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.

Nah, I lol'ed. At this point, the internet troll fest on 225 is progressing toward the comical or sad. We raised $20,000 for charity, nearly a thousand gamers had an awesome time, competitive and casual gaming was had in droves, and we're super stoked about next year.

Such an experience does not rest on the bitter criticism of a relative few, and rules arguments are best left for FAQ development cycles and rules forums.

MVBrandt wrote:
Nah, I lol'ed. At this point, the internet troll fest on 225 is progressing toward the comical or sad. We raised $20,000 for charity, nearly a thousand gamers had an awesome time, competitive and casual gaming was had in droves, and we're super stoked about next year.

Such an experience does not rest on the bitter criticism of a relative few, and rules arguments are best left for FAQ development cycles and rules forums.

$20,000, that's awesome!

And yeah, I'm sure NOVA was a fun event, I don't think it was a bad event at all, I just think that the interpretation of the wave serpent firing arc is totally flawed. Besides, what's more fun, dickbutt, or a long drawn out geometry lesson?

PS - I picked out Curlz just for you.

 minionboy wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:
Nah, I lol'ed. At this point, the internet troll fest on 225 is progressing toward the comical or sad. We raised $20,000 for charity, nearly a thousand gamers had an awesome time, competitive and casual gaming was had in droves, and we're super stoked about next year.

Such an experience does not rest on the bitter criticism of a relative few, and rules arguments are best left for FAQ development cycles and rules forums.

$20,000, that's awesome!

And yeah, I'm sure NOVA was a fun event, I don't think it was a bad event at all, I just think that the interpretation of the wave serpent firing arc is totally flawed. Besides, what's more fun, dickbutt, or a long drawn out geometry lesson?

PS - I picked out Curlz just for you.

It might be flawed! My only objection to critiques has been people going "THEY JUST RANDOMLY RULED 270!" which ... isn't true. Also, it's not "NOVA's ruling." It's a ruling used at a metric dickbutt-ton of tournaments, ans has been since the eldex came out.

Ipso facto, to the rules forums!

Appreciate the curlz though!

I actually think the second of those diagrams is how I usually see it played because the rules state the weapon is the front arc. The problem essentially is that GW never should have made an arc a weapon. The rules don't function for it, if they had written it as I feel is intended it would just be straight forward.

Breng77 wrote:
I actually think the second of those diagrams is how I usually see it played because the rules state the weapon is the front arc. The problem essentially is that GW never should have made an arc a weapon. The rules don't function for it, if they had written it as I feel is intended it would just be straight forward.

Well, they never said it was an arc, they said that you "treat this as a hull-mounted weapon pointing forward"

The rulebook for hull-mounted weapons is where the firing arc comes into play, which says, “In the rare cases when it matters, assume that guns can swivel vertically up to 45º, even if the barrel on the model itself cannot physically do that! Additionally, assume all hull-mounted weapons can swivel horizontally up to 45º. ”

So it says that even if the weapon is unable to be moved "such as the serpent shield" you assume a 45° arc.

But that's all for the YMDC forum anyhow.

YMDC is always interesting for their particular take on the rules .

Assume a 45 degree arc from where though?
The weapon does not even exist.

So where would you measure the arc from? Why is it the center of the vehicle?

Breng77 wrote:
Assume a 45 degree arc from where though?
The weapon does not even exist.

So where would you measure the arc from? Why is it the center of the vehicle?

Hull Mounted, pointed forward, so presumably at some point from the hull in the forward direction. Instead of the furthest front point in the first diagram, some people use from the back corners in the second diagram (both of which are logical conclusions), and while that does make sense, there are some who say that interpretation being too liberal (as it's arguing that the 45° doesn't start at a point, but instead can be bisected and set to straddle the whole width of the vehicle).

That would be an argument based on the width of the barrel if you will. In theory a Vindicator's demolisher cannon has a larger 45% fire arc than does a hull mounted Heavy bolter on a chimera because the weapon itself is wider. It seems to assume too much to arbitrarily pick a point on the vehicle. Which is why I would say #2 is the more correct interpretation.

In anyway the rules for vehicle weapons in this game are pretty bad.

Chancetragedy wrote:
I didn't play in the invitational and did the exact same thing after watching a few invitational and trios games. Why is that a problem?

Well for one its tailoring, which generally people have the view that this is a no no.

Again, not trying to spit in any faces. I just could see how someone not in the trios or invitational, who has spent valued dollars to be in the open would want a fair opportunity across the board. Heck if I were in the invitational and out great time and expense and had a meta buster and then the next morning saw people tailored for it I would be pissed (I live up far up north and can't haul all my crap with me). I'd make the best of it and enjoy myself, but part of me would feel annoyed that some dude with access to his models locally (or fill in whatever reasoning here, borrowing, changing gear etc) had modified his list because he was previewed piece of the meta and the tables.

I would say this would be a great reason for list submission, not necessarily for a check but to keep people locked in once they arrive and start playing.

I may be in the minority, it just seems like another none game-skill based advantage IMHO.

Just genuinely curious how others feel, because it seems like an easy enough fix.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:
I didn't play in the invitational and did the exact same thing after watching a few invitational and trios games. Why is that a problem?

Well for one its tailoring, which generally people have the view that this is a no no.

Again, not trying to spit in any faces. I just could see how someone not in the trios or invitational, who has spent valued dollars to be in the open would want a fair opportunity across the board. Heck if I were in the invitational and out great time and expense and had a meta buster and then the next morning saw people tailored for it I would be pissed (I live up far up north and can't haul all my crap with me). I'd make the best of it and enjoy myself, but part of me would feel annoyed that some dude with access to his models locally (or fill in whatever reasoning here, borrowing, changing gear etc) had modified his list because he was previewed piece of the meta and the tables.

I would say this would be a great reason for list submission, not necessarily for a check but to keep people locked in once they arrive and start playing.

I may be in the minority, it just seems like another none game-skill based advantage IMHO.

Just genuinely curious how others feel, because it seems like an easy enough fix.

I can understand this concern. We've actually been pondering making the Invitational a joint event with Torrent of Fire and run during Feb at the opposite side of the calendar year even. That said, list submission is not an easy fix at an event the size of NOVA (nearly a thousand attendees and huge logistical challenges). It would be an easier fix to just say that anyone playing in the Invitational must do so with their GT list. Solves the problem PDQ.

Tailoring is a no-no?

You send the best army you can to fit the mission. If you have the tactical prowess to assess an event's meta in a few hours, make adjustments to your list, and accurately assess the lay of the land terrain-wise... Then shouldn't you be rewarded for that forward thinking?

MVBrandt wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:
I didn't play in the invitational and did the exact same thing after watching a few invitational and trios games. Why is that a problem?

Well for one its tailoring, which generally people have the view that this is a no no.

Again, not trying to spit in any faces. I just could see how someone not in the trios or invitational, who has spent valued dollars to be in the open would want a fair opportunity across the board. Heck if I were in the invitational and out great time and expense and had a meta buster and then the next morning saw people tailored for it I would be pissed (I live up far up north and can't haul all my crap with me). I'd make the best of it and enjoy myself, but part of me would feel annoyed that some dude with access to his models locally (or fill in whatever reasoning here, borrowing, changing gear etc) had modified his list because he was previewed piece of the meta and the tables.

I would say this would be a great reason for list submission, not necessarily for a check but to keep people locked in once they arrive and start playing.

I may be in the minority, it just seems like another none game-skill based advantage IMHO.

Just genuinely curious how others feel, because it seems like an easy enough fix.

I can understand this concern. We've actually been pondering making the Invitational a joint event with Torrent of Fire and run during Feb at the opposite side of the calendar year even. That said, list submission is not an easy fix at an event the size of NOVA (nearly a thousand attendees and huge logistical challenges). It would be an easier fix to just say that anyone playing in the Invitational must do so with their GT list. Solves the problem PDQ.

Hey absolutely, BTW congrats and well done. I wasn't trying to aim criticism at the host here necessarily. Honestly if it is publicly frowned upon then players would self regulate I am sure. Hey, no one wants to be taunted as a WAAC player all weekend by their buds right.

Though it would also make sense to make it a stand alone mini event and ToF last year seemed like a great solution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Valhallan42nd wrote:
Tailoring is a no-no?

You send the best army you can to fit the mission. If you have the tactical prowess to assess an event's meta in a few hours, make adjustments to your list, and accurately assess the lay of the land terrain-wise... Then shouldn't you be rewarded for that forward thinking?

Its not really fair to the guy from Norway for example, unless you think he should FedEx his entire collection with him.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:
I didn't play in the invitational and did the exact same thing after watching a few invitational and trios games. Why is that a problem?

Well for one its tailoring, which generally people have the view that this is a no no.

Again, not trying to spit in any faces. I just could see how someone not in the trios or invitational, who has spent valued dollars to be in the open would want a fair opportunity across the board. Heck if I were in the invitational and out great time and expense and had a meta buster and then the next morning saw people tailored for it I would be pissed (I live up far up north and can't haul all my crap with me). I'd make the best of it and enjoy myself, but part of me would feel annoyed that some dude with access to his models locally (or fill in whatever reasoning here, borrowing, changing gear etc) had modified his list because he was previewed piece of the meta and the tables.

I would say this would be a great reason for list submission, not necessarily for a check but to keep people locked in once they arrive and start playing.

I may be in the minority, it just seems like another none game-skill based advantage IMHO.

Just genuinely curious how others feel, because it seems like an easy enough fix.

No offense taken but if I can offer a rebuttal to a couple points.

I flew out, did not borrow any models from anyone. When you go to a tournament do you not make a list you think will operate well to the missions and expected meta? Do you consider that unfair tailoring?

The terrain layouts, pictures and missions were available months in advance for anybody to see. But sometimes it's hard to judge from 2 dimensional pictures. So I brought 1 army with a few variant squads and decided to change it up after seeing the size of the terrain. I know I wasn't alone in that so I fail to see how it was unfair to anyone because everyone had the exact same access and availability of everything.

Myself and Matt Robertson brought a ton of spare stuff from the UK incase we wanted to change our lists at all after the invitational. We did this because we had no idea what the meta would be like and the terrain compared to the guys who lived nearby who may have seen it before. If we can bring it from the UK then I'm sure the guys from the US could too.

I wouldn't mind having lists locked at the invitational point but for myself anyway it was good fun to try 2 different list styles out. Me changing from screamer star to FMC definitely got me into the top 8, I know Matt found the extra unit of wracks very 'useful' .

It is also 2 different tournaments. One affecting the other is expected and i can not consider it list tailoring.

We had diagrams of the terrain setup that told us what to expect. We had mission packets well in advance. I can't really call it list tailoring to any significant degree.

That being said, I was not prepared for how powerful Daemon Summoning was on NOVA Terrain and using the NOVA Missions. I am hoping the go through significant revisions, especially the Quarters mission where number of units and points count so heavily. Any army that can generate units is at a massive advantage. Coupled with the huge LoS blocking terrain there were many matchups that were autolose on those. Just as the KP mission is poorly suited now that 5 Imperial Knights in an army. Its basically autolose for one side of the matchup, which happens.

I can understand this concern. We've actually been pondering making the Invitational a joint event with Torrent of Fire and run during Feb at the opposite side of the calendar year even. That said, list submission is not an easy fix at an event the size of NOVA (nearly a thousand attendees and huge logistical challenges). It would be an easier fix to just say that anyone playing in the Invitational must do so with their GT list. Solves the problem PDQ.

Sounds like an awesome idea !

Yeah the fact that the missions and terrain layout were there for all to see long beforehand is one thing, the "meta" in so much as the totality of what the 180 attendees brought was not. So ya, I can see that no sitting well with people who didn't think last minute list tailoring after seeing the competition was allowed or a thing. Around here, you usually need to locked in your list a few weeks beforehand, obviously things like model damage in travel can occur.

But ya, nothing wrong with practice, incorporarating the missions and terrain in your list building, I'm all for that, but last minute changes after seeing all or most of the armies seems, just, wrong.

Zagman wrote:We had diagrams of the terrain setup that told us what to expect. We had mission packets well in advance. I can't really call it list tailoring to any significant degree.

Right except seeing others lists was left out of your criteria there which was my concern.

pizzaguardian wrote:It is also 2 different tournaments. One affecting the other is expected and i can not consider it list tailoring.

Sorry but I don't think you know what tailoring means.

Jpr wrote:Myself and Matt Robertson brought a ton of spare stuff from the UK incase we wanted to change our lists at all after the invitational. We did this because we had no idea what the meta would be like and the terrain compared to the guys who lived nearby who may have seen it before. If we can bring it from the UK then I'm sure the guys from the US could too.

I wouldn't mind having lists locked at the invitational point but for myself anyway it was good fun to try 2 different list styles out. Me changing from screamer star to FMC definitely got me into the top 8, I know Matt found the extra unit of wracks very 'useful' .

This proves my point. My point was that it was a hole that could be gamed. You fellas spotted it and gamed it well. Nothing wrong with that, it was allowed, my question is whether moving forward it should be allowed or not.

Chancetragedy wrote:

Spoiler:

 Red Corsair wrote:

Chancetragedy wrote:
I didn't play in the invitational and did the exact same thing after watching a few invitational and trios games. Why is that a problem?

Well for one its tailoring, which generally people have the view that this is a no no.

Again, not trying to spit in any faces. I just could see how someone not in the trios or invitational, who has spent valued dollars to be in the open would want a fair opportunity across the board. Heck if I were in the invitational and out great time and expense and had a meta buster and then the next morning saw people tailored for it I would be pissed (I live up far up north and can't haul all my crap with me). I'd make the best of it and enjoy myself, but part of me would feel annoyed that some dude with access to his models locally (or fill in whatever reasoning here, borrowing, changing gear etc) had modified his list because he was previewed piece of the meta and the tables.

I would say this would be a great reason for list submission, not necessarily for a check but to keep people locked in once they arrive and start playing.

I may be in the minority, it just seems like another none game-skill based advantage IMHO.

Just genuinely curious how others feel, because it seems like an easy enough fix.

No offense taken but if I can offer a rebuttal to a couple points.

I flew out, did not borrow any models from anyone. When you go to a tournament do you not make a list you think will operate well to the missions and expected meta? Do you consider that unfair tailoring?

The terrain layouts, pictures and missions were available months in advance for anybody to see. But sometimes it's hard to judge from 2 dimensional pictures. So I brought 1 army with a few variant squads and decided to change it up after seeing the size of the terrain. I know I wasn't alone in that so I fail to see how it was unfair to anyone because everyone had the exact same access and availability of everything.

This also proves my point. You said it yourself that the diagrams weren't as useful as seeing the tables in person. So again, it was an advantage then. If it wasn't then why were people changing their armies? My question is should this advantage be available to those with the means to utilize it.

Lets be honest here, its unrealistic and absurd to say that everyone can take advantage of this or even to the same degree. Especially when some people live in the area and can bring an entirely different codex if they felt is was an edge.





I am glad things are moving forward in a positive spirit. Again I am not trying to be an internet dick to anyone so thanks for understanding.

This proves my point. My point was that it was a hole that could be gamed. You fellas spotted it and gamed it well. Nothing wrong with that, it was allowed, my question is whether moving forward it should be allowed or not.

The Invite isn't the same as the Open. People routinely take two different lists to both. It isn't an exploit or a cheat.

32 people play in the Invitational, and most of them know one another. It may be the singular most competitive event out there. To say that those who play in it are "locked" into the same list if they play in the Open is laughable.

Finally, the missions have been out for months. Anyone who has been before knows what to expect terrain-wise. Huzzah Hobbies runs a local monthly event using NOVA format. There are plenty of ways to practice and ready for NOVA. Furthermore, there is open gaming in advance, so everyone has a chance to come ahead of time, get some games in, and change their list.

Let's not make an issue out of nothing here...

 Red Corsair wrote:

This proves my point. My point was that it was a hole that could be gamed. You fellas spotted it and gamed it well. Nothing wrong with that, it was allowed, my question is whether moving forward it should be allowed or not.

*Disclaimer*

Take this with a grain of salt, because I'm removed from 40k for several years, but what I'm about to say at least then held true for myself and my friends:

People tailoring lists has never been a concern, and I've always encouraged people to do it against me. Being at the absolute top of your competitive game means that you're not looking for cheesy exploits, or secret codex tricks - but rather that you want your opponent to have every advantage before the game, with the deck stacked in their favor, so you can truly test your generalship.

Lots of people....lots of "heavy hitters" posted their armies on various blogs and websites before going to the Nova Open, and the same happens every year. You don't have to show up in person and look at the tables to tailor your list. I suspect any "tailoring" is more of a "My Take All Comers (TAC) list hadn't thought about that....I need to add something to be able to deal with it in case I run into it."

Nothing wrong with it. I promise!

 JGrand wrote:

This proves my point. My point was that it was a hole that could be gamed. You fellas spotted it and gamed it well. Nothing wrong with that, it was allowed, my question is whether moving forward it should be allowed or not.

The Invite isn't the same as the Open. People routinely take two different lists to both. It isn't an exploit or a cheat.

32 people play in the Invitational, and most of them know one another. It may be the singular most competitive event out there. To say that those who play in it are "locked" into the same list if they play in the Open is laughable.

Finally, the missions have been out for months. Anyone who has been before knows what to expect terrain-wise. Huzzah Hobbies runs a local monthly event using NOVA format. There are plenty of ways to practice and ready for NOVA. Furthermore, there is open gaming in advance, so everyone has a chance to come ahead of time, get some games in, and change their list.

Let's not make an issue out of nothing here...

What issue?

Sometimes I wonder if people like you read the discussion entirely before they post.

I accused no one of doing anything wrong. Nor did I say they shouldn't have won or anything. I simply asked if it was not in the communities ie NOVA's best interest to prevent people from altering their lists the night before the open after seeing a large portion of the field.

Even MVBrant voiced this as a concern in his eyes if you read back beyond 5-6 posts.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dashofpepper wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

This proves my point. My point was that it was a hole that could be gamed. You fellas spotted it and gamed it well. Nothing wrong with that, it was allowed, my question is whether moving forward it should be allowed or not.

You don't have to show up in person and look at the tables to tailor your list. "

Except there were people who without a doubt changed their lists after seeing the meta in person. I am not pulling this out of the air.

We didn't change our lists because of what was there, just because the terrain was so different to what we were used to in the UK and some rulings that were made in the invitational that affected out armies.

Except there were people who without a doubt changed their lists after seeing the meta in person. I am not pulling this out of the air.

Why does this matter? Every person at the event can watch the invitational and do the same.

But the issue is, someone who makes a greater effort and more invested in research and prep will ALWAYS have an advantage.

Let's say you required lists in a week before the event, no changes. So people can't see the terrain in person or see what people are actually bringing by walking around the night before.

*People who attend terrain building will still have an advantage.
*People who follow the NOVA blog or threads online wills till have an advantage.
*People who play in any pre-tourneys will still have an advantage.
*People who are active in the community and actually are friends with many of the top competitors and know what they are taking because they often blog about it months in advanced will have an advantage.
*People who show up in a group of friends have an advantage by knowing what some of the participants are bringing and pooling knowledge. Apparently all participants need to be sequestered for a month pre-tourney for it to be fair to solo people who don't know anyone at the tourney.

It can get absurd.

There will always be people who have the option to be more invested and say 'that's ok, I am cool with where I am.' There are going to be people who never read the missions or didn't bother to playtest them. There will be people who either are not aware of the FAQ rulings or didn't explicitly build an army around them. There will always be people who don't look at pictures of the terrain setup and terrain. There will be people who play what they have and don't have a backlog to even change their army if they wanted to.

If you move the bar arbitrarily, then people who prep up to that bar will still have an advantage over those who don't prep. As long as the same bar is applied to everyone, what makes it unfair? Claiming travel burdens or 'locals can run home and grab one of 30 armies they have' is disingenuous and sounds like sour grapes. If the bar is 'you need your list locked for game 1', then why is someone who swaps half his army due to terrain or hearing rumblings about a high concentration of Eldar different from someone who swaps his list because it is illegal, or didn't do his research and found out a unit he brought has a unfavorable FAQ ruling? I think it is very reasonable for peopel from the UK who play a totally different 'flavour' of 40k and have no idea what to expect to 'adjust' before the tourney, especially when they are legally allowed to. Why should they show up and a foghorn of sadness plays and says "Screw you! this is the USA now brah! You are stuck with your list, take your USA META beating and enjoy it. This is fair!"

I don't see why altering your list during the months leading up to a particular GT is ok but the days before is 'bad'. If everyone has the same freedom and some people choose to not take advantage, it isn't unfair. I don't see what locking lists in farther in advance accomplishes other than appealing to a small number of vocal 'casuals' who don't want to make the effort to be conscious of the meta and don't want others who are conscious of it to gain an advantage. Moving the 'lock-in' time for lists will simply change how those who 'research and prepare' function and those who don't research and prepare will still get caught with their pants down and cry foul.

And it is usually funny, no one who attends these events seems to have these concerns. Usually people who don't actually attend tourneys seem to be the first to scrutinize cheating or point out inequities. I suspect if they asked participants 'how far in advance should lists be 'locked in', most NOVA participants won't care/know there was even an issue or say 'it is fine how it is now.' You please your participants not the naysayer anonymous internet.

Well I think the point here is that the guys who have to fly can't just bring an entire extra army "just in case" in the same way the locals or even the guys who drive do.

Plus, I think pre event list submissions should be the de-facto standard for tournaments, simply due to how complex army construction is in this edition. I would personally rather have people roaming the tables stopping slow playing and answering rules questions than pouring over army lists while the event is going on.

Except a bunch of us showed that you can do and people have done that phazael...

And how fair is it if there is pre tournament list submission and then guys don't sign up till the day before? Pre tournament list submission works in smaller tournaments it does not work for 200 player GTS.

Army lists should be submitted a month in advanced and checked by the TOs. Tailoring definitely helps a certain percentage.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Army lists should be submitted a month in advanced and checked by the TOs. Tailoring definitely helps a certain percentage.

Why? What is the goal? What problem does it solve? I know the problems it creates and then the endless line of reasonable justifications to need to change your list. As a Modeler/painter, I know I am (and lots of other people) are painting literally up until the night before of the tourney. Many times I know I wasn't going to be able to finish everything so a unit gets dropped and replaced with something else as the deadline approaches. I think the travelers from the UK are a perfect example of why it is legitimate. Telling them to 'Suck Eggs' and lose all day with a month old list built for a different style of play is rude and vindictive. It is good for them to be willing and able to quickly adapt to the differences in styles of event here in the US. Makes it even less valid for other people to claim 'it can't be done' or 'is unfair' when others show it is possible, especially when coming from overseas. There are dozens of valid reasons people can and should be able to change lists before an event starts, I am not sure why adjusting to the Meta or getting in a few practice games before the event shouldn't be one of them.

Making an arbitrary frozen list policy doesn't serve any purpose except to please a couple of casual gamers who feel that they are being wronged somehow because someone else works harder than them in researching the local META, most of which is freely available on the internet months before the event. Those same select people will probably complain that 'those close to the event' saw the lists ahead of time and somehow gained an advantage too. If you move the bar, there will still people who 'worked harder than them to prepare' and those people will still feel cheated and complain.