Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Tounament Restriction, what can and cant you take.
H3r3t1c
post Jul 29 2014, 03:45 PM
Post #1


Member
*

Group: Members
Posts: 69
Joined: 2-February 13
Member No.: 14,004



Hi fellow gamers,
I'm not sure where to put this, or to whom this should really be said to. Here seems as good of a place as any and please direct your area TO's to this if you think its relevant.

Ok so I recently attended a tournament in QLD and some of the rules for that tournament struck me as a bit odd to say the least. Now of course with the release of then new rule set (7th) some of these topics have been made crystal clear.

Bear with me, there is a point to this shortly...

Some of these rules where things like grav weapons ignoring cover and inv. save when fired at vehicles, skyshield landing pads grating 3+ cover saves as standard to name but too.
Now instead of the gamers standing up and saying "err that aint right" there was an abundance of "Ok, im gonna exploit this as much as I can".

SO while TO's get to choose which rules we play by they don't always make sense. unsure.gif

So on to the main point..

Recently there was publish (BoLS I believe) the results for the American ATC tournament where Imperial Knight where in the top four scouring armies. And after witnessing these in games and heard stories of how they have crushed armies without breaking a sweat (im assuming you have seen/heard this before too) should they be banned from tournament? ....... To this I answer NO! let me say that again... NO, they shouldn't be banned from tournaments.

Why is that? Well its the same reason that the FULL rules for escalation including AV15 mighty bulwarks should be allowed. Balance.

If you allow Knights, Formations, Lords of War, Datasheet (cypher and Belakor ), Allies (taudar - ok not so much in the new set) then you should also be laying with the whole set of fortifications. If not anything else but to hide from these overpowered combinations and units. But there it is, they wouldn't be overpowered if you where using the full set of rules.
As such I suggest you talk to your TO's in regards to upcoming tournament and suggest that these fortifications be allowed into the armies and bring balance back.

Now I know people will say "but the Aquila's macro cannon is OP" but for what it does its not. it wont lay as much hut down as 3 manticores (almost same point equivalent). No where event close to it. But it will make say Knight users think about how to use them other than a bludgeon.

Lords of war are in the books and look to be here to stay, give people the option for countermeasures other than taking their own lords of war. armata_PDT_36.gif

Thanks for reading,
H3r3t1c.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
J.McGowan
post Jul 30 2014, 04:14 PM
Post #2


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 3,687
Joined: 28-September 08
From: Brisbane
Member No.: 6,162



Agree.

The thing with tournies though is that it is up to the TO to make the rules and publish it before the event.

This enables the TO to establish a pre concieved structure on how their event is to be run in line with what they hope to provide to the community.

It is up to us as individuals to simply choose to accept and play within the guidelines and conform to the intent of the event or simply wait for an event that is more to your playstyle.


You do raise a good point in the fact that for years not just this edition the restrictions you place on events as a TO will have an impact on shifting the meta of list design.

that is the only reason stars lists became popular not due to the fact that they were the strongest. More so that they had the answers to them stripped from the game by other units being restricted.

Every action has a reaction.

It is a fluid game and will always evolve and if we dont evolve with it or ahead of it, unfortunately there will always be friction



--------------------
Sure everyone likes to win, but in the end, the poduim is small and lonely place and you needed everyone else to get there.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
horus
post Aug 1 2014, 03:09 PM
Post #3


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 1,676
Joined: 14-August 06
From: Rockvegas
Member No.: 3,082



QUOTE(H3r3t1c @ Jul 29 2014, 03:45 PM) *

Hi fellow gamers,
I'm not sure where to put this, or to whom this should really be said to. Here seems as good of a place as any and please direct your area TO's to this if you think its relevant.

Ok so I recently attended a tournament in QLD and some of the rules for that tournament struck me as a bit odd to say the least. Now of course with the release of then new rule set (7th) some of these topics have been made crystal clear.

Bear with me, there is a point to this shortly...

Some of these rules where things like grav weapons ignoring cover and inv. save when fired at vehicles, skyshield landing pads grating 3+ cover saves as standard to name but too.
Now instead of the gamers standing up and saying "err that aint right" there was an abundance of "Ok, im gonna exploit this as much as I can".

SO while TO's get to choose which rules we play by they don't always make sense. unsure.gif

So on to the main point..

Recently there was publish (BoLS I believe) the results for the American ATC tournament where Imperial Knight where in the top four scouring armies. And after witnessing these in games and heard stories of how they have crushed armies without breaking a sweat (im assuming you have seen/heard this before too) should they be banned from tournament? ....... To this I answer NO! let me say that again... NO, they shouldn't be banned from tournaments.

Why is that? Well its the same reason that the FULL rules for escalation including AV15 mighty bulwarks should be allowed. Balance.

If you allow Knights, Formations, Lords of War, Datasheet (cypher and Belakor ), Allies (taudar - ok not so much in the new set) then you should also be laying with the whole set of fortifications. If not anything else but to hide from these overpowered combinations and units. But there it is, they wouldn't be overpowered if you where using the full set of rules.
As such I suggest you talk to your TO's in regards to upcoming tournament and suggest that these fortifications be allowed into the armies and bring balance back.

Now I know people will say "but the Aquila's macro cannon is OP" but for what it does its not. it wont lay as much hut down as 3 manticores (almost same point equivalent). No where event close to it. But it will make say Knight users think about how to use them other than a bludgeon.

Lords of war are in the books and look to be here to stay, give people the option for countermeasures other than taking their own lords of war. armata_PDT_36.gif

Thanks for reading,
H3r3t1c.


+1


--------------------
King of the North... leader of free men.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A wiseman
post Aug 5 2014, 08:58 PM
Post #4


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 723
Joined: 14-August 10
From: Brisbane
Member No.: 9,940



Good post mate, I agree with opening the floods gates to all options, though i'd also add in the reason that we all spend so much on our toys, who really likes to be told that some of them aren't allowed to be brought out to play
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Witchking
post Aug 8 2014, 08:49 AM
Post #5


True Story
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 3,701
Joined: 10-November 07
From: Toowoomba, QLD
Member No.: 4,690



I'm disappointed with the direction of 40k in all honesty. It's become an arms race. Instead of introducing cool and clever new rules for units, they've just made things "bigger". Now there are giant Dreadnoughts, huge battle tanks, etc. Whoever brings the biggest stick has the advantage.

I agree with your point of view in that if you allow these types of things, you should allow it all. Afterall, it's the player's decision to attend the event and they know what they're getting themselves into. However, having the 'option' of taking these huge units isn't really an option. You almost need them to stand a chance.. and that's where the problems come in.

As you've alluded to, if your opponent has an Imperial Knight and you don't, then you feel like you're at a huge disadvantage. So next game, you fight fire with fire. 6 months down the track, army lists are full of expensive forgeworld models, ridiculous-over-the-top walking behemoths and all of a sudden we're playing Epic in 28mm scale.

I would personally like to attend events with no allies or forgeworld at all. I prefer the old 4th ed style of "pick a codex and play it". None of these beardy allegiances just to push a slight advantage.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dono1979
post Aug 14 2014, 09:20 AM
Post #6


Resin Whisperer
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 7,659
Joined: 13-June 08
From: Canberra
Member No.: 5,612



QUOTE(The Witchking @ Aug 8 2014, 08:49 AM) *

I would personally like to attend events with no allies or forgeworld at all. I prefer the old 4th ed style of "pick a codex and play it". None of these beardy allegiances just to push a slight advantage.


So how exactly would banning allies and Forge World stop people from taking Knights, Baneblades, Hellhammers, Stormlords, Stompas, Lords of Skulls and every other Super Heavy that GW has released?


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ThatWallyGuy
post Aug 15 2014, 02:17 PM
Post #7


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 3,270
Joined: 1-August 12
Member No.: 13,305



QUOTE(The Witchking @ Aug 8 2014, 08:49 AM) *

I would personally like to attend events with no allies or forgeworld at all. I prefer the old 4th ed style of "pick a codex and play it". None of these beardy allegiances just to push a slight advantage.


The funny thing with this is that the vast majority of the FW stuff is no where near as powerful as the GW equivalent


--------------------
Only The Insane Can Truly Prosper
Only Those Who Can Prosper Can Truly Judge What Is Sane
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Witchking
post Aug 19 2014, 08:38 AM
Post #8


True Story
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 3,701
Joined: 10-November 07
From: Toowoomba, QLD
Member No.: 4,690



QUOTE(Dono1979 @ Aug 14 2014, 09:20 AM) *

So how exactly would banning allies and Forge World stop people from taking Knights, Baneblades, Hellhammers, Stormlords, Stompas, Lords of Skulls and every other Super Heavy that GW has released?


Ammended tournament rules that every player pack has. You know exactly what my point was, you're just being pedantic.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dono1979
post Aug 19 2014, 08:47 AM
Post #9


Resin Whisperer
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 7,659
Joined: 13-June 08
From: Canberra
Member No.: 5,612



QUOTE(The Witchking @ Aug 19 2014, 08:38 AM) *

Ammended tournament rules that every player pack has. You know exactly what my point was, you're just being pedantic.


No, I was actually trying to clarify what your point was; whether it was pointedly aimed at Forge World only models/units, or only focusing on Lords of War (Super Heavies), as some people still confuse the two .


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Æon
post Aug 19 2014, 08:54 AM
Post #10


Edition Change Skeptic
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 13,218
Joined: 19-November 04
From: Canberra
Member No.: 222



QUOTE(The Witchking @ Aug 19 2014, 08:38 AM) *

Ammended tournament rules that every player pack has. You know exactly what my point was, you're just being pedantic.


I hate to say, pure armies like double CAD Necrons are quite potent (or even single CAD to be fair) Allies and other stuff can help defend against some pretty potent stuff.

Unless of course you ammend the tournament rules somehow to bring a mythical sense of balance to the game for even single CAD no allied armies (would you care to share what that is?) Otherwise I'm not quite sure what your point was apart from attempt to defend yourself from some valid criticism - and no, I don't think I'm being pedantic tongue.gif


--------------------

"Hail ĆON - Slayer of the Scrubs"


Full Disclosure - Yes, I really am a scrub :)


WHFB 8.5 Community FaceBook Group

40K Chapter Unapproved FaceBook Group
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orange-Bell
post Aug 19 2014, 11:30 AM
Post #11


Space Coyote
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 1,237
Joined: 2-February 05
From: Perth
Member No.: 920



I'm running a tournament early next year and I've been giving thought to this.

One idea is running two streams alongside each other at the 6-game tournament. You can either bring a single force org (in effect 'comped'), or you can take whatever you like within the rules ('uncomped').

Each competes for a separate trophy, but it will be possible for comped armies to come up against uncomped armies depending on how they compete against others of their type, as there will be a Swiss-style draw after the first couple of rounds.

So someone who manages to completely cheese up a 'comped' single force org and stomps everyone will likely find themselves playing against an 'uncomped' army in game 3 or 4, whilst someone who takes a soft, fluffy 'uncomped' list and is getting stomped may find themselves playing against a 'comped' army.

The idea is to allow people to bring whatever kind of army they like, and hopefully come up against people with similar ability, based initially on list at first, then by wins and margin of victory as the tournament progresses, and have reasonably close and challenging games.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dono1979
post Aug 19 2014, 11:42 AM
Post #12


Resin Whisperer
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 7,659
Joined: 13-June 08
From: Canberra
Member No.: 5,612



really interesting concept, would be interested to hear how it goes and how taxing it was to run them.


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fofjunior
post Aug 19 2014, 03:01 PM
Post #13


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 1,538
Joined: 21-May 10
From: Brisbane, Queensland
Member No.: 9,506



The problem Dono that Witchking is getting at is that a lot of people in the hobby don't have access to all the toys unlike your collection which is quite impressive.

It then stops some people from coming to a tournament because they don't believe they can compete without those toys, don't like that style with the toys so back to the comped vs no comp argument dry.gif

Running both systems together could be interesting but again what if you are that comp/fluff bunny who comes up against a hard list - yep even if you don't shake hands at the start and walk away to save yourself the inevitable grief and try and minimise your flogging, its not very enjoyable just taking models off the table for a couple of hours whilst your opponent pounds you with the firepower of his list (been there done that - it sucks).

And buying those toys to compete can lead to other issues - like upsetting she who must be obeyed with how much said toys cost armata_PDT_05.gif

So in regards to the topic whilst letting everything in may result in providing some sort of balance - will never be perfect, unless everyone has equal access to those things (which we don't) it is not the answer.

In fact I don't think there is a perfect answer. Every tournament has its pro's and con's, comp vs no comp, all in vs restrictions, whatever.

To me it just comes down to what I feel like playing and what the TO wants in their tournament. They take the time to organise it so if I like it - I will play in it (SWMBO permitting). The argument will never end as to what is better and to be honest I don't think any one style is better it just depends on personal preference.



--------------------
Quote of wisdom - Semper Fidelis

40K goals for 2017 - play socially more often, complete armies on parade project with son.

Life goals - Lose 15kgs, improve health, spend more quality time with my wife, children and grandchildren. Catch up with friends.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Orange-Bell
post Aug 19 2014, 03:43 PM
Post #14


Space Coyote
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 1,237
Joined: 2-February 05
From: Perth
Member No.: 920



QUOTE
Running both systems together could be interesting but again what if you are that comp/fluff bunny who comes up against a hard list - yep even if you don't shake hands at the start and walk away to save yourself the inevitable grief and try and minimise your flogging, its not very enjoyable just taking models off the table for a couple of hours whilst your opponent pounds you with the firepower of his list (been there done that - it sucks).


Match-ups would be calculated so that bad match ups were avoided if possible. No system is perfect, but my aim would be to reduce bad match ups by ranking people on their tournament rankings (we have a reasonable system for it in WA), the perceived strength of their list, and their results in the tournament so far. A lot of work, but yeah, I want to try it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
damnitsham
post Aug 20 2014, 09:45 AM
Post #15


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 2,839
Joined: 4-January 06
From: Geelong
Member No.: 2,383



We're opening the flood gates at GH this year, at the very least it will be an interesting experiment.

After November we hope to have some data covering the spread of LoWs, forts and FW within an 80-player event, including the podium.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fofjunior
post Aug 20 2014, 02:43 PM
Post #16


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 1,538
Joined: 21-May 10
From: Brisbane, Queensland
Member No.: 9,506



QUOTE(Orange-Bell @ Aug 19 2014, 03:43 PM) *

Match-ups would be calculated so that bad match ups were avoided if possible. No system is perfect, but my aim would be to reduce bad match ups by ranking people on their tournament rankings (we have a reasonable system for it in WA), the perceived strength of their list, and their results in the tournament so far. A lot of work, but yeah, I want to try it.


Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed that tournament - was just playing the what if game biggrin.gif

######e happens sometimes but no doubt it would be alot of work for the TO so good luck with it - would love to see how it all goes and how it was perceived by players.


--------------------
Quote of wisdom - Semper Fidelis

40K goals for 2017 - play socially more often, complete armies on parade project with son.

Life goals - Lose 15kgs, improve health, spend more quality time with my wife, children and grandchildren. Catch up with friends.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
difsta
post Aug 23 2014, 05:12 PM
Post #17


The Travelling Mexican
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 4,429
Joined: 29-March 10
From: Melbourne
Member No.: 9,216



I dont think it is fair for people to complain about allied anymore. We are 2 editions into allies, this is the game now, get over it and move on. Allies have been out for years now, if you still own just 1 army with no allies, that is your choice. You just cant expect everyone else to stay stagnant like you have. I am not saying go out and buy the big forgeworld models to compete, trust me you dont need them. I am neither for nor against a blanket open the flood gates. I am part of the community comp system being made down in melbourne (mainly, I know other states are in on it too). And I think a balance is what is needed, as in some events like geelong heresy which allow everything, and some which have restrictions on certain things. People decide what they go to. But in the end TOs will run an event they want to run, if you dont like it, then don't go. It really is that simple. If you think a style of event should be run that isnt being run, dont complain that the TOs are doing it wrong. Run your own event. If people go, and it becomes popular , you may find others follow suit. If it is a flop maybe your opinion is just not shared by other players.

I am for diversity, I am against players who complain that TOs are doing it wrong, pull your finger out and try running an event


--------------------
Community Comp is alive and kicking. Come visit us over at our Facebook Page or out Community Comp Forum and get involved

My Modelling Diaries
ETC 2016 Australian Team Discussion
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ThatWallyGuy
post Aug 26 2014, 09:11 PM
Post #18


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 3,270
Joined: 1-August 12
Member No.: 13,305



One thing I'm kinda not liking atm.. While it isn't a big issue, just changing times thing..

Is the FoC restrictions.. in that you have to take Combined Arms as your primary. When there are several different FoC/formations out there that could take on the role of primary force.

Of course in doing so you are missing out on objective secured, but that's the risk..

I personally was tossing up the idea of a nid list made of Sky-blight formation as primary and then possibly a endless swarm as the 2nd option (as a lot of events you are only allowed 1 additional FoC, which I think is fair)

Now as the rules go this is a valid option and would be considered bound and have some nice options.. (would be half tempted to throw in a Trygon and unbound the list for better respawn options)


--------------------
Only The Insane Can Truly Prosper
Only Those Who Can Prosper Can Truly Judge What Is Sane
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Malakii
post Aug 26 2014, 11:15 PM
Post #19


Member
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 329
Joined: 23-January 12
From: Brisbane
Member No.: 12,475



QUOTE(difsta @ Aug 23 2014, 05:12 PM) *

I am for diversity, I am against players who complain that TOs are doing it wrong, pull your finger out and try running an event

+1


QUOTE(ThatWallyGuy @ Aug 26 2014, 09:11 PM) *

I personally was tossing up the idea of a nid list made of Sky-blight formation as primary and then possibly a endless swarm as the 2nd option (as a lot of events you are only allowed 1 additional FoC, which I think is fair)

Now as the rules go this is a valid option and would be considered bound and have some nice options.. (would be half tempted to throw in a Trygon and unbound the list for better respawn options)


What's stopping you? Their is no requirement that your Primary Detachment must be a CAD, it can be a formation. You just swapping the benefits of 1 type of army design for another.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dono1979
post Aug 27 2014, 07:56 AM
Post #20


Resin Whisperer
*

Group: Veteran Members
Posts: 7,659
Joined: 13-June 08
From: Canberra
Member No.: 5,612



QUOTE(Malakii @ Aug 26 2014, 11:15 PM) *

What's stopping you? Their is no requirement that your Primary Detachment must be a CAD, it can be a formation. You just swapping the benefits of 1 type of army design for another.


I think its more that most of the tournaments are ruling you have to use the CAD as your primary.


--------------------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th July 2019 - 03:14 PM