the owner in question seemed to handle it well. It was a surprise to me to later read his erroneous story on facebook, though i assumed it was done when he deleted many initial posts and left off with a "let it lie" final note.
Nova did not mishandle or mistreat a veteran and his service dog. There is sufficient testimony on record to leave me comfortable in the fact. It was a phenomenal convention!
Unfortunately, the individual related a story on social media that is unsupported by extensive witness report, including the report of one of his personal friends at the event.
+1. I saw the social media report and I also saw one of the incidents in question. Mike is being generous when he merely says the report is 'unsupported.'
Having not been to NOVA, I can only speak to my experiences at other events, and throughout my time in the mini-wargaming hobby, as a man with severe physical disabilities.
It has been my experience that the community and event organizers at large have been the MOST accommodating I have encountered in any area of my life. I have never had issues with physical accommodations at even the most local level, and have generally had no problems even when having my own opponents physically help me roll dice, or move models.
If anything, the hobby has been more therapeutic, social, and welcoming than anything else in my life, and I am grateful for how cool people really seem to be.
I'm still in the afterglow of NOVA and holy crap was that a fun event! I had an absolute blast taking my retro Ultramarines to the narrative, and between a bunch of really fun games, a lot of good beer, and a lot of new friends, I'll definitely be coming back next year!
I was not aware of the event concerning the service dog but I have seen this individual at other events and his treatment of his service dog was quite concerning to me.
Capital Palet was incredible. The quality of this event has increased exponentially throughout the years and the entries were the best I have ever seen. I would love to see separate catagories for professional and gamer as there is no way most gamers can compete at that level.
The paint classes were awesome as well. Thanks to all those that took time out to train. Jessica's class on how to paint females was probably one of the most fun and funniest paint classes I have ever taken. Rafi always has so much great info.
Charity events were awesome as well. The amount and quality of donations was very cool and I was very proud to be a part of it. I think over $18k was raised for Doctors across Borders. Great job to everyone involved.
As for the 40K event I was not as impressed as I have been in years past. Second round pairings were messed up with winners playing losers, ancillary scoring (paint, etc) was questionable, disorganized, and confusing, and there were some lists that several competitors were concerned with legality (most thought fortification formations were illegal per ITC army construction rules and the judge could not confirm or deny if this was true. It is possible NOVA made tweaks that I can not find to allow this). Missions were still the best in the competitive world in my opinion but NOVA's unwillingness to tweak rules to prevent some of the over powered combos like the ITC made this a very non-fun event to play in. I literally got tired of playing against 2+ reroll able saves. I really feel sorry for the people that had to deal with the Knights being moved forward via terrain and space marine powers then charging first turn. Not using GWFAQ meant I got to deal with armies strung all over the table with reroll 2+ saves and still benefiting from the void shield generator.
I have not missed many NOVA's but my experience at this years event leaves me with a bad taste and a questionable return. Several people I talked with seemed to feel the same way but I guess we shall see what they put in their comment card. Overall, at least at the 40K open event, it felt almost as if nobody was organizing and nobody cared. Maybe it is because I was not on a top table and the people in the kiddy pool don't matter to the staff since we are not playing for top prizes. I have seen NOVA get better every year but this year that was not the case. Right now I have no intention of returning in 2017. Maybe that will change as time progresses....who knows. I love most of the staff so maybe my desire to see friends will convince me to come again but a ten hour drive and $1000's spent may balance that out heh.
Joe - put your thoughts in the survey, too! That's good feedback, and we drive the con each year based heavily upon survey (Which should go out today or tomorrow latest).
I was frustrated by some of the rulings of the judges. One in particular went explicitly against NOVA's FAQ and it quite possibly cost me the game. I understand that maybe it wasn't the intention of the rule but you can't just say "that shouldn't say that" and tell us to play it differently. You gotta stick to whats written once you're at the event and halfway through the third round.
I loved the event and the missions are great but there was a lot of confusion with rulings and I hope that next year the ITC and nova FAQ can align much closer. I can keep a few things in mind but especially with the GWfaqs coming out and muddying the waters, this year was very confusing.
Cult of My Boy Blue wrote: Heard a pretty disturbing story from the event on the mistreatment of a Disabled Vet and his Service Dog. And since I have met the dog several times I know this animal to be absolutely well behaved. Have to say that this story was very disappointing to hear.
From someone who was there and absolutely LOVES dogs. The dog was growling at people, bit someone, had to be muzzled (by the owner of his own accord). There was someone else there with two service dogs (two pitties) who were absolutely lovely and probably the most well behaved dogs I have ever been around (also maybe the lickiest dogs I have ever been around).
The biggest improvement I noticed this year (this being my 5th year) was having judges/officials going around and letting people know time was ticking and to wrap things up. Not in a mean way at all but definitely in a stern no-nonsense kind of way that I greatly appreciated. In past years I've played people who swore we could fit another turn in the next 10 or 15 minutes or "don't worry they let you continue playing past the time limit..." usually because they either knew they were going to lose without that extra turn or wanted to max out their points. So kudos to you guys going around and laying down the law - I appreciated it!
As always, had a blast. As Fishboy alluded to, the open was a bit bananas, but I personally attribute it to the state of the game and not NOVA itself. The GWFAQs put NOVA in a tough spot because of their draft and somewhat disorganized, inaccessible nature; if NOVA accepted some of the rulings there would be questions and confusion on any left out.
My one critique this year was the paint judging. It was a day later than it has been in the past, meaning final judging couldn't be done until Sunday during and between final rounds, rather than Saturday night. This made it tough because I know some people leave Saturday night or don't return to the hall on Sunday. It was also a bit disappointing as I take photos of the top armies every year, but I never saw the winner and his set up. I'm guessing his game went more or less to time or he was judged at table. Finally, there were a few armies that I felt out of place in the final judging, which made the preliminary judging feel inconsistent.
And yes, Mike, I included my feedback in the survey. Again, overall extremely positive and if anything the most fun one yet.
Fishboy wrote: As for the 40K event I was not as impressed as I have been in years past. Second round pairings were messed up with winners playing losers, ancillary scoring (paint, etc) was questionable, disorganized, and confusing, and there were some lists that several competitors were concerned with legality (most thought fortification formations were illegal per ITC army construction rules and the judge could not confirm or deny if this was true. It is possible NOVA made tweaks that I can not find to allow this). Missions were still the best in the competitive world in my opinion but NOVA's unwillingness to tweak rules to prevent some of the over powered combos like the ITC made this a very non-fun event to play in. I literally got tired of playing against 2+ reroll able saves. I really feel sorry for the people that had to deal with the Knights being moved forward via terrain and space marine powers then charging first turn. Not using GWFAQ meant I got to deal with armies strung all over the table with reroll 2+ saves and still benefiting from the void shield generator.
I have not missed many NOVA's but my experience at this years event leaves me with a bad taste and a questionable return. Several people I talked with seemed to feel the same way but I guess we shall see what they put in their comment card. Overall, at least at the 40K open event, it felt almost as if nobody was organizing and nobody cared. Maybe it is because I was not on a top table and the people in the kiddy pool don't matter to the staff since we are not playing for top prizes. I have seen NOVA get better every year but this year that was not the case. Right now I have no intention of returning in 2017. Maybe that will change as time progresses....who knows. I love most of the staff so maybe my desire to see friends will convince me to come again but a ten hour drive and $1000's spent may balance that out heh.
Took the words right out of my mouth. This was only my second NOVA, but otherwise my and my 3 friends' experience was very similar to Fishboy's. Basically it came down to 1) the game has reached a point (mainly in the psychic phase) where balance through missions alone is no longer possible and 2) Pairings were messed up. The quote I got was "I hate to see my GT winners in the 4th bracket". Problem is that if pairings aren't at least equitable for the first 4 rounds people aren't coming back for 7+8 and 2/3 of their tournament has been miserable. I also watched some wildly unbalanced games in the lower brackets that were likely a direct result of poor bracketing. I think a good hard look at battle points, win-loss records and margin of victory would be good going forward. It was better last year, and I'm not sure what changed.
On a positive, having GW there was great and I thoroughly enjoyed the 30K Knight Spearhead game, it was well-run and I got a cool trophy.
greyknight12 wrote: Pairings were messed up. The quote I got was "I hate to see my GT winners in the 4th bracket". Problem is that if pairings aren't at least equitable for the first 4 rounds people aren't coming back for 7+8 and 2/3 of their tournament has been miserable. I also watched some wildly unbalanced games in the lower brackets that were likely a direct result of poor bracketing. I think a good hard look at battle points, win-loss records and margin of victory would be good going forward. It was better last year, and I'm not sure what changed.
I'm not sure I understand the quote you reference here, or what you mean. I can just about guarantee you the pairing software has not changed at all since last year. The brackets looked about what I would have expected:
Bracket 1: 4-0 and high 3-1
Bracket 2-3: 3-1
Bracket 4-6: 2-2
Bracket 7-8: 1-3
Bracket 9: low 1-3 and 0-4
As for unbalanced games in lower brackets, honestly I took that to be the state of the game more than anything. Very few people were bringing the "stuff I had painted on my shelf" lists anymore, and the game has gotten extremely matchup unbalanced. Two of my friends in round 3 played very good imperial death star lists that were 0-2 at the time. Both won, making those very capable lists go 0-3, meaning they wound up in Bracket 7 or below.
I always enjoy coming out to the Nova Open After getting nothing but ITC events out on the west coast, and the Nova missions are a nice change
I finished all of my games on time which a lot of armies struggle to finish with in the ITC I do not know if it is because of the time it takes to roll all of those maelstrom missions, or if it is because of the deathstar nature of the Nova
The two downsides I felt were the choice to use Death from the Skies I am glad that none of my opponents wanted to use the Dogfighting Phase, but I depend on my crimson hunters for my anti-tank, and being -1 BS sucked
The other head scratcher was choosing to give warp spyders infinite jumps. I understand that GWsFAQ is still in its trail state, but the change to warp spyders was an official errata that is a change to the codex.
Blackmoor wrote: The other head scratcher was choosing to give warp spyders infinite jumps. I understand that GWsFAQ is still in its trail state, but the change to warp spyders was an official errata that is a change to the codex.
Not going to speak for Phil or NOVA, but the draft and unofficial nature of the GWFAQs put NOVA in a tough spot. And while it may say "official errata" or whatever on their facebook page, it's still not included on their website in the published PDF FAQs. The reason NOVA was in a tough spot, in my opinion, was that if they took the Warp Spider change, or Thunderwolves S10, then it becomes difficult to differentiate between why some Draft FAQs or whatever were or were not accepted.
greyknight12 wrote: Pairings were messed up. The quote I got was "I hate to see my GT winners in the 4th bracket". Problem is that if pairings aren't at least equitable for the first 4 rounds people aren't coming back for 7+8 and 2/3 of their tournament has been miserable. I also watched some wildly unbalanced games in the lower brackets that were likely a direct result of poor bracketing. I think a good hard look at battle points, win-loss records and margin of victory would be good going forward. It was better last year, and I'm not sure what changed.
I'm not sure I understand the quote you reference here, or what you mean. I can just about guarantee you the pairing software has not changed at all since last year. The brackets looked about what I would have expected:
Bracket 1: 4-0 and high 3-1
Bracket 2-3: 3-1
Bracket 4-6: 2-2
Bracket 7-8: 1-3
Bracket 9: low 1-3 and 0-4
As for unbalanced games in lower brackets, honestly I took that to be the state of the game more than anything. Very few people were bringing the "stuff I had painted on my shelf" lists anymore, and the game has gotten extremely matchup unbalanced. Two of my friends in round 3 played very good imperial death star lists that were 0-2 at the time. Both won, making those very capable lists go 0-3, meaning they wound up in Bracket 7 or below.
My reference was (I know this as fact) match ups were messed up as soon as round two where top winning players were playing players on the bottom tables. When reported they were told not to worry about it since a game had already started so the baby seal clubbing began early. Also some players were told to "cool their jets" since it was only round two. I think this was said in jest but still came off quite arrogant since it was the staff that made the mistake and seemed condescending to the players. That really added to the feeling that they just didn't care.
Had a great time at NOVA, huge thanks to Mike Brandt and everyone that spent the year prior prepping and several long days to bring together an amazing event. It was my second time in four years (out of country 2014/2015) and I plan to be back for 2017.
I had six great games in the 40 Open GT, and I plan to bring a 30k army next year to participate, its almost overwhelming in the best ways.
greyknight12 wrote: Pairings were messed up. The quote I got was "I hate to see my GT winners in the 4th bracket". Problem is that if pairings aren't at least equitable for the first 4 rounds people aren't coming back for 7+8 and 2/3 of their tournament has been miserable. I also watched some wildly unbalanced games in the lower brackets that were likely a direct result of poor bracketing. I think a good hard look at battle points, win-loss records and margin of victory would be good going forward. It was better last year, and I'm not sure what changed.
I'm not sure I understand the quote you reference here, or what you mean. I can just about guarantee you the pairing software has not changed at all since last year. The brackets looked about what I would have expected:
Bracket 1: 4-0 and high 3-1
Bracket 2-3: 3-1
Bracket 4-6: 2-2
Bracket 7-8: 1-3
Bracket 9: low 1-3 and 0-4
As for unbalanced games in lower brackets, honestly I took that to be the state of the game more than anything. Very few people were bringing the "stuff I had painted on my shelf" lists anymore, and the game has gotten extremely matchup unbalanced. Two of my friends in round 3 played very good imperial death star lists that were 0-2 at the time. Both won, making those very capable lists go 0-3, meaning they wound up in Bracket 7 or below.
My reference was (I know this as fact) match ups were messed up as soon as round two where top winning players were playing players on the bottom tables. When reported they were told not to worry about it since a game had already started so the baby seal clubbing began early. Also some players were told to "cool their jets" since it was only round two. I think this was said in jest but still came off quite arrogant since it was the staff that made the mistake and seemed condescending to the players. That really added to the feeling that they just didn't care.
Because I'm a nerd, I took a look. There were 3 mis-pairings in round 2, with a winner playing someone who had lost. One looks to just be that there was an odd number of tables, so one winner had to play a loser from round 1 (Werner Born vs. Gerraint Jennens). The other two it looks like one table from Round 1 (Carlos Kaiser vs Brad Voorhees) had the score flipped, and later fixed, which resulted in Carlos being paired down while Brad was paired up.
Carlos was a good guy. I played him second round. And we had fun. He had max score, a win, and should have been on the top table. I had zero points and a loss. It was not a pair down but a scoring entry mistake by the judges. I had heard there were two other similar issues in round two.
Edit to add...the player that Carlos tabled in turn three (I think Carlos said it was a quick game but many games have followed since then hehe) of round one with a loss and minimal score was playing on the top table where Carlos should have been.
Just saw a write up of the Top 16 lists and I had two questions. One: is Renegade and Heretics that good? Saw them a bunch. Two: can we ban Come the Apocalypse allies? Seeing things like Daemons and Eldar really makes me cringe.
jreilly89 wrote: Just saw a write up of the Top 16 lists and I had two questions. One: is Renegade and Heretics that good? Saw them a bunch. Two: can we ban Come the Apocalypse allies? Seeing things like Daemons and Eldar really makes me cringe.
It makes me cringe too, but it's a GT where narrative is supposed to be thrown out the window.
2 years in a row is more than enough of that!
