Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Well it's all what you make of it I guess. If people like to play with no scoring units then that's cool I just know I wouldn't like it as long as I wasn't playing total cheese.

GrandWarmasterPinto wrote:I'm not saying it's a certainty someone is going to bring one. I just don't think if someone does they should be screwed because of either a really lazy attempt to force people not to play it anymore or just a simple oversight by developers who don't want to say it's illegal now. It's a game where the goal is to have fun, not penalize someone for their choice of army.

The overall goal of the game is to have fun, but the goals of a tournament go beyond that. The goals should also include creating a fair and balanced playing field. Changing the rules specifically to help out a single list fulfils neither of those, and for some it stomps all over the first one as well. My shooty Space Marines don't like the increased cover saves in 5th--should the tournament organizer at my local store use 4th edition cover rules to accomodate me? The fact that they are even letting Armored Company compete is already a major deviation from their normal restrictions. No one is forced to bring them.

This is 5th edition. Anyone playing AC is going to have this same problem at all tournaments, and in any game with the least bit of competition involved. Making the tanks able to hold objectives isn't in the rules.

Completely negating cover saves seems like a change on a completely different scale. Allowing troop choices in AC doesn't seem bad at all with the way defensive weapons work and close combat against tanks. I myself don't really compete in tournaments because I don't like how competitive people get and forget the real point of the game. So I guess my opinion is really biased as far as that goes.

If I played against an Armored Company I would not have any fun.

A similar question was posted elsewhere, this was the answer from DT:

The Trade team haven't tried to change the rules, vehicle units are still not scoring (hooray!).

Sorry for the confusion rumors might have caused.
Cheers
Dave

thanks everyone, this is exactly what needed to happen. I know the right answer all along, but getting official answers from at least 3 different sources, in writing lets me run the tournament the right way, despite what my trade sales guy says.

But seriously...you are the tournament organizer, and you already knew the right answer and that your trade rep was wrong. What power does the trade rep have? None. Was he threatening to cancel your trade account if you didn't run the tournament his way? I highly doubt it.

whitedragon wrote: What power does the trade rep have? None.

ah, but they do have power. It's all in the wrist. They can mis-key your order something fierce. Gettng sealer instead of black primer, or 33 Adrian Smith artbooks when you asked for 1 can be harsh!

Seriously, rep made a bad call, it's fixed, and never reprecussions for running the tournament correctly. The only reprecussion for running a bad tournament might be not getting asked to run the next one.

I'm really confused by all this debate. I thought the armored company was illegal in tourneys now period. This past games day I went to, the speaker (the games day event manager) there said that GW was trying to get away from anything non codex. He said that they are working towards streamlining everything so that in tourneys only the stuff in the official codecies works. This meant to make things easier to find and reference, tourneys easier to run. He said the days of legal lists from magazines, or having to refer to another codex for something not in yours will eventually fade out.

Last 40k grand tourney the rules specifically said "Unless otherwise noted, only the main lists from the Warhammer 40,000
Codices may be used." And then a a set of coxecies are listed, Eldar, Space Marines, Guard ext. the normal stuff...

Even on their web site Jervis says

A number of people have asked why certain army lists are not permitted in the tournament. The answer to this is simple; we're moving towards a system for our tournaments where the only lists that are permitted are those that are currently in print. Having a situation where a player can bring along an old out of print list that an opponent may never have seen before is clearly unfair, and not really something we want to continue. We felt it better to start acting now, as the situation will only get worse the longer the list remains unavailable. This will be an ongoing process, as we still need to resolve some issues to do with army list variants that were printed in White Dwarf or which can be downloaded from our websites. However, in the long run our official tournaments will only permit armies based on army list that are currently available as printed books.

I know, I know, what about players whose armyies are no longer 'legal?' Well, we were worried about this too, and to make sure that they could still enter the tournament we have included the 'Counts As' rule in this year's rules pack. The Counts As rule allows players to use old Citadel miniatures no longer covered by the current army lists at our tournaments. The Count As rule has been included in each of the new tournament packs, now available to download, so that you can see how it works. The important thing, though, is that it means that it's very easy, with just a little tiny bit of imagination, to use an army designed for one of the out-of-print lists.

Edit: I hadn't read the rules for the ardboys tourney before posting I guess the rules pack for the ardboys tourney is much looser in list selection, but I don't see why it should be any different from the standard. That's only going to make things unbalanced and confusing.

That's only going to make things unbalanced and confusing.

Ard boyz is not about balance. It is GWs attempt at an adepticon style Gladiator. I take it you didn't play in or here about last years ard boyz. The scenarios were about as unbalanced as possible, CA lists or no. Granted it sounds like they will be straight from the rulebook yawners this time.

Yeah, I didn't know

Look, the idea was not to allow scoring rules to change for any army other than AC. AC are (were?) getting a special allowance, much like the bajillion special rules that the rest of us get. They have been so completely screwed by the edition change, that throwing them a bone in one competition is both sportsmanlike and intended to make the play environment more interesting.

For those of you saying that you would not have any fun playing AC, I fear that you will have the same problem ("losing isn't fun") with the likely LandRaiderSpam and 3-Monolith lists that will be in the top tier of most locals, and probably well represented in the semi-finals. If you're not packing good maneuverable AT and a few melta units, you're probably already not going to win 'Ard Boyz. Instead, enjoy the challenge and go for that rear armor. My guess is that "no fun" here means "I lack high-volume anti-tank capacity."

I played an AC player in the semis last year, and had a blast. His tanks were terrifying...until they got flanked. Then bye-bye AC, fellow got tabled. He was still a good sport, though- AC players generally are. They usually do it for the love of the models and the theme, and have great-looking armies. If those things (gentelmanly behavior, great-looking army, challenging play) aren't enough to convince you to give someone a chance to compete with a special allowance, I'd say you are exactly the sort of twit that everyone enjoys seeing wiped off the table.

Finally, for the AC players out there- since this tourney doesn't require painting scores or adherence to the same list between rounds, just find out the rules for your local, and then hang in there to see what the ruling for the semis etc. are. You play AC, so you probably have an alternate army anyways. Just have both on deck, even the day of.

For the organizers of locals, please consider that AC lists have many handicaps, and giving them a special allowance does not require adjustment of the rules for all other armies. Even with scoring tanks, AC are going to suffer badly at the hands... er, powerklaws/fists/rending talons of the other likely top-tier lists. Except dual-lash of course, and those spankers deserve it (kidding!)

Last year I noticed a few armies that had unpainted or primed only miniatures. Is that allowed again this year?

Savnock:

Tournaments have rules for a reason, you can't as a tournament organizer change them for a couple players because you feel that its unfair to them how GW wrote the rules.

As a tournament ORGANIZER your responsibility transcends your personal feelings of what is fair and right, and you have a responsibility to ALL OF THE PLAYERS at the tournament to give them what they expected: the rules GW wrote.

In fifth edition, only non-vehicle troops are scoring. Therefore, AC doesnt have scoring units, and will need to take allies. This isnt even open to debate. Home rule it all you want for your personal games, but home ruling something at a nation wide tournament is a severe breach of conduct and judgement on the part of an organizer.

And for you savnock, who said AC got "screwed" by 5th edition, you obviously havent played them. They've gotten far tougher with obscured saves, the new damage table, etc., their templates do much much more damage with the new blast rules, the only aspect they have to worry about in the least is the new combat on rear armor. However, with this points level, you can toss out 10 ordnance templates a turn, which will prevent a lot of the combat from ever happening.

Add in some scoring allies, and its my most feared army in this new edition and for ard boyz.

Relapse wrote: Last year I noticed a few armies that had unpainted or primed only miniatures. Is that allowed again this year?

There is no painting requirement at the 'Ard Boyz. Its focus is totally on game play.

targetawg wrote:
In fifth edition, only non-vehicle troops are scoring. Therefore, AC doesnt have scoring units, and will need to take allies. This isnt even open to debate.

There in lies the problem: The AC "codex" was written for a different set of rules. Under the new rules the codex has some problems such as no scoring units. Other armies have had tweaks done to them via FAQs why not the AC? Allowing the AC's troop units to capture objectives is a logical exception to the 5e rules. There may be others but I don't see the big issue.

Home rule it all you want for your personal games, but home ruling something at a nation wide tournament is a severe breach of conduct and judgement on the part of an organizer.

A tournament director can run his tournament any way he wants. He is free to adjust the rules as he see fit. Witness the Adepticon Gladiator tournament: it permits the use of Forge World models and even makes adjustments to those rules to fit their tournament. You are not required to play in any tournament. If you don't like the rules then don't play in it.

To bring some clarity to this issue, since it seems still muddied, the AC list as it is presented has no units that can capture objectives.

For the 'Ard Boyz tournaments players using the AC list will need to bring allied Troop infantry choices from the Demon Hunter or Witch Hunter lists if they wish to capture objectives.

There in lies the problem: The AC "codex" was written for a different set of rules. Under the new rules the codex has some problems such as no scoring units. Other armies have had tweaks done to them via FAQs why not the AC? Allowing the AC's troop units to capture objectives is a logical exception to the 5e rules. There may be others but I don't see the big issue.

The AC "codex" was also written under a system where vehicles were much easier to destroy and blast templates were much less potent. Perhaps we should use 3rd/4th edition rules for those as well because, you know, it was designed with these rules in mind, not the 5th edition ones.

Hell, we can apply that logic to every codex except maybe Daemons. What disadvantages imposed on an army by the 5th edition changes are significant enough to warrant special treatment? Cover saves? Wound allocation? Close combat resolution? Glancing hits? This is why you cannot start making army-specific exceptions to the tournament rules. If one army gets them then every army should.

A tournament director can run his tournament any way he wants. He is free to adjust the rules as he see fit. Witness the Adepticon Gladiator tournament: it permits the use of Forge World models and even makes adjustments to those rules to fit their tournament. You are not required to play in any tournament. If you don't like the rules then don't play in it.

If they are providing the rules of the tournament to you then there is the implicit agreement that by calling your event a GW 'Ard Boyz Tournament you will be using the GW 'Ard Boyz Tournament rules. Perhaps there is even an explicit agreement--does obtaining the tournament package from GW involve agreeing to anything (such as not charging an entry fee), or do they just hand out prize packages to anyone who claims to have a store?

[i] Removed per FARSEER JENKINS per request.

TheGreatAvatar wrote:

targetawg wrote:
In fifth edition, only non-vehicle troops are scoring. Therefore, AC doesnt have scoring units, and will need to take allies. This isnt even open to debate.

There in lies the problem: The AC "codex" was written for a different set of rules. Under the new rules the codex has some problems such as no scoring units. Other armies have had tweaks done to them via FAQs why not the AC? Allowing the AC's troop units to capture objectives is a logical exception to the 5e rules. There may be others but I don't see the big issue.

Home rule it all you want for your personal games, but home ruling something at a nation wide tournament is a severe breach of conduct and judgement on the part of an organizer.

A tournament director can run his tournament any way he wants. He is free to adjust the rules as he see fit. Witness the Adepticon Gladiator tournament: it permits the use of Forge World models and even makes adjustments to those rules to fit their tournament. You are not required to play in any tournament. If you don't like the rules then don't play in it.

you are correct a normal tournament can be run away you like. If I show up and the organizer changes the rules for a national event. I will be pissed. It would like going to the GT and finding out that the plague marines follow 4th edition Feel no pain rules. for you know that book was written in 4th.

Adepticon can run events like the gladiator because they spend a lot of time and energy making the event as balanced as they can, within the framework of the format. They post comprehensive rules and information months ahead of time. Finally they run the actual events to the letter of the rules they posted. With Adepticon, you know exactly what you're getting into. That's one of the reasons it's so popular.

If I go to any Ard Boyz event, or any GW event at all, I call ahead to try and confirm any rule changes or event oddities. It pays to be prepared. If the trade sales boyz at GW don't issue a rule addendum allowing scoring tanks, I will argue as such if I see it at a local or regional qualifier, even if it's not my game. If someone gets hosed by this, including myself, I will bear witness and contact GW. It won't likely matter, as GW rarely takes action, but I guarentee the T.O. at the event will hear about it, and won't likely get business from me or my friends ever again.

I know I sound sanctimonious, but I've been to too many events where the locals got advance info, or cockamamie rulings in their favor. There are two stores/T.O.s that I will never play at again, because they took the attitude that they could do anything they want.

I have also been to several venues where I had a great time, the rules were available early and were thoughtfully enforced, and it was apparent that the organizers were really trying to make an event for the players to enjoy. Adepticon I've already mentioned, and Dicehead Games in Cleveland TN is another. Cincinnati Arsenal Games ran an event earlier this year and I had a blast! I'll drive all day friday to get to an event saturday, if it has a good track record.

So watch out, T.O.s... Event site rulings can be ok in moderation, but going renegade usually results in one happy winner and a dozen or more incensed players!

Chris Gohlinghorst wrote:To bring some clarity to this issue, since it seems still muddied, the AC list as it is presented has no units that can capture objectives.

For the 'Ard Boyz tournaments players using the AC list will need to bring allied Troop infantry choices from the Demon Hunter or Witch Hunter lists if they wish to capture objectives.

Thanks for the clarification on this, Chris!

skkipper wrote:I called a Gw rep and he said that my army with 88 berzerkers um um auto wins yeah that's it. I automaticly win all games cause 88 berzerkers are just that cool.

really tanks=scoring only works if they post it on the "rules" site. until then it is just a made up rule

88's not a good khorne number.. 8+8 = 16.. 1+6 - 7.. that's nurgle. 11 units of 8 is also a bad combo.. that's not even the number of any god..

I'd suggest that your autowin needs a little more refinement.. lol I just made that up too.

targetawg wrote:Savnock:

Tournaments have rules for a reason, you can't as a tournament organizer change them for a couple players because you feel that its unfair to them how GW wrote the rules.

As a tournament ORGANIZER your responsibility transcends your personal feelings of what is fair and right, and you have a responsibility to ALL OF THE PLAYERS at the tournament to give them what they expected: the rules GW wrote.

In fifth edition, only non-vehicle troops are scoring. Therefore, AC doesnt have scoring units, and will need to take allies. This isnt even open to debate. Home rule it all you want for your personal games, but home ruling something at a nation wide tournament is a severe breach of conduct and judgement on the part of an organizer.

And for you savnock, who said AC got "screwed" by 5th edition, you obviously havent played them. They've gotten far tougher with obscured saves, the new damage table, etc., their templates do much much more damage with the new blast rules, the only aspect they have to worry about in the least is the new combat on rear armor. However, with this points level, you can toss out 10 ordnance templates a turn, which will prevent a lot of the combat from ever happening.

Add in some scoring allies, and its my most feared army in this new edition and for ard boyz.

I see your argument and strongly disagree on several angles.

First, a tourney organizer (whether it be GW or an indy group) has every right to change the rules for their event. They have no obligation to you or anyone else: don't like the rules for that tourney, don't play in the tourney. This is why Adepticon rocks: they accomodate the entire range of GW/Forgeworld products, attempting to include players whose force selections have been severely excluded (like AC, LatD and Kroot Mercenaries). The core rules are in no way inviolate, holy, or even fair and balanced in the first place. A single exception to the core rules for a single army does not an "ohnoesworldzizendzing!11!!" make. The apparent code of "conduct" that a national tourney would be "breaching". by allowing AC tanks to score does not exist.

As for little experience fighting AC in the new edition, you do have me there. I will try to get a trial game in to see what could possibly be so scary to all the whiners. You may be right. However, I suspect that I will simply (gasp!) ADAPT and use the same tactics that I will be using against Land Raider spam or tank-heavy Guard to blunt any advantages that AC may get from tons of blast templates. Sure, they may be harder to kill. They also won't be moving much. And multiple blast templates? You'd better be ready for those in general, or you will be owned by a wide variety of opponents.

And AC did indisputably get screwed by 5th edition: NO SCORING UNITS. Cannot win without tabling. Lame. If you fail to recognize that, you are either being obscurantist or a complete idiot (which I don not believe to be the case from your otherwise well-stated response). If you would like to imagine some code of conduct or standard of fairness for tourney organizers, one would think that allowing armies to be even vaguely winnable on their own would be a prominent feature of that code, well before abhorring special fixes for armies that have gotten screwed.

Back to the tactical bits: If AC do take enough (4+) transported troops units (allied or whatever) to score in a 2500 game, I'm willing to bet that their firepower advantage slips beneath their vehicular liabilities (rear armor _is_ a huge problem, and so is assult, and so are melta hordes, massed gauss weapons, etc etc.).Actually, from your response I wonder how much you had to play them under 4th. In my dozen or so games against them, I found their strengths to be firepower and mobility, which have apparently been replaced by firepower and resilience under the new rules. Without scoring tanks, they are far worse, for their resilience counts little if they are unable to do more than draw so long as a single enemy unit remains on-table.

Really, I hate to see widespread chicken-little whining screwing a rarely-fielded, very thematic list. A shame on every Lash Prince/Tri-Monolith/Land-Raider-Coddler that cried out against them. This is exactly the sort of BS that makes the game overly homogeneous. Tournament play will never be balanced perfectly- perhaps everyone should ease off the crybaby routine and let it be a little more varied and interesting. Looks like this has already been resolved in the favor of those shaking in their shoes at the thought of a handful fo armor armies, but it's a damn shame that it went that way.

First, a tourney organizer (whether it be GW or an indy group) has every right to change the rules for their event. They have no obligation to you or anyone else: don't like the rules for that tourney, don't play in the tourney.

Key words 'their event'. This is a national 'ardboyz tournament. Stores running the tournament are taking part in a larger event. It's not 'their event'. They shouldn't be changing rules on a local level. In their own tournaments, perfectly fine. A shop owner actually does have an obligation to use the rules given out. If a shop owner doesn't like the rules for the tourney, then don't run the tourney.

If you get the event package, take advantage of the prize support, and get yourself listed as running the 'Ardboyz Tournament', then you should abide by the rules.

mikhaila wrote:First, a tourney organizer (whether it be GW or an indy group) has every right to change the rules for their event. They have no obligation to you or anyone else: don't like the rules for that tourney, don't play in the tourney.

Key words 'their event'. This is a national 'ardboyz tournament. Stores running the tournament are taking part in a larger event. It's not 'their event'. They shouldn't be changing rules on a local level. In their own tournaments, perfectly fine. A shop owner actually does have an obligation to use the rules given out. If a shop owner doesn't like the rules for the tourney, then don't run the tourney.

If you get the event package, take advantage of the prize support, and get yourself listed as running the 'Ardboyz Tournament', then you should abide by the rules.

Congratulations, you have missed the point, misunderstood most of the posters, and probably not read the thread. We were discussing a rumored special allowance for the Armored Company nationwide, for the whole 'Ard Boyz tourney at all locations... not local tourney organizers. Krab Kirby mentioned policing locals a couple posts ago, so maybe that confused you- but it is not the main topic of this thread, nor of my post. Please read more than the last four posts before you reply, thanks.

And a _national_ tournament organizer, GW or an indy circuit or whatever, has just as much right to modify their rules set as any local shop. The core rules are not somehow sacred or untouchable. They aren't really balanced in the first place. It's supposed to be about fun, for crissakes. Including more varied armylists (within reason- say armylists that are/were widely used and viable but for one little needed tweak...) means more fun, IMNSHO. If you disagree, I would ask you to examine your motivations for excluding AC players and their lists. Please finish this quote: "Whining about fairness at a Warhammer tournament is like competing in the Special Olympics: Win or lose, you're still..."



.......>

It comes down to this: AC players are generally decent chaps, and the army was not a powergamer staple by any stretch of the imagination. They got screwed by the edition change, and should have received a general fix to keep them viable in all 40K play. At the very least, a ruling to make them playable in tourneys would be a good show of appreciation by GW for these folks who are so often super-collectors, kitbashers and inspirations to the rest of us on the modeling section of this very forum. To see such involved gamers screwed by a rules change and then sandbagged by whiners that can't stomach a little more competition in a silly tournament is a damned shame.

I don't think Mikhaila missed the point at all, and you reinforced it in your answer.

GW has the right to change the rules in a national tournament. GW would need to make it clear that this was changed (whether it be in the actual FAQ or in the rules packet). They didn't. All of this gnashing of teeth is around a RUMOR that someone somewhere talked to someone in GW and AC can score with troops tanks. To me the original rumor was no better than getting it from a red shirt.

GW put out the rules packet. AC is used as is. According to the 5th edition rules. Period. This was even confirmed by Chris a couple of posts up. I think it has nothing to do with whining or people fearing AC. It was never an issue, just a rumor.

Does it stink that AC is handicapped? Sure. Do AC players know that going in? Yup. Should GW change the basic AC rules list to accomodate it? Sure. Will that happen for Ard Boyz? Nope.

Savnock wrote:Please finish this quote: "Whining about fairness at a Warhammer tournament is like competing in the Special Olympics: Win or lose, you're still..."

The thing is Savnock - that exact quote can be turned around to the AC players whining about fairness for their army in the event.

Savnock wrote:It comes down to this: AC players are generally decent chaps, and the army was not a powergamer staple by any stretch of the imagination. They got screwed by the edition change, and should have received a general fix to keep them viable in all 40K play. At the very least, a ruling to make them playable in tourneys would be a good show of appreciation by GW for these folks who are so often super-collectors, kitbashers and inspirations to the rest of us on the modeling section of this very forum. To see such involved gamers screwed by a rules change and then sandbagged by whiners that can't stomach a little more competition in a silly tournament is a damned shame.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether or not they are decent chaps or "super-collectors". There are tons of us out here that are decent chaps and "super-collectors". If you make a change for that army specifically, then the same change should be made across the board for all forces. Otherwise you open up a lot of rulings that should be made for other forces. There are options for AC to get scoring units and it does make for a tougher game. Players know those options ahead of time. If they elect not to use those options, that's their choice. If they don't like it, well - they can just reference your quote above.

Savnock, seriously, you missed the point.

No one was ever debating a local organizer’s right to change the rules for a local event. Nor were they ever debating GW’s right to alter the rules for a national event they run.

The original poster (Minus67) stated that he is running an Ard Boyz event, and was told by his GW trade sales rep that a special allowance was being made to allow AC Troops tanks to score. Since this is not in the actual rules packet, and is a serious alteration of the rules, he came on here seeking confirmation or denial from other sources, preferably other folks running the events and also in direct communication with GW.

Mikhaila is also running an ard boyz event, and told Minus67 that as far as he knew there had been no such alteration to the rules. There is no official documentation of such, so he should presume that the trade sales rep was mistaken.

At one point mecureal stated (or implied), however, that HE was ALSO running an Ard Boyz event, and was planning to CHANGE the rules to allow AC troops choices to score. Around which point you, Thegreatavatar, grandmasterpinto, and others stepped up to defend ACs as not being unbalanced, and seemingly in support of his decision.

This is where people got concerned, because it IS a national event, not just his personal tournament. Changing the rules in this way, when not explicitly communicated by GW to the player base as a whole and WELL in advance, would be unfair, inconsistent, and highly inappropriate.

Chris Gohlinghorst, thankfully, has now given us official confirmation from himself and Dave Taylor that Mikhaila was correct- no such house rule is in place, and if there was, they would tell us about it officially (ie: in the packet).