July 28, 2024, 01:18:05 PM

Author Topic: Adepticon Announcement  (Read 33536 times)

Offline afterimagedan

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1902
    • Loc: Chicago IL, USA
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #45 on: December 23, 2013, 09:38:17 PM »
The problem is going to be for fleets who only have allies that are all orange and some other fleets have lots of green. So, if you take IN, you have the option for the least punished option, which would be SM, Admech, or Rogue Trader. Tyranids, Necrons, and Chaos will enter the tournament at a disadvantage because they have no green. The only way around this, from what I can tell, is to allow you to take an ally of your own fleet type but still make it so it has its own fleet list.

Offline RaptorEvolved

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Into the fires of battle, unto the anvil of war!
    • Loc: Chicago
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #46 on: December 23, 2013, 09:43:00 PM »
thats right what Dan said, wre finishing the packets, and follow up ruleset, and allies matrix, unfortunately it's the same thing that happens with 40k 6th ed
If I do kill you, it'll be from the front, and you'll be armed.
-Malcolm Reynolds

Offline Islacrusez

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 349
    • Loc: Plymouth, United Kingdom
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #47 on: December 24, 2013, 12:02:20 AM »
Mind if I take a crack at it? There's probably going to be some objectionable "trusted" allies, and probably an asymmetric pattern; but it might come out a bit more even (if that's the desired outcome?).
Quite crucial to be able to tell minefields and rally points apart...

Offline lordgoober

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 151
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #48 on: December 24, 2013, 12:43:56 AM »
go ahead.  while we're adding new things to this year,  on the fleet design side,  it's better if people will enjoy what we're doing.  I'd like to see your idea.

Offline Islacrusez

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 349
    • Loc: Plymouth, United Kingdom
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #49 on: December 24, 2013, 01:00:40 AM »
I'll give it a go...

Definitions:
Disallowed - Simply not allowed, reserved purely for same-fleet allies.
Trusted - People who might get along by choice when pressed
Necessity - Either given their marching orders, or under the understanding that they'll get back to killing each other afterwards
Distrust - Ongoing concern about "friendly" fire, suspicious "weapon systems failures" and conspicuous absence in battle
Hostile - Shoot first, shoot some more; don't leave anyone alive to ask questions.

Disallowed:
You cannot take allies from your own type, ie IN/IN, Chaos/Chaos etc

Trusted zone:
Admech: Imperial Navy, Space Marines
Chaos: Ork, Eldar
Dark Eldar: Eldar, Rogue Trader
Eldar: Dark Eldar, Rogue Trader
Inquisition: Imperial Navy
Imperial Navy: Space Marines, Admech
Necrons: Admech, Chaos
Orks: Chaos, Imperial Navy
Rogue Trader: Inquisition
Space Marine: Admech
Tau: Rogue Trader
Tyranids: Necrons

Allies by necessity:
Admech: Imperial Navy, Space Marines, Inquisition
Chaos: Ork, Eldar, Tau,
Dark Eldar: Eldar, Rogue Trader
Eldar: Dark Eldar, Rogue Trader, Chaos
Inquisition: Imperial Navy, Space Marines, Admech
Imperial Navy: Space Marines, Admech, Inquisition, Rogue Trader
Necrons: Admech, Chaos, Inquisition
Orks: Chaos, Imperial Navy, Rogue Trader
Rogue Trader: Inquisition, Imperial Navy
Space Marine: Admech, Imperial Navy, Inquisiton
Tau: Rogue Trader, Eldar
Tyranids: Necrons, Chaos

Distrusted:
Admech: Imperial Navy, Space Marines, Inquisition, Rogue Trader, Tau
Chaos: Ork, Eldar, Tau, Imperial Navy
Dark Eldar: Eldar, Rogue Trader, Chaos, Tau
Eldar: Dark Eldar, Rogue Trader, Chaos, Tau
Inquisition: Imperial Navy, Space Marines, Admech, Rogue Trader
Imperial Navy: Space Marines, Admech, Inquisition, Rogue Trader, Chaos
Necrons: Admech, Chaos, Inquisition, Imperial Navy
Orks: Chaos, Imperial Navy, Rogue Trader, Space Marines
Rogue Trader: Inquisition, Imperial Navy, Space Marines
Space Marine: Admech, Imperial Navy, Inquisiton, Rogue Trader
Tau: Rogue Trader, Eldar, Imperial Navy
Tyranids: Necrons, Chaos, Orks

Anything left is hostile.

If anyone wants to throw that into a chart like the previous one, that'd be amazing as it would give much better oversight over who has what allies and if anyone has too few or too many.

This list has been compiled mostly thematically. Some of the allies are only one-way, representing people you're willing to assist because you can stab them in the back later, but you'd not want them covering your rear, or largely where the Imperium is concerned, you've been ordered to assist them but would not trust them yourself.

Tyranids have gained some friends, though they only just about trust the Necrons because they've figured out they're not very tasty... However, nobody trusts them, so nobody gets them as allies.

Some people (especially Orks and IN) have allies through respect earned by fighting each other (a bit like Commissar Yarrick).

Obviously open to suggestions, and I'd be happy for a table to be based off this lot. The trusted allies were largely the core of the idea (some of them were made up on the fly), but most of the other grades of ally were made up on the fly.
Quite crucial to be able to tell minefields and rally points apart...

Offline unseelied

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 99
    • Loc: Levittown, PA 19057 USA
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #50 on: December 24, 2013, 04:51:00 AM »
Another point to keep in mind is 250pts of anything really isn't that scary so the advantages of say an imperial fleet with allies over a nid one aren't going to be world shaking as long as the nids can get at least something to ally with.  Its basicly going to be one squadron of escorts or a cruiser.

I think having yourself as an ally is something to be looked into as a possible thing.  Especially if it is a separate fleet and doens't open the doors to extra battlecruisers or something.  Maybe the nids could get a vanguard fleet contingent that doesn't listen to the hive ships but runs with those rules instead. 

On the other side of the coin why can't the nids be best buds with IN?  Maybe the officer corps is part of the cult.  Maybe the whole fleet is part of the cult.  Maybe chaos could get a flotilla that follows a different god.  There are what something like six chaos lists now.  I think the fluff can be reasonablly stretched so that everyone can get at least one best buddy even if it is a fringe group of themselves. 

Offline lordgoober

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 151
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #51 on: December 24, 2013, 05:57:16 AM »
Point on the Vanguard fleet with the Tyranids. 

Offline RaptorEvolved

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Into the fires of battle, unto the anvil of war!
    • Loc: Chicago
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #52 on: December 24, 2013, 09:44:52 PM »
Unseelied, and Isla I like this alot, we'll be modified a couple thing and the vanguard nid thing is great I agree that each fleet should have at least 1 trusted. we'll get on it, update to follow shortly
If I do kill you, it'll be from the front, and you'll be armed.
-Malcolm Reynolds

Offline unseelied

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 99
    • Loc: Levittown, PA 19057 USA
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #53 on: December 25, 2013, 02:59:44 PM »
I wanted to ask, since I've got the adepticon guys on this thread, what is the adepticon policy for proxy armies at the BFG tourney?  Now that GW has stopped producing models for BFG will you allow in say counts as firestorm armada fleets?  What is legal and what is not?  Thanks.

Offline lordgoober

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 151
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #54 on: December 25, 2013, 04:37:08 PM »
That is something we are going to be discussing as time goes on.  The simple answer I can give right now is as long as it's in relative close scale to BFG and you clearly identify what ship class it is supposed to represent and it's fairly close in size and weaponry where applicable to what it represents (IE you can't use a battleship size fig from another company to represent an escort) it is going to be legal.

Offline Seahawk

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 446
  • Bombardment!
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #55 on: December 27, 2013, 11:19:18 PM »
Goober, I was mainly referring to Andrew's list. Also, what about my earlier comment?
Andrew me, or Andrew someone else?

Also, no SM and Chaos? The Red Corsairs have modern marine vessels alongside their other stuff. Also, is Acon sticking to BFG + FAQ like every year? (pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease)
« Last Edit: December 27, 2013, 11:20:53 PM by Seahawk »

Offline lordgoober

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 151
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #56 on: December 27, 2013, 11:51:47 PM »
Yes.  for this year at least we are at BFG + FAQ like years past.  Whether we switch to BFG:R in the future or not is something we'll probably discuss at the event itself.

Offline Seahawk

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 446
  • Bombardment!
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #57 on: December 28, 2013, 09:54:16 PM »
I'd rather continue with standard instead of fan-made, but that's just me! :D

Offline unseelied

  • Active Member
  • *
  • Posts: 99
    • Loc: Levittown, PA 19057 USA
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #58 on: December 28, 2013, 11:32:42 PM »
I'd have to agree.  Standard is better than fan-made in my book also.   I was under the impression it wasn't actually finished yet anyway.(I could be wrong as I am not really following it)  The only reason I can think of for Adepticon to move to it would be if the majority of players who are coming to adepticon are using it.  No one around my part of the earth is using it but I don't know what the BFG scene around chicago is like. 

Offline horizon

  • Moderator
  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 4197
  • Destiny Infinity Eternity
Re: Adepticon Announcement
« Reply #59 on: December 29, 2013, 09:25:35 AM »
Revised is indeed not finished yet. So sticking to official rules plus (never made official ;) ) FAQ is the best thing to do.
To me it is a pity because that means the game uses those daft overlapping rules + the not 1.0 blastmarker rules + rhe broken ;) Eldar rules (heh heh).