Australasian version of ETC?, Interested? Options

[raven0470]

Yea another trophy for me to collect , where do we sign up , you know Qld will win again!!

[Starfire]

Wait, who won High Lords this time?

Eldrad, Abaddon, Lysander, Ghazkull to name just a few.

SCs are ok in comped tournaments; no comp however I say they should be banned.

You're advocating taking really powerful characters in a soft tournament scene, but when lists can deal with them and the effect they have on the game, you want them banned? Seriously?

This post has been edited by Starfire: Aug 10 2010, 11:41 PM

[Nzarra]

Also strongly disagree with banning of SCs - with more recent codexes the SCs are what brings the variety. Not nessessarily saying we would see in no comp but no SC effectively bans Deathwing, Loganwing, Sang Gaurd lists, much of the gaurds variety.

We see Eldrad and Gazz in comped events (hell even in comped events at 1200 points) - should not be an issue in non-comped. I agree it is a throwback restriction that restricts variety for no real gain.

One that was used in a no comp event here was to ban SCs over x points (think it was 200 or 250) - effectively what it meant was no Eldrad, Abbadon, Gazz etc i.e the mega characters which allowing those that added list variety. If really nessessary that may be a compromise.

[adreal]

also, would we have to play 1750pts??

Cause.....well it's kinda boring, 2K, no comp, could be great fun

[Colostomyboy]

also, would we have to play 1750pts??

Cause.....well it's kinda boring, 2K, no comp, could be great fun

That'd have to be balanced against time taken to play the games, I suspect. More points usually equals less overall games during the tournament. I'd be happy to play less points vs. more players, and I reckon it also gives a better idea of who really succeeded against the serried ranks of opposition, rather than winning by lucky draws.

But definitely up for an Australasian (Oceanic?) tournament. The only major problems will be;

(A) Stopping the Kiwi's from winning

and;

(B.) Enforcing English as the majority language (looking at the Kiwi's again!)

This post has been edited by Colostomyboy: Aug 11 2010, 09:40 AM

[Starfire]

I like the idea of 2000pts as well. Battle in the Vines is 2000pts, we manage 5 games there without any trouble.

[Mono]

6 players but 4 would probably be more manageable

No comp as it would seem to fit the event style but for comp I really don't care as long as I know how comp will be done.

Club based teams as it casts a wider net for who can play and would make it easier to determine who is on the team.

for 4 players a different codex for each player, for 6 or more there would need to be some duplication. Another possibility would be to allow a team to have everybody use the same codex however SC can only be used once across a team.

For characters I would put a restriction on total points for any 1 character, something like cannot cost 250 points or more and only 1 character that costs 200 points or more.

+1 for the medallion idea. How about a best painted for any given team rather than individual.

[ArchonCryx]

Definitely feel all Special CHaracters should be allowed. You could limit it to one Special character per slot if you liked, althouigh that'd rule out doublewing (would anyone field doublewing in a no comp field, personally I doubt it)

Even though I am a comp adherent, I am now tending to agree it probably should be no comp - that seems at the heart of the ETC concept.

I like the "one Codex per player" idea, but with the caveat of wanting to revisit this after the Inquisition gets released. I also like the "no 2 armies from same codex within a team" idea, and that all special rules interactions do *not* carry over to a teammate if we're playing mre than 2 players per table...


Hmm, i just realised I don't know a whole lot about the ETC format. I know it's teams, and that it's a cheesefest at 1750 and they banned SCs. Oh, and it was held in Germany this year. That's about it.

[Nzarra]

Its still one vs one Alex - the key thing seems to be in the draw of who faces who - a team draws another team i.e Australia vs NZ then they go through some process in each team whereby they decide the matchups - not sure of mechanics - will check them out but that is a key part of the tactics of the event is working who plays who

[Nzarra]

hmm - interesting

Captains will have 30 minutes before each match to decide who will play with which opponent. They can consult with and use the help of the rest of the team as they wish.

Players during match will be matched by Captains in the following way:
"Secret challenge" - At the start of the pairing captains chose secretly one player - a champion. Champions can be different from round to round. Both names of champions are written down at the start of the pairing on a separate piece of paper and revealed and the end of it. Champions play on the last available table.

After that:
1. Both captains roll a dice.
2. Captain A who rolled lowest puts forward player A.
3. Captain B puts a player to fight player A.
4. Captain A chooses a table for that game.
5. Captain B who rolled highest puts forward player B.
6. Captain A puts a player to fight player B.
7. Captain B chooses a table for that game.
8. Captain A .....

[Nzarra]

just a thought - most voting is for 4 or 6 players - what about 5 per team - still a little easier than six to conordinate and greatly improves the odds of getting a clear result each round rather than the old 2 game each

just a thought

[Starfire]

That would probably help out he road trippers as well, because you can also squeeze 5 into most cars (along with models and gear if you pack light) whereas with 6 you have to have access to a people mover or drive two cars.

[Zidi]

That would probably help out he road trippers as well, because you can also squeeze 5 into most cars (along with models and gear if you pack light) whereas with 6 you have to have access to a people mover or drive two cars.

Sounds interesting.

Not sure why Special Characters should be an issue, in my experience they aren't generally over-powered for their price, and codex's like Witchhunters, Dark Eldar, Tyranids generally don't have overpowered SC's.

I've heard all this bad stuff about abaddon, but ultimately he isn't that bad. The one time i played him Wyches took off 2 wounds, then a whole bunch of dark lances followed by splinter fire took him out.

Also played Eldrad and the Avatar together with 9 war walkers and didn't find that too hard (albeit, mainly due to the mission type, it was points for standing by objective counted every turn from turn 3, and i made sure to wipe out his troops choices (wychs got 12 inch charge to combat one)) by turn 3 and then made sure my troops got some points =p

[Darth Eddie]

Eldrad, Abaddon, Lysander, Ghazkull to name just a few.

SCs are ok in comped tournaments; no comp however I say they should be banned.

Why should they be banned?
No comp sounds good to me and banning SC goes against the hole idea of 5th ed.

[ÆON]

SC's tie up lists into the same format over and over again. SW's with Logan and Long Fangs, Ghazz in Wagons, Vulcan and Melta's. It's one thing to say these SC lists are unique and special lists, but they are also replicated over and over again at tourney's. I also agree that 5th edition is the SC edition, but as I've heard many times before "How is it possible Eldrad is everywhere in the Galaxy as he is in every Eldar list."

The SC's can be an easy button for army lists, not always, but sometimes.

[ArchonCryx]

What about if you're the kind of player who normally steers well clear of special characters in a comped environment?

I saw the ETC lists. I don't really see how banning the SCs promoted much in the way of variety, particularly for Chaos, who all raided the Obliterator planet big time!

I don't quite get if you eliminate comp why you want a lot of strict restrictions...

I guess I'm really saying that if you really don't want me to play a special character, give a comp score!

Lol, I'd loved to have tried submitting a DE list for ETC lead by Kruellagh - exactly what power-based or variety-promoting argument works against allowing her???

If there is a list of characters ppl are sick of seeing, why not just write that?

I'll start. We can ban:

Eldrad (I mean ffs, he's long dead already!)
Abaddon
Ghazghull
Vulkan
Lysander
Marneus
Mephiston
Logan

That seems about all, nothing else is springing to mind as particularly outrageous, especially if we apply the one SC per slot idea I had earlier...

I'm surprised how short it is, yet I'm content.

Wouldn't something like really that work better than flat out banning ALL SCs? Partiicularly if SCs force a certain list format only "sometimes", eh Aeon?

[Loriness]

If this is the all in best team/generals, just play 40k as is. No restrictions other than what's in the rules, no comp, and no douch. I might bring a necron list just to see how cheese it can be.

[Darth Eddie]

If this is the all in best team/generals, just play 40k as is. No restrictions other than what's in the rules, no comp, and no douch. I might bring a necron list just to see how cheese it can be.

+1

[Starfire]

When you remove comp, you allow people the freedom to create lists that can effectively deal with special characters.

[ÆON]

When you remove comp, you allow people the freedom to create lists that can effectively deal with special characters.

Say like Vulcan with Melta spam?