Adepticon Announcement

[lordgoober]

actually seahawk,  if you could tweak your chart just slightly,  to allow Tyranids to take as desperate allies non Tyranid ships, we'll probably steal your chart (actually I had asked Raptor to take your chart and add a couple of our tweaks to it but he used our original chart instead )

[horizon]

Did any actually look at allies bit in the FAQ 2010?

I mean... the FAQ is being used at Adepticon. 

[unseelied]

This is precisely why they cannot have AdMech ships

Sure. In a perfect world they would have there own ruleset.  As it stands DM don't have one and their cousins the AM do and it happens to have tech upgrades and all the things I believe a DM fleet should have.  Why should they have access to the best IN ships? Becauses that ruleset is the best out of what is available to represent them.  Perfect? Nope, but it is the best fit out of the options available.

Imperial Navy are basically largely press-ganged ships, people who have been forced to go on these godforsaken ships and have a gun to their head to make sure they stay there. The officers might have a bit more discipline, being the ones doing the gun-holding and generally more loyal, but just like the rest of your average humans they can be turned.

Its the same with the AM.  The ships are run by press ganged scum.  Admech build all the ships and they all run the same way. Its in the Lords of Mars series, maybe priests of mars.  The AM despite being all about machiney are still humans with human weaknesses and desires.  Not for the flesh so much but for power and knowledge they will do quite a bit.  They aren't space marines and even the mighty space marines fall.

AdMech? Another story altogether. AdMech don't "just turn", just like Sisters of Battle and Grey Knights don't just turn.

Half the admech went over to chaos during the heresy.  Thats a terrible record.  I'd have to disagree that they couldn't "just turn".   The AM is plagued with cults that do various forbidden tech or follow strange interpretations of strict cannon.  Its only a short step from cult ridden to out right heresy.  There is a story featuring grey knights who go purge a forgeworld that got cut off by warpstorms and then fell to chaos.  I think its called Dark Mechanicus.  An entire forgeworld falls to chaos in that book.  Anyway I believe it more than possible, its probable that an explorator fleet could fall to chaos and bring their ships.  Thats the fluff reason for a DM fleet using the Am list.   I feel the best possible representation of an AM fleet, even a fallen one, is the Admech list.  Thats the practical reason.

If I say I have fallen IN fleet I can ally it with chaos.  Its exactly the same as me saying I have a fallen AM fleet but for some reason I can't ally it with chaos.    Either let the DM have their due or stop the IN from getting it.  Just looking for a fair deal here or at least a reasonable explanation. 

[RaptorEvolved]

So I'm compilingthe new data sheet and I read Desperate Allies: As for Allies of Convenience, but ships from the Allied Fleet cannot achieve mission objectives.
Additionally, at the start of your turn, roll a D6 for each ship/squadron within 15cm of a Desperate Ally ship/squadron:
on a 1, that ship/squadron cannot turn, fire, or launch ordnance as they watch for betrayal.

so would that allow you to take special orders then even when watching for betrayal

[RaptorEvolved]

ALSO i THINK there is a slight issue with the desprqte allies thing to them not at least tryingo move outta of the way from say a planet or astroid field, even Nid fleet when they go on instinctive behaviour have rules to avoid them from doing that it needs to be change to

Desperate Allies: As for Allies of Convenience, but ships from the Allied Fleet cannot achieve mission objectives.
Additionally, at the start of your turn, roll a D6 for each ship/squadron within 15cm of a Desperate Ally ship/squadron:
on a 1, that ship/squadron cannot turn, fire, or launch ordnance as they watch for betrayal. EXCEPTION: If this would cause the ship to collide with or move into terrain, it may turn as normal to avoid it

[Seahawk]

No special orders other than BFI.

While I wrote no turns and I meant no turns (even for terrain; betrayal comes at a cost!), in the end it's up to you guys.

[afterimagedan]

While I wrote no turns and I meant no turns (even for terrain; betrayal comes at a cost!), in the end it's up to you guys.

How is that realistic? I don't get it...

[Islacrusez]

While I wrote no turns and I meant no turns (even for terrain; betrayal comes at a cost!), in the end it's up to you guys.

How is that realistic? I don't get it...

Yeah, I'm not liking that. Maybe...

Paranoid ship cannot end movement turn with the suspect out of fire arc (ie, behind you, or on a side suffering damaged weapon)
Suspect ship must move before the paranoid ship.
Suspect ship must fire before the paranoid ship.
Suspect ship is treated as priority target for purposes of fire allocation (any weapon that has the suspect in its fire arc must make a leadership test to ignore target), though it doesn't have to fire at it if it fails.

Not sure if that has enough effect?

[lordgoober]

I think the Seahawk's idea actually is going to work out just fine.   I'm going to be dictatorial here and keep that for the 2-5 result on the "we don't like them" roll.

So I have now taken the chart that Andrew sent to me as an idea as it seems to be a happy compromise between Seahawk's and my original chart.  This will be the chart we use.  I have made slight tweaks to the chart to fix the rules I was intending to work into the chart.

Here is the chart as will be submitted to the Adepticon PDF maker later today when all the rules we are working on get compiled and sent off.

[afterimagedan]

Wow, that document is jacked up. Any way to make it more legible?

[Seahawk]

While I wrote no turns and I meant no turns (even for terrain; betrayal comes at a cost!), in the end it's up to you guys.

How is that realistic? I don't get it...

It's supposed to represent a variety of ship actions, like:
- Doesn't know whether to turn away and present rear only to get shot, or turn toward and show as an aggressive act.
- Crew frozen by inaction as gossip spreads that their ally might turn against them (or not).
- A showdown of who has more chutzpa, one upping and so forth, like a big ol' game of chicken.

My only issue with the chart is that some people might not know what "you have failed me for the last time" means. A simple explanation of "must direct half of their total weapons in that arc against that Desperate Ally" might be easier.

[lordgoober]

derp.  forgot to put in half the sentence.  There is supposed to be "from Abbadon's rules in Armada" there.

[unseelied]

When I open the chart its all messed up.  Could you just post up the final rules here as half of them are cut off and can't be read? 
So chaos can ally with both SM and IN but not Admech?  Chaos can't ally with Admech but Admech can ally with chao?  So strange and quirky.  No one can say I didn't champion the cause of the Dark Mechanicus.  At least this chart is done anyway and everyone can find somebody to ally with. 

[lordgoober]

ok.  the pdf export didn't work well.  pm me with an email address and I can send you the excel spreadsheet directly so people can see it.

[Seahawk]

I think you shouldn't reference "you have failed me for the last time" at all, now that I've reread it.

First, there will be confusion over Abaddon's reroll. Next, the Desperate Ally should not get +1 Ld for being shot at!

I think it'd be better if entirely replaced with: "This ship must direct half of its available Firepower and Lance strength against the  nearest Desperate Ally. Resolve the attack as normal."