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.

It would be nice in the future if Reecius does not modify rules. I remember him saying how overpowered is Invisibility and there seemed to be some hate directed towards deathstars. I would prefer not to see ranged D allowed either... how can that be any fun to play against - only people that brought the Lynx defended it with wishy washy excuses .

See? Case and point haha

To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.
honestly how many blast weapons/templates with skyfire actually exist?

gungo wrote:
To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.
honestly how many blast weapons/templates with skyfire actually exist?

All the ones sitting on a skyfire nexus

 Blackmoor wrote:


Again, FMC=Automatic Invisibility so why allow one, and not the other?

Only if you let Invisibility be hit at full BS by skyfire and forbid invisible units from charging.

I think I head LVO has a exit poll , do they publish the results of that?

gungo wrote:
To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.

7th edition killed Seer Council, not the LVO nerf.

The fact that Seer Council won last year, and they have not been a factor at any other major GT that does not even have the nerfed 2++ after 7th edition dropped seems to be evidence enough. You cannot build an army around unreliable psychic powers. Do you know what you can build an army around? FMC and Wave Serpents.

 z3n1st wrote:

gungo wrote:
To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.
honestly how many blast weapons/templates with skyfire actually exist?

All the ones sitting on a skyfire nexus

Again mobile blast weapons holding a mysterious objectives are hardly common site regardless.

 Tyran wrote:

 Blackmoor wrote:


Again, FMC=Automatic Invisibility so why allow one, and not the other?

Only if you let Invisibility be hit at full BS by skyfire and forbid invisible units from charging.

Sure, if you then make it so you automatically cast invisibility then you have a deal!

 Blackmoor wrote:

gungo wrote:
To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.

7th edition killed Seer Council, not the LVO nerf.

The fact that Seer Council won last year, and they have not been a factor at any other major GT that does not even have the nerfed 2++ after 7th edition dropped seems to be evidence enough. You cannot build an army around unreliable psychic powers. Do you know what you can build an army around? FMC and Wave Serpents.

Afaik seer council didn't own the 2+ rerollable save.

gungo wrote:
To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.
honestly how many blast weapons/templates with skyfire actually exist?

Riptides and Doomscythes mostly. But more importantly, blasts scattering onto FMCs and clipping them with templates while shooting at other units.

gungo wrote:

 Blackmoor wrote:

gungo wrote:
To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.

7th edition killed Seer Council, not the LVO nerf.

The fact that Seer Council won last year, and they have not been a factor at any other major GT that does not even have the nerfed 2++ after 7th edition dropped seems to be evidence enough. You cannot build an army around unreliable psychic powers. Do you know what you can build an army around? FMC and Wave Serpents.

Afaik seer council didn't own the 2+ rerollable save.

The Sceamerstar died way earlier. The fact that it does not have hit and run means that it was a gimmick list that had a lifespan of a few months.

So who is suggesting the ban on FMC ?

 Blackmoor wrote:
The Sceamerstar died way earlier. The fact that it does not have hit and run means that it was a gimmick list that had a lifespan of a few months.

Go play Nick Nanavati and come back and say that with a straight face.

 silveryfox wrote:
Really liked being able to watch the finals from home here in Sweden. Hope more tournaments will provide that!

Great seeing iNcontroL too, always in need of more channels to stalk that guy.

This was an awesome post

Are the streams going to be uploaded for viewing later, or have they already?

 RiTides wrote:

 silveryfox wrote:
Really liked being able to watch the finals from home here in Sweden. Hope more tournaments will provide that!

Great seeing iNcontroL too, always in need of more channels to stalk that guy.

This was an awesome post

Are the streams going to be uploaded for viewing later, or have they already?

http://www.twitch.tv/frontlinegaming_tv/profile/past_broadcasts

I dunno if there is "proper" uploads on youtube.

Nick plays DroneStar now not ScreamerStar. Blackmoor is relevant.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Nick plays DroneStar now not ScreamerStar. Blackmoor is relevant.

Point very well taken!

Although I wouldn't necessarily characterize it as either -- but then I shouldn't speak on his behalf, so to speak!

The Seer Council that won last year was played by Alex Fennel.

The 2+ screamer was played by Nick N.

Put those list in a less experienced player and see the results.

Now put less experienced players list in Alex or Nicks hands and watch it become the next big sensation.

You can not claim things are over powered when only referencing the utilization of extremely talented players.

Tsilber wrote:
The Seer Council that won last year was played by Alex Fennel.

The 2+ screamer was played by Nick N.

Put those list in a less experienced player and see the results.

Now put less experienced players list in Alex or Nicks hands and watch it become the next big sensation.

You can not claim things are over powered when only referencing the utilization of extremely talented players.

Also a very valid point! However, I do think that people are too quick to underestimate the remaining strength of the Chaos Daemons. Full disclosure, I do not play Chaos Daemons.

Oh Deamons are very good, heard they won a GT recently.... Even without Fateweaver or Bel Akor. Or a 2++ screamer star.

 Blackmoor wrote:

gungo wrote:
To be fair I really think the rules changes to invis and 2++ helped diversify the tournament. However I think the rule regarding blasts with skyfire and flying monstrous creatures hurt the diversity.
LVO was favored to fmc because of this. Great event regardless.

7th edition killed Seer Council, not the LVO nerf.

The fact that Seer Council won last year, and they have not been a factor at any other major GT that does not even have the nerfed 2++ after 7th edition dropped seems to be evidence enough. You cannot build an army around unreliable psychic powers. Do you know what you can build an army around? FMC and Wave Serpents.

TBF, it is a lot harder to correct for GW's poor rules writing by modifying core units in an army book than it is to very slightly nerf random powers that effect everyone. As you say, psychic powers are already random rolls and you run a very large risk in relying heavily on them. However, certain armies can reasonably guarantee getting at least one power of their choosing through several routes (multiple psychers, high ML psychers, special characters that can pick powers, etc.), and 99/100 you'll go with invis. Invisibility has the ability to make very questionable units into rock stars, and you'd be a fool to not take it if it's available. The fact that every army wasn't some version of Flyrant spam/Centurion star is a testament to the balance these rules decisions have made in the game. The invis nerf helped to diversify the field, by addressing one of the more dominant builds in the game currently (centurion star).

Now, the rules didn't address FMCs, or WS's. But what do you want to have happen here? With one, GW made a bad codex. Instead of trying to spend the time and fix it with reasonable updates, they just said "Here ya go, spam the one good unit and be happy". In the other, they just made a core unit ridiculously good for the points. FLG's rules set is designed to help normalize a game that GW has obviously no interest in balancing, in order to make a competitive format possible. Is it really their fault that GW has no idea how much better a Toughness/Wounds value is than an equivalent AV? Or that snap-firing isn't that much of a deterrent when you can twinlink all your weapons anyway?

I'm really not sure what the argument is here. If you are pointing out that something needs to be done to address WS's and FMC's in addition to invis and re-rolls since FLG is already modifying rules, then that's a valid concern. I'm sure the rulings were made in order to be as conservative as possible by affecting all armies equally, which you can only do by modifying the core rules. As the FAQ's are an iterative process, pointing out weaknesses in the rule set that needs to be addressed in the future is great. However if the argument is that no rules should be bothered to be changed since changing them favors certain armies over certain others, no dice. The game is simply unplayable in a tournament setting if not modified, and the field would be incredibly bland and uninteresting w/out trying to balance certain broken units/items/builds. First and foremost, FLG is in the business of running an entertaining event that that earns them a buck. Attempting to level the playing field to encourage more people to attend their events w/out worrying about being curb-stomped by the FoTM power build in the first round is in their best interest.

Having seen the current itteration of rules in effect, I'm sure there will be talk of what to do about Flyrant spam. For instance I'm going to guess the very conservative decision on how to interpret blasts interacting with FMCs was made prior to Leviathan, when FMC spam was an oddity not the norm. Now that Flyrant spam is a thing, it absolutely needs to be addressed in some manner for next year (I honestly don't see GW releasing an uber AA unit, or other rule that makes cheap FMC spam a bad idea). But walking the line between fixing lazy rules writing and persecuting a codex is something that would take several months. In all fairness, I do believe there simply wasn't enough time to really think through a fix and play test it prior to such a huge event.

 Dash2021 wrote:

TBF, it is a lot harder to correct for GW's poor rules writing by modifying core units in an army book than it is to very slightly nerf random powers that effect everyone. As you say, psychic powers are already random rolls and you run a very large risk in relying heavily on them. However, certain armies can reasonably guarantee getting at least one power of their choosing through several routes (multiple psychers, high ML psychers, special characters that can pick powers, etc.), and 99/100 you'll go with invis. Invisibility has the ability to make very questionable units into rock stars, and you'd be a fool to not take it if it's available. The fact that every army wasn't some version of Flyrant spam/Centurion star is a testament to the balance these rules decisions have made in the game. The invis nerf helped to diversify the field, by addressing one of the more dominant builds in the game currently (centurion star).

My question to you is why have we not seen invisibility dominate tournaments? If what you say is true, and invisibility is over the top powerful, then why have we not seen the results of this?

This thread has quickly dissolved.

 Byte wrote:
This thread has quickly dissolved.

sadly I agree - it is a shame since I was enjoying the original conversation about tournaments.

I will contact a mod I think.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Dash2021 wrote:

TBF, it is a lot harder to correct for GW's poor rules writing by modifying core units in an army book than it is to very slightly nerf random powers that effect everyone. As you say, psychic powers are already random rolls and you run a very large risk in relying heavily on them. However, certain armies can reasonably guarantee getting at least one power of their choosing through several routes (multiple psychers, high ML psychers, special characters that can pick powers, etc.), and 99/100 you'll go with invis. Invisibility has the ability to make very questionable units into rock stars, and you'd be a fool to not take it if it's available. The fact that every army wasn't some version of Flyrant spam/Centurion star is a testament to the balance these rules decisions have made in the game. The invis nerf helped to diversify the field, by addressing one of the more dominant builds in the game currently (centurion star).

My question to you is why have we not seen invisibility dominate tournaments? If what you say is true, and invisibility is over the top powerful, then why have we not seen the results of this?

Reece's answer is that it's not actually about what's dominating tournaments, it's about what people have fun playing against. The players attending the LVO voted and spoke. There are plenty of internet experts who will talk about how "their poll questions were poorly worded which skewed the results" or "they missed other equally unfun problems", but at the end of the day, I didn't meet a single person at the LVO who didn't have an absolute blast. Turns out the debate on banning or not banning something like Invisibility really isn't important to running a good tournament.

 Brothererekose wrote:

Warmonger2757 wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:
Still looking to find out who got Best Paint and such. Anyone got a link?

I *did* watch the twitch feed, but missed them when I went AFK during the boring parts where names were announced, and then Reece shrugged and placed the paper on the table.

Israel's Tau got the top army. I don't have a link but I was there when he got the award. His Tau were gorgeous.

I saw it & took pix. Damn near perfect.

I kibbitzed with Israel as he showed me his earth and water caste models like a proud poppa. I plan to use the 'between armor plates lighting' element he had on some crisis suits. I even had cheek enough to suggest one of the mechanics have a hood open on the tetra in the garage bay, up to his elbows.

Here's that repair been scene:




Tch, shook the camera a bit.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Dash2021 wrote:

TBF, it is a lot harder to correct for GW's poor rules writing by modifying core units in an army book than it is to very slightly nerf random powers that effect everyone. As you say, psychic powers are already random rolls and you run a very large risk in relying heavily on them. However, certain armies can reasonably guarantee getting at least one power of their choosing through several routes (multiple psychers, high ML psychers, special characters that can pick powers, etc.), and 99/100 you'll go with invis. Invisibility has the ability to make very questionable units into rock stars, and you'd be a fool to not take it if it's available. The fact that every army wasn't some version of Flyrant spam/Centurion star is a testament to the balance these rules decisions have made in the game. The invis nerf helped to diversify the field, by addressing one of the more dominant builds in the game currently (centurion star).

My question to you is why have we not seen invisibility dominate tournaments? If what you say is true, and invisibility is over the top powerful, then why have we not seen the results of this?

DarkLink pretty well hit it on the head. It's really nothing to do with "is it OTT, game breaking and absolute win button". . The question really is, is it fun to play against a unit you can quite literally shoot your entire army at every turn of the game and not kill? 2++ and FMC (specifically Flyrant) spam isn't any different. The inclusion of more powerful LOW (Lynx) was a direct result of attempting to address things like AdLance. Turns out they traded one monster for another, but I'm going to guess Lynx won't be asked back to play next year either. As I stated before, the FLG guys are out to make a living and making the game both competitive and fun is the best way for them to drive people through the doors.

Also, I do think you are being a little disingenuous with the assumption that since Invis stars aren't winning every single GT that it's not that powerful. Firstly, the top table certainly did have an invis star on it. Secondly, if you look at Invis star's representation at events I think you'll find it to be an extremely common list theme. As a side note, Seer Council is still very doable under the ITC format which allows self allying, and yet it wasn't a player this year.

But, again, I think the more important point is whether it's interesting to play against. There were 240 people at that event that didn't make it to the 3rd day, FLG has a much larger burden of responsibility to them than to the 8 or so guys who would have showed up and played regardless of whatever rule set they set forth. They are the ones who voted to nerf invis,, and from all accounts very few that were present regretted that decision. If the rule for the tourney was that on day 3 you had to wear hot pink tube tops, a thong, and crocs the guys at the top tables would have still showed up, and used the thong rule to their advantage as much as it was possible. The rest spend a lot of money to show up and have fun, knowing they're as likely to win the lottery as actually make it to day 3. All they ask is to have fun, and clearly those people don't think shooting your entire army at a squad and doing one wound is fun. Playing against Flyrant spam isn't either, so I expect some effort to curb that next year as well. And I'm sure it'll open some exploitable loop hole that'll subsequently have to be quashed, but every change is an experiment and some experiments fail. You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Blackmoor wrote:


Again, FMC=Automatic Invisibility so why allow one, and not the other?

Only if you let Invisibility be hit at full BS by skyfire and forbid invisible units from charging.

Sure, if you then make it so you automatically cast invisibility then you have a deal!

At 2 WC it isn't that hard to cast, at least no for heavy psyker armies.

So has anyone gotten a hold of Brandon Grant's Dark Angel list that took 12th this year?