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.

Good stuff

 Julnlecs wrote:
Aaron Wolfstar vs Matt Root War Convocation in the Finals.

How is Matt on the final table but not on the final 16.

Eric Hoerger and another player dropped before Round 5 and Matt Root was an alternate.

The list might not be completely accurate. Adepticon posts the final results, til then just gotta take the witnesses word for it

Matt Root took out Nick Nanavati in the Semi-Finals.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aaron Aleong wins with Wolfstar Superfriends.

 Julnlecs wrote:
Matt Root took out Nick Nanavati in the Semi-Finals.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Aaron Aleong wins with Wolfstar Superfriends.

Where does it say that?

He told me himself.

winning list, was posted on my club's page. Looks illegal as the sanguinary priest should be 121, but i guess that he removed a piece of wargear and was at 1846.

The winner of adepticon had a illegal list, not only was it over points, but you can't take lone wolfs to fill up the mandatory slots. Also it was made clear that he was ignoring the -2 penalty for charging tru terrain and at one point a t.o call him on it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nautica wrote:
winning list, was posted on my club's page. Looks illegal as the sanguinary priest should be 121, but i guess that he removed a piece of wargear and was at 1846.

he should have been Disqulified, it's not fair to all the players he cheated.

Have got to love this game.

So this could have been an honest mistake in list building, he might not own a paper codex where it clearly says does not take up a force org slot, might have been using army builder or battlescribe and never looked at the what you did wrong notifications.

Really doesn't matter though honest or purposefully done the list is illegal. If Adepticon does nothing then why not take an illegal list to their tournament.

If nothing is done then there is no line in the sand so just expect this to happen if you go.

Why not ignore rules and be a ass during games, there is no way for an opposing playing to do anything, no sportsmanship score to keep people acting polite.

Does anyone know every rule there is by heart, no, so we all make mistakes but there has been never ending drama with winners since we have gone to the winner is the only score.

Hey im not a big fan of sportsmanship since at a Chicago GW GT I beat two Iron Warriors and a blood angel from the same local chicago game club and they all gave me a zero sportsmanship score. They were heard talking about keeping anyone down who beat them.

So me a guy who has won a best sportsmanship trophy with the 3rd highest battle at a GW GT went at another one in Chicago to the second lowest score of the whole tournament.

So yeah I know chipmunks are out there but something has to be done.

Yes I know not everyone who wins or does well is not a rat bastard, but the few bad apples seem to keep popping up.

maybe some kind of mixture of the (ard boy, zero comp, be an ass) environment we have now with the (Bring The Hobby Back) that the Long War keeps talking about.

just my thoughts, but hey maybe GW will swoop in and run tournament again and influence everyone into a golden age .....LOL....

FWIW, ITC, Adepticon, and NOVA all use broad spectrum award and scoring more in line with classic grand tournaments than with ard boyz. Factual $.02

Basically, don't blame everybody because someone made an error or cheated. It's silly. These things happened back in the GW GT days, too, and being a TO of a very big event is much more difficult than sniping at their calls after the fact from the peanut gallery.

MVBrandt wrote:
FWIW, ITC, Adepticon, and NOVA all use broad spectrum award and scoring more in line with classic grand tournaments than with ard boyz. Factual $.02

Basically, don't blame everybody because someone made an error or cheated. It's silly. These things happened back in the GW GT days, too, and being a TO of a very big event is much more difficult than sniping at their calls after the fact from the peanut gallery.

while I understand being a t.o is a thankless job. Cheating is cheating and if t.o's don't do something about it then it will just lead to more people cheating at events. I don't blame the t.o's for not catching it right away but once they were told and reaslized he was cheating he should have been taking out of the top 16, it's not fair to those people that played by the rules

MVBrandt wrote:
FWIW, ITC, Adepticon, and NOVA all use broad spectrum award and scoring more in line with classic grand tournaments than with ard boyz. Factual $.02

Basically, don't blame everybody because someone made an error or cheated. It's silly. These things happened back in the GW GT days, too, and being a TO of a very big event is much more difficult than sniping at their calls after the fact from the peanut gallery.

This was not a snipe at them Brant, I'm sure they have already dealt with 100 fires already, this was a question at what is going to happen if a person has a clearly illegal list for what ever reason. (Maybe he dosnt have a calculater to add for him) that was not have not fulfilled his force org.

If they do nothing why not take a unbound list next year and when confronted, if ever , just say SO WHAT??? Or also bring a another list that is within the rules and go MY BAD I will use the legal one now.

ITC , NOVA and Adepticon do have a broad spectrum of awards they give out for Catagorys
But for deciding who WINS it is all battle , win loss style. $.02

I am not saying the old GW tournaments were perfect , they were very fluff heavy but we need something to keep people acting like friendly human beings and not have to question every single rule and thing they do.

And yes I know there were people notorious back in the day for trying to cheat you but maybe something can be done.

I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

while I agree with how the judges ruled it and In the end it's up to the T.O's to make the call. Lists should be summited for the top 16 players to be reviewed. Because while he played minus a model (granted a good model) it dosent change the fact that until it was found out he was benefiting from a illegal army list. Take away that model first game and I bet you he dosent make the top 16. Not to meantion he was ignoring the -2 penalty for charging thru cover pretty much the whole event until a t.o called him on it. We all spend lots of time bulding lists and I'd even goes as so far as to say that we spend more time list bulding then we do playing, top table players should know there rules and have legal lists, to say it wasent malicious I think it's wrong, it's not a rule you can just miss, he new and tried to get away with it (speculation) at the end of the day his win is void as far as I'm concerned (not that it matters what I think) and he should send out a apology to all the players that he cheated.

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?

skarsol wrote:

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?

First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?

Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.

The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.

 jy2 wrote:

skarsol wrote:

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?

First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?

Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.

The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.

if a T.o. Calls you on something you must be clearly cheating. Second he was using 1pt to many and that in its self is cheating. so idk how you can defend that. He cheated and people know he was cheating, he has no credibility anymore and if I were him I'd give up the award. He cheated players plain and simple

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

LOL........(You can take one lone Wolf for each troops choice or unit of wolf guard or wolf guard terminators in your army. This selection does not use up a force organization slot. So are you saying his DA and white scar troop choice met the troop choice requirement....totally different detachment...wow.....still does not use up a slot.

So he got an e-mail that is not in the FAQ giving him permission to ignore the rules.....that nobody else knows about....that seems FAIR!!!!! So your saying he got explicit permission, so maybe next year there could be an email saying he could play unbound or at an extra 1,000 points.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running. Did that claw kill anything in the previous games?

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event. So if I brought an extra land raider all I would have to do is not use it when the mistake is found?

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event. has it ever been done?

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

 Matthias wrote:
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

I'm not sure how the Lone Wolf issue is debatable or vague. This rule itself in the codex couldn't be more clear and straight forward. If Adepticon created a rule stating that a Lone Wolf does take up a FOC slot, the issue still remains that there is no troop, Wolf Guard, or Wolf Guard Terminator unit in the army needed to satisfy the Lone Wolf entry. Another concern is how does Adepticon create a rule against what the codex states and not let any of the other participants know about it except the "said" player. Not publishing changes to rules due to time constraints or what have you is simply not acceptable. A lot of time, money, and effort is spent to attend events like Adepticon, the least Adepticon can do is make the rules as transparent as possible so it levels the playing field for everyone.

 jy2 wrote:

skarsol wrote:

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?

First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?

Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.

The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.

Model positioning can't mitigate the -2. From page 47: "If, when charging, one or more models have to move through difficult terrain in order to reach the enemy by the shortest possible route, the entire UNIT must subtract 2 from its dice roll when determining its charge range." That said, I wasn't there and cannot determine intent/degree of malice so I won't speculate as to the appropriateness of the TOs actions. I will simply assume they were made with good faith.

PanzerLeader wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

skarsol wrote:

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?

First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?

Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.

The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.

Model positioning can't mitigate the -2. From page 47: "If, when charging, one or more models have to move through difficult terrain in order to reach the enemy by the shortest possible route, the entire UNIT must subtract 2 from its dice roll when determining its charge range." That said, I wasn't there and cannot determine intent/degree of malice so I won't speculate as to the appropriateness of the TOs actions. I will simply assume they were made with good faith.

Right, but those models - bikes and cavalry - ignore the -2" penalty (and technically, it is a unit of bikes because of the Command Squad). So if you can position the unit such that the non-bike/cavalry models do not have to move through terrain when charging the target, then the entire unit doesn't suffer the penalty. However, if the foot-models do have to traverse through terrain, then the unit will suffer the penalty.

Exactly right on model positioning. If the model that is penalized for moving terrain does not in fact move through terrain, you're set. This happens with mixed unit types more than you might think

40kmaster1 wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

skarsol wrote:

 Matthias wrote:
I am not involved in the 40K events this year (first time in 14 years) aside from software support, but I can shed a little light on the situation as I understand it. The TOs are too busy of course to even look at this thread, but these responses are more or less relayed from them.

Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

Aaron's List: This list was 1 point over as he did not purchase the bolt pistol on the Sang Priest which would have allowed him to swap it out for Lightning Claw he was running.

Our Conduct Policy (same policy AdeptiCon states: If a player’s list is found to contain illegal units or any other rules violation, at a minimum, the models in violation will be removed from all subsequent play. If a list is found to exceed the event’s intended point value, the player will be required to remove an ENTIRE UNIT from all subsequent play in order to bring the list back within the confines of the event.

In all cases, the tournament organizers reserve the right to nullify any game outcome resulting from illegal play. Repeated abuse of the rules will result in expulsion from the event.

The judges felt this error was not malicious and chose to follow the conduct policy. Aaron played his remaining games 120 points down without the Sang Priest.

What about ignoring the -2 charge range through cover in an army whose whole schtick is to multicharge?

First of all, getting a rule wrong is not cause for disciplinary action unless he still does it despite being told otherwise. Everyone makes mistakes. The difference here is intent. Was it malicious and can it be proven?

Secondly, bikes and cavalry don't take the -2 charge penalty. Instead, they just take dangerous terrain tests instead unless they have Skilled Rider (which I believe White Scars and Black Knights do). Unless the foot Libbies are with the unit and they are the ones who have to traverse through terrain. Then again, oftentimes, an experienced general will position them such that they can try to avoid moving through terrain when making the charge.

The thing is, when the TO "corrected" him, did he do it again intentionally? If not, then there really isn't grounds to call him a cheater based on getting 1 rule wrong.

if a T.o. Calls you on something you must be clearly cheating. Second he was using 1pt to many and that in its self is cheating. so idk how you can defend that. He cheated and people know he was cheating, he has no credibility anymore and if I were him I'd give up the award. He cheated players plain and simple

Then why did the TO not just disqualify the guy if the TO felt that he was cheating? It isn't so black-and-white because if it was, then we'd all be cheaters in the game, unless you mean to tell me that you have never, ever gotten a rule in the game wrong before?

Bottom-line is the organization was there and they made the call. They then punished him as they felt was appropriate. Whether you thought he cheated or not is irrelevant.

@jy2: It's the opposite man. Any model that touches the terrain triggers the -2 for the unit. If even a single model cannot ignore the -2, the entire unit suffers the penalty. Whether the foot models touch terrain is functionally irrelevant. Their presence alone removes the advantage normally gained by the cavalry/bike models because charge distance is determined by unit, not by model.

PanzerLeader wrote:
@jy2: It's the opposite man. Any model that touches the terrain triggers the -2 for the unit. If even a single model cannot ignore the -2, the entire unit suffers the penalty. Whether the foot models touch terrain is functionally irrelevant. Their presence alone removes the advantage normally gained by the cavalry/bike models because charge distance is determined by unit, not by model.

I'll research this some more when I get home later.

 NotThisTime wrote:

 Matthias wrote:
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

I'm not sure how the Lone Wolf issue is debatable or vague. This rule itself in the codex couldn't be more clear and straight forward. If Adepticon created a rule stating that a Lone Wolf does take up a FOC slot, the issue still remains that there is no troop, Wolf Guard, or Wolf Guard Terminator unit in the army needed to satisfy the Lone Wolf entry.

ILLEGAL LIST

But I will bet dollars to donuts that they do nothing (JELLYFISH SPINE) .........................................................................or it was a hook up, never see that in Chicago!!!!!!!!!

 NotThisTime wrote:

 Matthias wrote:
Lone Wolf Issue: Whether or not the Lone Wolf can be taken as a stand alone elite slot without the requisite units is debatable/vague. We made a ruling for the very similar Court of the Archon that that unit could act as the stand alone Force Org slot. We answered several emails that we would interpret the Lone Wolf the same way but we're not able to publish the interpretation. But what we did is consistent with what we published and Aaron received explicit permission to do it before the event.

I'm not sure how the Lone Wolf issue is debatable or vague. This rule itself in the codex couldn't be more clear and straight forward. If Adepticon created a rule stating that a Lone Wolf does take up a FOC slot, the issue still remains that there is no troop, Wolf Guard, or Wolf Guard Terminator unit in the army needed to satisfy the Lone Wolf entry. Another concern is how does Adepticon create a rule against what the codex states and not let any of the other participants know about it except the "said" player. Not publishing changes to rules due to time constraints or what have you is simply not acceptable. A lot of time, money, and effort is spent to attend events like Adepticon, the least Adepticon can do is make the rules as transparent as possible so it levels the playing field for everyone.

There are troops in the army. The rules for the Lone Wolf does not say that the troop has to be from the Space Wolf detachment. It doesn't even have to be a troop from the SW codex. It just has to be a troop in the army. I know that's a technicality, but the RAW is correct, even if the RAI probably isn't.

As for the 2nd part of your comments, there is just too much source material out there that no one will ever know everything exactly. No one can also account for all the rules interactions for all combinations as well. TO's will address/FAQ probably the most common/frequent questions that come up, but on the back end, there are 100's and 100's of lesser questions that most people don't know to even ask simply because they don't know armies other than their own. It's quite common and ironically, the larger the tournament, the longer and harder it becomes for TO's to address these issues. Rather, they do quick replies to people's queries just so that those people can prepare their armies for the tournament. Transparency will always be an issue because TO's simply do not have the time and resources to address every single concern that is asked of them. For example, the TO may address the Piranha Firestream rules in a FAQ (or publicly) because probably 1000's of people ask them the same question over and over, but to the 1 guy out of 10,000 who asks about Lone Wolves filling up an Elite slot, it becomes much easier for the TO to simply answer his email/question directly. In such a large tournament, you need to take responsibility for your own army. If you have a question about your army, you better ask (and ask again if you don't get a response) the TO. DO NOT expect the TO's to address the millions and miliions of rules permutations/list building combinations by him/themselves. NO ONE has the time to do that.

This means I can bring servitors to fill the elite tax for CoTGW Det base on how Adapticon rule it while having IP as hq

 jy2 wrote:
There are troops in the army. The rules for the Lone Wolf does not say that the troop has to be from the Space Wolf detachment. It doesn't even have to be a troop from the SW codex. It just has to be a troop in the army. I know that's a technicality, but the RAW is correct, even if the RAI probably isn't.

Wow jy2, that's a bit of a stretch even for you as two of the three unit choices are Wolves. Assuming Troops could be taken from another codex to satisfy the rule leaves me at a loss for words. The list is illegal and Adepticon compounded the issue by not posting to the masses there intent on the rule. And that cannot be debated.

 jy2 wrote:
As for the 2nd part of your comments, there is just too much source material out there that no one will ever know everything exactly. No one can also account for all the rules interactions for all combinations as well. TO's will address/FAQ probably the most common/frequent questions that come up, but on the back end, there are 100's and 100's of lesser questions that most people don't know to even ask simply because they don't know armies other than their own. It's quite common and ironically, the larger the tournament, the longer and harder it becomes for TO's to address these issues. Rather, they do quick replies to people's queries just so that those people can prepare their armies for the tournament. Transparency will always be an issue because TO's simply do not have the time and resources to address every single concern that is asked of them. For example, the TO may address the Piranha Firestream rules in a FAQ (or publicly) because probably 1000's of people ask them the same question over and over, but to the 1 guy out of 10,000 who asks about Lone Wolves filling up an Elite slot, it becomes much easier for the TO to simply answer his email/question directly. In such a large tournament, you need to take responsibility for your own army. If you have a question about your army, you better ask (and ask again if you don't get a response) the TO. DO NOT expect the TO's to address the millions and miliions of rules permutations/list building combinations by him/themselves. NO ONE has the time to do that.

I agree with you but in this case we are talking about the basics of army list construction, not the interaction of game play between units/models. Before anyone rolls a single die in a tournament, the guidelines for how all armies are to be constructed should be as transparent as glass. If your telling me when can't that right than what's the point.