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.

Black Blow Fly wrote:I am opposed to the use of hte INAT FAQ at the finals. The rules should be consistent through each round.

G

The nature of GW rules being what it is, there will be no consistent rules from beginning to end unless something like the INAT is used for every round. If one merely discounts use of any such comprehensive FAQ from the finals, then everyone coming from the variety of different national locations will run into an interpretation that they were unaware of and unable to prepare for.

I think GW believes that the independent TO's wont follow the INAT or even know what it is.. Considering there are so many running the prelims. I mean their excuse for cutting out most web/WD content was that "It confuses our poor 60 IQ customers so much.. they dont know how to use this web net.. inter thing"

Prelims arent much of a big deal but I think it really should be followed for the semis and finals since there are far fewer stores allowed to do semis. Oh and the semis have the best prizes

Black Blow Fly wrote:I am opposed to the use of hte INAT FAQ at the finals. The rules should be consistent through each round.

G

It would be nice. If they are going to use INAT for the finals this year, I'll probably use INAT at the prelim and regionals we are holding so that we're consistant with all three rounds that we're hosting.

To be honest INAT is not popular in Florida & it raised a lot of ire last year when it was announced the Battle Bunker would use it. There are some really dodgey rules interpretations for Tyranids. A lot of people simply come to hte finals unaware. I don't think the finals should be an extension of Adepticon. Even Redbeard has discussed his issues with INAT.

G

If folks come to the finals unaware, thats an issue with player preparedness. If I've gone through two preliminary rounds and made travel and lodging arrangements, I should certainly be aware what the rules are for the event. That said, it is foolish to change the rules from one round to the next.

Kirby that FAQ has more pages than the rulebook and more importantly it is by no means official. You are not doing yourself any favors paying lip service to hte council.

G

I wasn't debating the size of the document or how official it is, or even who likes it or not. I was just surprised that anyone smart enough to make it through a local and regional qualifier wouldn't be aware what documents the finals would be using. Whether or not you like the INAT, it pays to know it as comprehensively as possible and to have a copy at any event using it.

Black Blow Fly wrote:Kirby that FAQ has more pages than the rulebook and more importantly it is by no means official. You are not doing yourself any favors paying lip service to hte council.

G

Dude, who cares?

CatPeeler wrote:

pretre wrote:Ancient Wonders in Tualatin. It's the local Portland prelim that I know of.

They will also be held at Rivals in Hillsboro, Knightfall Games in Beaverton, and (I think) Rainy Day Games in Aloha.

Wacky that there will be so many. I wonder if the population will support it. On a side note, for some reason the one at Ancient Wonders is May 16th rather than 15th, so maybe someone could hit both.

I'll re-iterate my position that the nationals for 'Ard Boys using INAT is much preferable to using no comprehensive FAQ at all.

One merely needs to check out the rules forums here or any other large 40K fan site to see how many different interpretations there are to all the many gray areas in the 40K rules universe.

Lacking something up front that details how these conflicts will be resolved during the tournament sets up players for the situation of having a call made against them in the middle of a game that can affect the outcome. If the player had known how that call would be made before the tournament even started, that player could have modified their list or their play strategy ahead of time, and not been caught at a disadvantage mid-game.

(Personally, I don't care if 'Ard Boys uses the INAT or not, but they should darn well have some sort of comprehensive FAQ available plenty of time in advance.)

I think the INAT for the finals only is fine.

The first two rounds are local/regional events so most people are on the same page as far as the rules go.

The problem comes at the national level when you have all of the regional rules interacting.

If the Florida people don't like it that is fine, since the Florida events do not have to use it, but it works to iron out the problems when the Florida people play against the people outside of Florida.

What other comprehensive FAQ is available for the whole of 40K? GW has an FAQ, but it sure ain't comprehensive. Are there any others out there?

If the Florida people don't like it that is fine, since the Florida events do not have to use it, but it works to iron out the problems when the Florida people play against the people outside of Florida.

Black Blow Fly doesn't speak for the state. I have no problem with it, and after many years seeing this debate, I just laugh at the ridiculousness of it all.

No surprise that a large group of 40k elites dislike the rulings of another large group :p Check egos at the tournament door!

There has to be some kind of FAQ as others have said.. if not the adepticon one than what? I dont agree with some of the rulings, and I also dont agree with some of the ramblings and total preoccuption with RAW on dakka either :p

Feels less like a problem with the INAT and more like a problem of "who are the most powerful rule people"..

However, I do agree the INAT is really long .. and I think that half of the stuff in there only comes up between super argumentative people.. But, atleast they put in the effort

Better to have laws that you agree with 90% of the time than no laws

Blackmoor duped me. Here I was hoping to see the scenarios.

Sigh

It's not an official document published by GW and has no place in the Ard Boyz. It's just that simple really. Last year they sprang it on us at the last second, this year we should know better.

G

Black Blow Fly wrote:It's not an official document published by GW and has no place in the Ard Boyz. It's just that simple really. Last year they sprang it on us at the last second, this year we should know better.

G

Surely it's better to have bitter rules disputes even though the premiere Tournament in the country already has an FAQ that addresses all of the questions one might have. Particularly when Yakface is one of the people that GW asks to help with their FAQs... Seriously people.

OT: Why are there two sets of dates? One says they start June 11th, the other says May 15...

Not official, but it also deals with a lot of stuff that there is no official stance on. From point of view of a store running the regionals, some questions and arguements are nightmares to deal with at the regional level, because of differences in player opinion, and with no FAQ from GW. If GW agreed to use the INAT, life is easier at the regionals and finals for me. With no INAT or GW FAQ, I'm having a pound of raw meat and 6 cups of coffee for breakfast that day. Double that for the final round. Should be interesting, at the least.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
OT: Why are there two sets of dates? One says they start June 11th, the other says May 15...

Bad copy and past from someone using last years PDF. Already sent them an Email about it. May 15th is the correct date.

I'd rather they use one single FAQ for all three rounds of a national tournament, then let TOs make rulings on the spot in the first two rounds. INAT has its problems, and I've never agreed with all their rulings, but it's better than letting each prelim and qualifier use their own interpretations.

And the answer isn't "let everyone be sporting about it." We know that won't work.

Ok this thread as officially jumped the shark.
It has turned from an update to...

Dakkite-1 I don't like the INAT because, I just don't like it.
Dakkite-2 Well it's better than nothing
Dakkite-1 Yeah... but I don't like it
Dakkite-3 It's better than nothing
Dakkite-1 I know thats what you think, but I really... really don't like it.
Dakkite-4 Yeah but we don't have anything else
Dakkite-1 I really really really don't like it.


Ok.. we get it..... can we move on. :-)

GG

If GW adopts the INAT FAQ it should be worldwide. Teh same set of rules should be used at every GW event.

G

generalgrog wrote:Ok this thread as officially jumped the shark.
It has turned from an update to...

Dakkite-1 I don't like the INAT because, I just don't like it.
Dakkite-2 Well it's better than nothing
Dakkite-1 Yeah... but I don't like it
Dakkite-3 It's better than nothing
Dakkite-1 I know thats what you think, but I really... really don't like it.
Dakkite-4 Yeah but we don't have anything else
Dakkite-1 I really really really don't like it.


Ok.. we get it..... can we move on. :-)

GG

Haha...

Never have I seen a full page of Dakka-discussion summarized more concisely.

Black Blow Fly wrote:I am opposed to the use of hte INAT FAQ at the finals. The rules should be consistent through each round.

G

Agreed, I remember last year all the ork players ripping off their Deffrollaz after they spent prize support on them. If GW would have simply said from the beginning to use the INAT FAQ I think there would have been less complaints. I personally feel that the INAT is a great source to give consistent rulings from round to round. I remember hearing "But that is not the way we ran it at our tournament" more than once, and until GW releases an "Official" all encompassing FAQ, INAT is the best for now.

Black Blow Fly wrote:Teh same set of rules should be used at every GW event.

I agree. But, until GW gets out of their "we're a minatures company" mindset, it won't happen. The INAT FAQ is, imho, a better alternative than the limited amount of FAQs that we get from GW. It took them what, 3 years to make a ruling on deffrollas?

Yay, San Luis Obispo is holding their own Ard Boyz event! I won't have to drive 3+ hours to play this year!

Pity my IG won't be ready for quite some time. I'll have to rely on my Dark Angels...

pretre wrote:
Wacky that there will be so many. I wonder if the population will support it. On a side note, for some reason the one at Ancient Wonders is May 16th rather than 15th, so maybe someone could hit both.

That would be against the rules for shops. Everything GW puts out says May 15 (with the exception of some of the content, that has the 2009 dates still). Hosting the event the day after would be kinda douche-y.

Some stores make like 0 profit from hosting 'ard boyz.. Last year a bunch of stores had MTG events planned and did those instead

paulguise wrote:

pretre wrote:
Wacky that there will be so many. I wonder if the population will support it. On a side note, for some reason the one at Ancient Wonders is May 16th rather than 15th, so maybe someone could hit both.

That would be against the rules for shops. Everything GW puts out says May 15 (with the exception of some of the content, that has the 2009 dates still). Hosting the event the day after would be kinda douche-y.

Oh Absolutely!! um....unless GW told all the shops that we could run it either day of the weekend, especially if you were working around already scheduled events. Non issue here. For a few years GW has allowed shops to run 'ardboyz on Sundays. You can't run two, but you can pick the day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kirasu wrote:Some stores make like 0 profit from hosting 'ard boyz.. Last year a bunch of stores had MTG events planned and did those instead

Yep. It's a free event, you aren't supposed to charge. So when it comes up against an event you already have a couple dozen people signed up for, it's going to be a tough choice for the store. Luckily, GW are flexible about it, and most can fit it in one day or another. No MTG release this year at least.

mikhaila wrote:

Black Blow Fly wrote:I am opposed to the use of hte INAT FAQ at the finals. The rules should be consistent through each round.

G

It would be nice. If they are going to use INAT for the finals this year, I'll probably use INAT at the prelim and regionals we are holding so that we're consistant with all three rounds that we're hosting.

Same here (except that we aren't running regionals, just prelims)

Couple of oddities I've noticed, first off the given webpage links to a squatter search engine, instead of any GW page. Second, it seems that the stores are providing the prize support? I was under the impression that GW was handling that through the online vouchers, any idea on how that's going to run?

For round 1, stores will hand out 120.00 in prizes and be reimbursed by GW
For round 2, players need to register on the GW website, I'll turn in names of 1st,2nd, 3rd and emails. GW will credit your online account, or contact you about what army you want.
For round 3, ...hmm, no clue. Prizes and Trophies. Hand out what they send me to hand out, and other stuff probably provided through the website and/or added to your online account. Know more later.