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.

Redbeard wrote:But that's only even possible because it doesn't take the "battle over all" uber-competitive approach. That's what I mean.

Ah, got it. Thanks for clarifying.

The last-minute change of how IA could be used in the Team Tournament really honked me off.

Aside from that, it was an incredible time, especially given that it was my first.

I think I'd second the 'three games with a longer time limit' over 'four games', but until 6th Ed hits and we've had a few months to let the new rules sink in, you can't really address this until then.

Briancj wrote:The last-minute change of how IA could be used in the Team Tournament really honked me off.

We didn't use any FW stuff this year - what last minute change?

Briancj wrote:The last-minute change of how IA could be used in the Team Tournament really honked me off.

Aside from that, it was an incredible time, especially given that it was my first.

I think I'd second the 'three games with a longer time limit' over 'four games', but until 6th Ed hits and we've had a few months to let the new rules sink in, you can't really address this until then.

The problem with going to three games is that it's already very hard to determine who "won" at the end of the event because with only 4 rounds, it's possible to have 8 completely undefeated teams at the end. Who wins? Right now it's not too bad as theme/size of the win/painting/other points here and there sort folks out. Remove a round and you double the number of undefeateds, how do you work with it then?

I'll second it was a long, tiring day (this was my first team tournament), but I don't see a way around it, and for me i think it actually added to the epic feeling of the event/the day.

I think five rounds would be a bit ridiculous. More is not always better. As some have already pointed out it is okay to work some soft scoring into an event.

-666- wrote:I think five rounds would be a bit ridiculous. More is not always better. As some have already pointed out it is okay to work some soft scoring into an event.

I wasn't suggesting five rounds, I was responding that it should remain at 4 rounds, like it currently is, as the other poster was suggesting 3 rounds.

I've always been a proponent of tournaments that aren't purely BP, as overall is my favorite award. I don't even think they should be called soft scoring, as to me, they're part of the hobby just as much as the gaming aspect.

@-666-

No one is advocating 5 rounds that I've seen. Though Target did point out that dropping to 3 games would double the field of "undefeated's" as well as dropping around 70 (maybe more)possible points off the score (sports/battle/hq & token bonuses). Basically it's a bad idea to drop the number of games but no one is advocating 5 games. I don't think that would be possible. And to be honest I wouldn't be interested.

Re: Forgeworld

The rules packet for the 40K TT was posted 11/22/2011 that detailed the event changes for 2012. This included a tweak to the use of Forgeworld units intended to allow a less restrictive use of Forgeworld models.

In 2011 Forgeworld units were limited to one player as an 0-1 Force Org selection. In 2012, we opened up Forgeworld units to allow them as 0-1 unique selections. Meaning as a team you could field as many Forgeworld models as you wanted as long as none of the choices are repeated.

Additionally the 40K TT primer missions were posted on 02/15/12 with the following note:
Imperial Armor / Forge World Units are allowed from the AdeptiCon 2012 Allowable Imperial Armor & Apocalypse Units rules, but due to the scarce nature of these units each unit is considered unique (0-1) and may only be taken once per team.

I agree that losing one round of games will drastically affect scoring and results. And, there IS something to be said about the 'marathon' portion of the TT. You know it is coming, and you prepare for it as best you can. How you hold up during round four is an important part of that sportsmanship score.

So, instead, perhaps we should look at other ways to reduce the overall length. A previous poster mentioned the paper-on-the-wall table assignments. This should be online. It doesn't take much to save an excel spreadsheet as a web page, and upload it to a website.

Things also appear to be getting very cramped at the Westin. If the vendors were somewhere else, there would have been more room. Everyone moving between tables in narrow confines == major traffic jams. I understand AC had a conflict with a wedding(?), and lost space this year.

At this point, I expect there to be software handling pairings and table assignments. I sincerely hope this isn't being done by hand.

--B.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

muwhe wrote:

Re: Forgeworld

The rules packet for the 40K TT was posted 11/22/2011 that detailed the event changes for 2012. This included a tweak to the use of Forgeworld units intended to allow a less restrictive use of Forgeworld models.

In 2011 Forgeworld units were limited to one player as an 0-1 Force Org selection. In 2012, we opened up Forgeworld units to allow them as 0-1 unique selections. Meaning as a team you could field as many Forgeworld models as you wanted as long as none of the choices are repeated.

Please do not take this as hostile.

Was an email sent out about the change? I didn't get one. My Team didn't know about it until about a month before AC kicked off. I also seem to recall not seeing the changes in the rules packet online until that time. Now, it is entirely possible that my team somehow missed this by a county mile, and as I have no screenshots/evidence, I can't back my assertations up.

I would think that such a major change should have been plastered everywhere.

--B.

@Brainj

Not offense taken here or intended. I think a number of veteran guys missed the change as well.

Just was pointing out what the change was for those that missed it and when we posted it.

muwhe wrote:@Brainj
Not offense taken here or intended. I think a number of veteran guys missed the change as well.
Just was pointing out what the change was for those that missed it and when we posted it.

Muchos Gracias. I do not envy y'all the challenge of having to possibly revamp everything, including the INAT FAQ (omfg), for 6th edition. Truly, prepping AC 2013 will be the Labors of Hercules.

muwhe wrote:
Re: Forgeworld

The rules packet for the 40K TT was posted 11/22/2011 that detailed the event changes for 2012. This included a tweak to the use of Forgeworld units intended to allow a less restrictive use of Forgeworld models.

In 2011 Forgeworld units were limited to one player as an 0-1 Force Org selection. In 2012, we opened up Forgeworld units to allow them as 0-1 unique selections. Meaning as a team you could field as many Forgeworld models as you wanted as long as none of the choices are repeated.

This is true. However, this is still more restrictive than it had been in 2010, 2009, and prior years, where any team member could bring any FW unit, with the exception of super heavies, gargantuans and flyers. It'd be cool to see a grot rebellion army, for example, with grot tanks all over the place, but under the 2011 and 2012 rules, this is impossible. It was possible in prior years.

We have already begun preparation for 2013 TT. Mostly determining our theme and wardrobe. Armies aren't nearly as important.

Down with Fezes, Up with Pleather!

Y'all'r from Texas. You have acres and acres of cows. Down with pleather, up with leather! I mean, REALLY.

jwolf wrote:We have already begun preparation for 2013 TT. Mostly determining our theme and wardrobe. Armies aren't nearly as important.

Down with Fezes, Up with Pleather!

We'll get you next time, jwolf.

Valhallan42nd wrote:

jwolf wrote:We have already begun preparation for 2013 TT. Mostly determining our theme and wardrobe. Armies aren't nearly as important.

Down with Fezes, Up with Pleather!

We'll get you next time, jwolf.

Challenge accepted!

jwolf wrote:We have already begun preparation for 2013 TT. Mostly determining our theme and wardrobe. Armies aren't nearly as important.

Down with Fezes, Up with Pleather!

Ha ha ha!! That seems to be so true. Stick a Titan in there and you'll do just fine. Wouldn't it be cool to dress as Warhounds... I love your attitude. : )