Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[EAST] So you have some minis? and you want to Play? AWESOME

Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
edited April 2012 in PAX Archive
Sooo The Miniwargaming tournaments at Pax east 2012 are set.

Twitter Feed for this topic set up.

Name PAXeastMINIwar


Prereg Email is miniwargamespaxeast@gmail.com

Please send your prereg request in the following format.

Name: (ex John Doe/Mr Smith)
System/Day: (ex Warhammer/ Fri)
Army/Faction Played: (ex Empire)


Slots Remaining
Warhammer fantasy (9/14)
Warmachine (0/16)
Warhammer 40k (0/16)


Thanks.

Fri WHFB
1000 pts
three round

Pitched battle
(win 10points Draw 5points Loss 0points)

no comp
Sporstmanship (up to 5points a round)
Lose points for:
-2 Player did not have necessary items to play game promptly (Dice, army Rulebook, measuring implement)
-1 Player played in an untimely fashion (game did not progress past turn 3 unless opponent was tabled)
-1 No printed army list (hand written counts as long as the list is legible)
-1 Was not a fun opponent to play against.

Sat
WM/Hordes
35pt steamroller

There are no painting requirements,
the models must be on bases, fully assembled...
you need dice, templates, counters, ruler/tape measure


Warhammer 40,000
Points: 1500

Tournament type: Three Round

Battle points (by mission)

Army Composition Start at 10 pts then adjusted for following:
1 HQ choice +2pts
2 or more HQ choices +0
1 Named Character +0
More than 1 named Character -5pts for each named character past the first.
More than 1 AV 14 vehicle (such as a Land raider, or Monolith) -5 per each past 1
More Troops than other force org slots +5 pts for each additional troops choice.
(example 5 troops, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Elite, 1 Heavy 1 HQ = +5 Pts)
More units than double troops choices (not counting HQ) -5 for each additional special choice.
(example 2 Troops, 2 Fast Attack, 2 Heavy = -5)

Sportsmanship 5pts per round
Lose points for:
-2 Player did not have necessary items to play game promptly (Dice, army Rulebook, measuring implement)
-1 Player played in an untimely fashion (game did not progress past turn 3 unless opponent was tabled)
-1 No printed army list (hand written counts as long as the list is legible)
-1 Was not a fun opponent to play against.






40k Tournament Results

Missions 1,2,4 (in the order they were played)

1st Overall: Chris Bradley 112 points
2nd Overall: Auston Hershaw 91 points
3rd Overall: Mike Fiume 87 Points

Most consistent (no award... THIS year...) Frank Ramsey (10 battle points EVERY ROUND)
Smokin' Boots: Andrew Ojeman : 31 points

Total Score Breakdown

Name Army Comp Sports R1 R2 R3 Total
Chris Bradley Orks 22 15 30 30 15 112
Auston Habershaw Daemons 22 14 0 25 30 91
Mike Fiume CSM 12 15 30 5 25 87
Mike Voda Orks 22 14 10 20 20 86
Chris O' Hare SM 25 15 15 25 0 80
Andrew Sudbury SM 12 15 20 25 5 77
Chris Safirik GK 12 14 10 30 10 76
Todd Rautenberg CSM 25 15 5 5 20 70
Frank Ramsey SM 17 15 10 10 10 62
Luke Vermeer CSM 17 15 20 10 0 62
Karl Pagan GK 25 15 20 0 0 60
Sergio Garay Jr. BT 5 14 20 15 0 54
Jason Chang SM 22 15 0 0 15 52
Andrew Ojeman SM 7 14 0 5 5 31
Reynolds Davidson Orks 12 8 2 5 Drp Drp
Christine (ringer) Millar SoB NA 10 17 25 -NA 52

Sam Butler on
«13

Posts

  • KhadourKhadour Dinosaur Cupcake Boston, MARegistered User regular
    Sam Butler wrote:
    For 2012 What additional stuff would folks like to see?
    Unfortunately, I never got to spend much time in miniland at East last year. I hope to rectify some of that this year. As far as additional stuff, I'd be very interested in at least demoing Malifaux - that one's caught my attention, and I haven't been able to make it to a FLGS for a demo yet (and probably won't before East, the way things are shaping up). I might be up for playing either 40K or Warmahordes, and possibly Flames of War.

    From what I saw last year, you guys had some awesome terrain and tables set up - keep up the good work!

    Do unto others 20% better than you would expect them to do unto you, to correct for subjective error - Linus Pauling
    jswidget.php?username=cmdour&numitems=5&text=title&images=small&show=recentplays&imagesonly=1&imagepos=right&inline=1&addstyles=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Good to hear. I'll have registration info up as soon as I have a green light for what's running.

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    contents relocate to front post for ease of browsers...

    Sam Butler on
  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    If folks are willing I'd appreciate them testing out the following 40K missions. I intend to use three of them at Pax East 2012. I would also like to get some sugestions for more detailed "flavor text" for each mission.

    Here are the Missions

    Mission 1
    Planetfall

    INCOMING ENEMY TRANSPORTS

    Deployment:
    Spearhead. (modified)
    Three objectives placed 12” apart along the center line of the table (short)
    PlanetFalldeployment.jpg

    Special Rules
    Nightfight (Turn one Only)
    Dropzone. All attacker units may be deployed via Deepstrike Turn 1, or move on from the attackers board edge. Any mishap results of “destroyed” from this initial Deepstrike are treated as returned to “normal” reserve (i.e. they missed their LZ and have to walk/drive to the battle, no Deepstrike unless unit is able to do so normally)

    all Defender Units gain the Rule Scout, if they already Scout, they gain Infiltrate

    VCs
    Primary (15pts): Attacker Win More Killpoints than the Defender in the Defenders deployment zone at the end of the game. (Immobilized Vehicles/walkers, fleeing units DO NOT COUNT)
    Secondary: Win (10Pts) Kill all opponent Hqs, Draw Kill one HQ(5pts)
    Tertiary: Win (5Pts) Hold more objectives than your Opponent, Draw (2Pts)Same number of objectives


    Game length
    Standard Random game length.
    (3+ for turn 6, 4+ turn 7)



    Mission 2
    Hold The Line

    HOLD THE BASTARDS HERE. None Shall Pass

    Deployment:
    Pitched Battle
    two objectives placed in the Defenders deployment zone 12” up, and 18” in from each short table edge
    Holdtheline.jpg

    Special Rules
    Strategic Genius
    The Attacker may Infiltrate one Unit not normally allowed to do so (No Transports may take advantage of this)
    Defender may change the deployment of a single unit after all other units are deployed.


    VCs

    Primary Win 15pts D 5pts: Killpoints
    Secondary W10pts D 5pts: Objectives
    Tertiary: Win (5Pts) Kill an opponents HQ, (Both players may gain this objective)


    Game length
    Standard Random game length.
    (3+ for turn 6, 4+ turn 7)



    Mission 3
    Line Of Battle

    Are those enemy troops. GET EM.

    Deployment:
    Pitched Battle (modified)
    Each player's initial deployment zone is the center 24” of the pitched battle 12”
    Objectives: Three along the center line of the table 18” apart. (longways)

    LineofbattleDeployment.jpg
    (Known glitch image has the 24" and 18" distances reversed text list of distances is correct)

    Special Rules
    Line Of March
    Every unit is placed into reserve in a “Line of March” each player gets two units a round, and every unit MUST be assigned a place BEFORE deployment. (IE Round one units selected 1, and 2, arrive, units 3,4,5,6 stay in reserve. This overrides the normal way for Demons to Deploy as they have already manifested and are walking around. )
    Only HQ, Fast,Elites, and Troops may be chosen as the first two selections.

    All Units still in reserve Arrive Turn 5.

    Units with the Rules: Scout, or Infiltrate instead gain Outflank.

    Broken Arrow:
    After an HQ unit has been on the table for a full turn the controlling player may declare Broken Arrow at the beginning of their turn (Roll a D6 1-3 Nothing happens, 4-5 an additional selection arrives, 6 any unit still in reserve may be deployed) (I.E . Broken Arrow is called Round Two. Normally only units 3, and 4, would arrive, but the player rolls a 6 and nominates Unit 6 to arrive.)

    VCs

    Primary 15pts, D 5pts : Objectives
    Secondary W10pts D 5pts: Killpoints
    Tertiary: Win (5Pts) Kill an opponents HQ, (Both players may gain this objective)

    Game length
    Standard Random game length.
    (3+ for turn 6, 4+ turn 7)

    Mission 4
    Gold Rush

    All fo da Money yo.

    Deployment:
    Pitched Battle
    Objectives Five crates of Gold One in the center of each table quarter, and one in the center of the table
    GoldRushDeployment.jpg

    Special Rules
    Gold:
    Each crate of gold may be picked up in the movement phase, or shooting phase by a model that moves into base to base contact with it. A unit may only carry one crate at a time. And requires hands to pick up the crate (a rifleman type Dreadnought would not be able to grab the Gold for example)

    Beast of Burden:
    If a unit is carrying a Crate of gold its movement is Reduced by 2 inches (min 1”)
    If a unit carrying a Crate of Gold enters a Vehicle, the vehicle loses Fast (if applicable) and its movement is reduced by 2”
    Crates may be dropped during the movement phase. This includes inside Transport Vehicles, in which case treat the Vehicle's hull as the Objective for purposes of contesting. If the vehicle is destroyed place the Gold as close to the center of the wreck as possible.

    VCs

    Primary 15pts, D 5pts: Objectives
    Secondary Win 10pts Draw 5pts: Killpoints
    Tertiary: Win (5Pts) Have more crates carried by any unit


    Game length
    Standard Random game length.
    (3+ for turn 6, 4+ turn 7)

    Mission 5
    Race to the bottom

    Your Normal general was abruptly recalled and replaced by “Adm Christoforo, aboard the Ocean Marketer.” The more stuff that Dies the more important the battle was right? Wait a minute? How is he running both sides?....

    Deployment:
    Dawn of War (modified)
    Modification to deployment is no Limitation to what my be deployed first turn.
    Racetothebottomdeployment.jpg
    Special Rules
    Self destruction:
    A unit reduced to below 50% may be voluntarily removed as a casualty by its owner during his/her movement phase. It is then placed in reserve to return to the battlefield. Each unit may only be recycled in this way once. The exception are HQ choices as they have more sense than to return to a losing fight.

    VCs

    Primary 15pts, D 5pts: Reverse killpoints. (Each of your OWN units destroyed gains you 1 Point)
    Secondary Win 10pts Draw 5pts: Kill all opposing HQs
    Tertiary: Win (5Pts) Recycle more units than your opponent.


    Game length
    Standard Random game length.
    (3+ for turn 6, 4+ turn 7)

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Slots Remaining
    Warhammer fantasy (14/14)
    Warmachine (13/16)
    Warhammer 40k (21/24)

  • crazygcrazyg Registered User regular
    Orks are looking forward to some Krumpin

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Warhammer fantasy (14/14)
    Warmachine (13/16)
    Warhammer 40k (19/24)

  • SJSJ Registered User regular
    Unfortunately I don't have the time/money to head there, but I'd love for you to explain the reasoning behind your 40k comp system.

  • TheLawinatorTheLawinator Registered User regular
    Blood in the water.

    My SteamID Gamertag and PSN: TheLawinator
  • AsherAsher Registered User regular
    As an experienced Tournament player I'm going to weigh in and second SJ's query on the Comp system. Math comp is pretty bad way of doing comp as it can be easily broken. If you're going to do comp, make it panel as that's the only really "fair" way of doing it. You could do a mix of Panel/Peer comp if you feel like it, but peer comp always has it's own problems.

    As it is, your comp system is going to have pretty much the opposite effect. For example, a fairly soft fun list I'm planning on taking to a tournament soon:

    Farseer with kit
    Jain Zar

    6 Fire Dragons with kit
    10 Banshees with kit in Serpent

    10 Dire Avengers, kit in Serpent
    10 Dire Avengers with kit

    Falcon
    2x War Walkers

    This would score a 5. 10 base +0 for 2 HQs, -5 for having double other slots than troops. As you can see your system unfairly hobbles Codexes (Generally older ones) which lack good troops choices. This list already has enough problems (2 scoring units, sub par HQ, low numbers) without being overly penalised by the comp system. Under the Australian comp standard, I'd expect to get somewhere between 3.5-4/5 depending on weapon options.

    Now, let's take a a fairly horrible boring netlist.

    Rune Priest with kit

    6X Grey Hunters in Razorbacks with whatever weapons and some kit.

    2X Long Fangs with 4 MLs each.

    As far as I can work out this would score a whopping 27. 10 base +2 for 1 HQ + 15 for 6 Troops vs 3 other selections.

    See the problem? Math comp simply doesn't work. Many, many, many people have tried it, and no one has managed to make a system that works. Even in the cases where it nearly works, it just changed the meta so that there is a new power build. As it is this system overly penalises soft armies and old codexes while giving boring power builds a boost they don't need. If you do want to do comp, round up some experienced gamer buddies to mark comp for you.



    I'd also query the sports system as well. Most of the things you can lose points for are things that should be givens. In my opinion the Comp systems that work best are either a Card system, where there is no peer marking, but players can complain to the TO who then issues a yellow or red card penalty based on their assessment, or just straight up letting players mark each other out of 5. In the second case, making sure you clearly define what each score means is important. (ie 5 = Best game ever, 4 = Good enjoyable game, 3 = Average game, 2 = Had minor issues with opponent, had MAJOR issues with opponent, 0 = Would never play this person again, please kick them out).

    Things my Red Terror has Swallowed Whole: A Mentors Librarian, a Fire Warrior Sash'Ui. Total Points: 109 (so far...)
    "Leapin' and Hoppin' on a Warpshadow" - Mah Nids
    The Swordwind Rises! - Biel Tan. All Aspects. All the time.
    "Before seeking Victory, first make yourself Invulnerable to defeat" - Sneaky sneaky Raptors
  • altmannaltmann Registered User regular
    Yeah I can break that comp system in about 4 seconds with a ridiculous list.

    Also, reverse kill points? Does that work? (never tried it, but it seems a very odd way of having a mission).

    My Flickr. My Fruitfucker computer and my Annarchy computer. See my PAX 2006/07/08 Flickr sets

    "Look at that subtle off-white coloring, the tasteful thickness of it... Oh my God, it even has a watermark."
  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Slots Remaining
    Warhammer fantasy (13/14)
    Warmachine (12/16)
    Warhammer 40k (20/24)

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    SJ wrote:
    Unfortunately I don't have the time/money to head there, but I'd love for you to explain the reasoning behind your 40k comp system.

    The thought behind the comp system was to attempt to get folks to take more troops and less other stuff as "top heavy" armies are not horribly realistic. (Yeah I know I just referred to "realism" regarding to a game that spams nine foot tall hate monks with chainsaw swords...)

    Asher wrote:
    As an experienced Tournament player I'm going to weigh in and second SJ's query on the Comp system. Math comp is pretty bad way of doing comp as it can be easily broken. If you're going to do comp, make it panel as that's the only really "fair" way of doing it. You could do a mix of Panel/Peer comp if you feel like it, but peer comp always has it's own problems.

    As it is, your comp system is going to have pretty much the opposite effect. For example, a fairly soft fun list I'm planning on taking to a tournament soon:

    Farseer with kit
    Jain Zar

    6 Fire Dragons with kit
    10 Banshees with kit in Serpent

    10 Dire Avengers, kit in Serpent
    10 Dire Avengers with kit

    Falcon
    2x War Walkers

    This would score a 5. 10 base +0 for 2 HQs, -5 for having double other slots than troops. As you can see your system unfairly hobbles Codexes (Generally older ones) which lack good troops choices. This list already has enough problems (2 scoring units, sub par HQ, low numbers) without being overly penalised by the comp system. Under the Australian comp standard, I'd expect to get somewhere between 3.5-4/5 depending on weapon options.

    Now, let's take a a fairly horrible boring netlist.

    Rune Priest with kit

    6X Grey Hunters in Razorbacks with whatever weapons and some kit.

    2X Long Fangs with 4 MLs each.

    As far as I can work out this would score a whopping 27. 10 base +2 for 1 HQ + 15 for 6 Troops vs 3 other selections.

    See the problem? Math comp simply doesn't work. Many, many, many people have tried it, and no one has managed to make a system that works. Even in the cases where it nearly works, it just changed the meta so that there is a new power build. As it is this system overly penalises soft armies and old codexes while giving boring power builds a boost they don't need. If you do want to do comp, round up some experienced gamer buddies to mark comp for you.



    I'd also query the sports system as well. Most of the things you can lose points for are things that should be givens. In my opinion the Comp systems that work best are either a Card system, where there is no peer marking, but players can complain to the TO who then issues a yellow or red card penalty based on their assessment, or just straight up letting players mark each other out of 5. In the second case, making sure you clearly define what each score means is important. (ie 5 = Best game ever, 4 = Good enjoyable game, 3 = Average game, 2 = Had minor issues with opponent, had MAJOR issues with opponent, 0 = Would never play this person again, please kick them out).

    Kinda sucks to play old codexes then don't it. of course in GW games it usually does. That Eldar list doesn't look particularly "soft" to me either. That wolf list you quoted only enters is at 1178 points or so as well... so shorting yourself 300pts to gain a +17 on comp I'm kinda cool with.
    altmann wrote:
    Yeah I can break that comp system in about 4 seconds with a ridiculous list.

    Also, reverse kill points? Does that work? (never tried it, but it seems a very odd way of having a mission).
    then DOO EEET come play games and have fun. bring the most wreck ass list you can bring. as for the reverse killpoints... the original situation that I themed that mission around was a bit... Odd.



    Slots Remaining
    Warhammer fantasy (13/14)
    Warmachine (12/16)
    Warhammer 40k (20/24)


  • AsherAsher Registered User regular
    You've kinda missed the point.

    The comp system you have is going to arbitrarily penalise codexes that don't have good troops choices and buff those that do. Space Wolves, Guard, Grey Knights, Blood Angels and even Necrons have good troops which people want to take anyway. Some other Codexes need to take so many units from other slots that they're unlikely to get any bonuses (nids, Dark Eldar) while others just want to get away with the minimum possible (Eldar, Tau). And those are the dexes that are the ones that should be getting a boost from a comp system.

    Oh and That Swoof list easily hits 1500 depending on options.

    Things my Red Terror has Swallowed Whole: A Mentors Librarian, a Fire Warrior Sash'Ui. Total Points: 109 (so far...)
    "Leapin' and Hoppin' on a Warpshadow" - Mah Nids
    The Swordwind Rises! - Biel Tan. All Aspects. All the time.
    "Before seeking Victory, first make yourself Invulnerable to defeat" - Sneaky sneaky Raptors
  • CorporateLogoCorporateLogo The toilet knows how I feelRegistered User regular
    edited January 2012
    Sam Butler wrote:
    More than 1 AV 14 vehicle (such as a Land raider, or Monolith) -5 per each past 1
    More Troops than other force org slots +5 pts for each additional troops choice.
    (example 5 troops, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Elite, 1 Heavy 1 HQ = +5 Pts)
    More units than double troops choices (not counting HQ) -5 for each additional special choice.
    (example 2 Troops, 2 Fast Attack, 2 Heavy = -5)

    As if Guard players needed any more incentive to go triple vendetta/veterans heavy

    I mean, the big problem in the current meta is the proliferation of mechanized everything, punishing the few AV 14 vehicles, one of which can be taken in a squadron of up to 3, is nonsensical

    If anything, you should penalize players for taking loads of transports, but even then I don't think that's a good idea as armies like DE need lots of transports to work

    CorporateLogo on
    Do not have a cow, mortal.

    3DS: 2251-4432-9039

    c9PXgFo.jpg
  • KhadourKhadour Dinosaur Cupcake Boston, MARegistered User regular
    While not part of this discussion, I've been watching it with interest. I'd like to point out that most tournaments at PAX are most definitely NOT populated with hardcore tourney players - the main point is to just relax, have fun, and enjoy playing with people you wouldn't normally play with. I'd venture to guess that a number of players signing up to participate have only played in a few competitive games (if those), and are just looking to enjoy themselves. Sam may know better than I do (since he's run this a few times now), but that's the impression that I've gotten over the years of spectating . . .

    Carry on.

    Do unto others 20% better than you would expect them to do unto you, to correct for subjective error - Linus Pauling
    jswidget.php?username=cmdour&numitems=5&text=title&images=small&show=recentplays&imagesonly=1&imagepos=right&inline=1&addstyles=1&domains%5B%5D=boardgame&imagewidget=1
  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    I apologize in advance for the following "Wall o Text"
    Khadour wrote:
    While not part of this discussion, I've been watching it with interest. I'd like to point out that most tournaments at PAX are most definitely NOT populated with hardcore tourney players - the main point is to just relax, have fun, and enjoy playing with people you wouldn't normally play with. I'd venture to guess that a number of players signing up to participate have only played in a few competitive games (if those), and are just looking to enjoy themselves. Sam may know better than I do (since he's run this a few times now), but that's the impression that I've gotten over the years of spectating . . .

    Carry on.

    By and large correct.
    Asher wrote:
    You've kinda missed the point.

    The comp system you have is going to arbitrarily penalize codexes that don't have good troops choices and buff those that do. Space Wolves, Guard, Grey Knights, Blood Angels and even Necrons have good troops which people want to take anyway. Some other Codexes need to take so many units from other slots that they're unlikely to get any bonuses (nids, Dark Eldar) while others just want to get away with the minimum possible (Eldar, Tau). And those are the dexes that are the ones that should be getting a boost from a comp system.

    Oh and That Swoof list easily hits 1500 depending on options.

    Fair enough. then they should take em. My goal is in no way intended to try an "re-balance" the meta of 40k. The comp merely reflects my belief that "top heavy" armies tend to be very much HA ha here's my Uber combo now take your army off the table now. IF older Codexes have "weaker" choices as troops and and nastier choices in other areas thats GW's doing not mine. (personally I play a "Fluffy" CSM Nurgle list, cult numbers everything that can be marked is etc) The comp has not been a real restriction for people in the past to do very well. If I remember correctly 2nd place last year was a "low comp" list.
    Sam Butler wrote:
    More than 1 AV 14 vehicle (such as a Land raider, or Monolith) -5 per each past 1
    More Troops than other force org slots +5 pts for each additional troops choice.
    (example 5 troops, 1 Fast Attack, 1 Elite, 1 Heavy 1 HQ = +5 Pts)
    More units than double troops choices (not counting HQ) -5 for each additional special choice.
    (example 2 Troops, 2 Fast Attack, 2 Heavy = -5)

    As if Guard players needed any more incentive to go triple vendetta/veterans heavy

    I mean, the big problem in the current meta is the proliferation of mechanized everything, punishing the few AV 14 vehicles, one of which can be taken in a squadron of up to 3, is nonsensical

    If anything, you should penalize players for taking loads of transports, but even then I don't think that's a good idea as armies like DE need lots of transports to work

    Any problems with the current "meta" are due to the now prevalent culture of many 40k Players seeking to win at all costs, as opposed to trying to use stuff that looks "fun" or challenging themselves to step outside their comfort zones. There is NO entry fee at Pax east, if you are bying a badge to ANY PAX event East or Prime do it to see the show, and meet other gamers if you are doing it to "win" I think you might be missing the point of PAX entirely. There are NO "big money" type prizes on the line at PAX east. At most is a new brick of dice, or a neat medal. I do not feel like going through EVERY SINGLE CODEX ENTRY and decreeing what IN MY OPINION is broken and assign a value to how broken it is therein lies a swift path to madness. Failing that I can only try and discourage people from taking the things that I have seen as an issue (Massed Landraiders, Special glass cannon elites/heavies that combo to remove 1-2 units a turn I'm looking at you Mr Lash prince...)

    to take a line from the Warmachine rulebook, "Play like you've got a pair." and by that I mean don't just take a "internet list" do your own thing. be courageous. Take stuff you wouldn't normally. a Guard Player taking Ogryn for example, or an Eldar player taking lots of Guardians. That said if your "fun" Armylist happens to be a net list ringer, or those are the only models that you own bring that list as well.

    The "comp" system I have out is simple, straightforward, and transparent. If older codexes suffer... Sorry that kinda sucks, but take it up with GW not me, its their game. IF you don't think you can have fun in this tournament simple don't enter, bring your army and try and wrangle a "casual" game instead.

    The tables and terrain will be set up all weekend. Fri, and Sun will have at least 5 and in all probability more tables unclaimed by an organized activity. Use em, and please have fun doing so.



  • SJSJ Registered User regular
    Their game, your tournament. You are responsible for the system your tournament uses and no one else. If you want a comp system, don't try to reason your way out of taking responsibility for it by shifting blame to GW's release schedule.

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    SJ wrote:
    Their game, your tournament. You are responsible for the system your tournament uses and no one else. If you want a comp system, don't try to reason your way out of taking responsibility for it by shifting blame to GW's release schedule.

    Then I'll sum up THE FULL AND TOTAL REASONING for you... again... The thought behind the comp system was to attempt to get folks to take more troops and less other stuff as "top heavy" armies are not horribly realistic. (Yeah I know I just referred to "realism" regarding to a game that spams nine foot tall hate monks with chainsaw swords...)


  • Anon the FelonAnon the Felon In bat country.Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    Wow. This was brought up in the 40k thread and I decided to find what was being talked about. This is...bizarre.

    Sam. Your comp system is terrible. Comp in general is terrible with 40k. Instead of saying "yeah old codex's suck, and now you're going to just not have fun playing/list building under my system. But that's not my fault, that's GW's fault." Why not just let people build their lists and come play 40k. As you said, the rewards are nothing more then bragging rights...so why over complicate things? Why make it so people who just want to play against their PA friends, who also play older books, struggle even more?

    I play BT. My troop choice isn't terrible, but under your system...I wouldn't at all be able to balance out a list that was remotely playable (even in a beer and pretzels game) without taking huge comp hits. That's a fault of your engineered comp system, not GW. GW did not intend for me to play BT under your defined rules, they intended for me to be able to balance out a list so I could exploit my codex's strengths and limit my weaknesses. It's not even a fault of an older book...it's just how the army operates. You're attempting to limit how a given army is actually designed to function!

    Just let people play bud. There's not point in complicating and making things a headache for everyone, when it's just a tournament for "I won PAX East 40k tourny! Yeah SJ! I beat you! WHEEEEE!" If later SJ wants to take it up with me that my list ran 2 LR's, only 25 troops, and 2 of every other slot? That's on him. Making an army try to function outside of it's intended realm is not how the game was designed in the first place, penalizing people for playing armor heavy guard, or fast attack focused Eldar is just not...nice (Nevermind the fact that some people may just only have some models, and not be even able to build a list under your comp system without violations that in any other game [including Adepticon, the 40k yardstick] aren't an issue).

    Disclaimer: I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your comp design. I'm trying to explain that it's deeply flawed, and your rational is also flawed.

    Anon the Felon on
  • SJSJ Registered User regular
    I didn't ask for your reasoning, I heard you the first time. I'm telling you to take responsibility for your comp system. If you think it's worth playing with, then advocate for it, take the blame for it for good or ill, don't try to shift the discussion to GW's failings.

  • AsherAsher Registered User regular
    Wanting to have a "Just for fun, take what you want" tournament is admirable, It is a good thing to want to run. I would absolutely attend a tournament with that philosophy.

    However, this is not what you will achieve with this comp system. Even if you don't end up with a lot of spammy power gaming lists from a few codexes you will still be overly penalising the fluffy bunny players for taking what they want to take, for fun.

    It's your tournament and you can run it however you want. I really do hope that you get the kind of participants and atmosphere you want, but that comp system is creating a horribly unfair playing feel that will reward the kind of builds you want to avoid.

    How does your fluffy Chaos list score under the system out of curiosity?

    Things my Red Terror has Swallowed Whole: A Mentors Librarian, a Fire Warrior Sash'Ui. Total Points: 109 (so far...)
    "Leapin' and Hoppin' on a Warpshadow" - Mah Nids
    The Swordwind Rises! - Biel Tan. All Aspects. All the time.
    "Before seeking Victory, first make yourself Invulnerable to defeat" - Sneaky sneaky Raptors
  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Wow. This was brought up in the 40k thread and I decided to find what was being talked about. This is...bizarre.

    Sam. Your comp system is terrible. Comp in general is terrible with 40k. Instead of saying "yeah old codex's suck, and now you're going to just not have fun playing/list building under my system. But that's not my fault, that's GW's fault." Why not just let people build their lists and come play 40k. As you said, the rewards are nothing more then bragging rights...so why over complicate things? Why make it so people who just want to play against their PA friends, who also play older books, struggle even more?

    I play BT. My troop choice isn't terrible, but under your system...I wouldn't at all be able to balance out a list that was remotely playable (even in a beer and pretzels game) without taking huge comp hits. That's a fault of your engineered comp system, not GW. GW did not intend for me to play BT under your defined rules, they intended for me to be able to balance out a list so I could exploit my codex's strengths and limit my weaknesses. It's not even a fault of an older book...it's just how the army operates. You're attempting to limit how a given army is actually designed to function!

    Just let people play bud. There's not point in complicating and making things a headache for everyone, when it's just a tournament for "I won PAX East 40k tourny! Yeah SJ! I beat you! WHEEEEE!" If later SJ wants to take it up with me that my list ran 2 LR's, only 25 troops, and 2 of every other slot? That's on him. Making an army try to function outside of it's intended realm is not how the game was designed in the first place, penalizing people for playing armor heavy guard, or fast attack focused Eldar is just not...nice (Nevermind the fact that some people may just only have some models, and not be even able to build a list under your comp system without violations that in any other game [including Adepticon, the 40k yardstick] aren't an issue).

    Disclaimer: I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your comp design. I'm trying to explain that it's deeply flawed, and your rational is also flawed.

    My impression is that Adepticon has largely done away with comp entirely... That's their call. You are entitled to your opinion about the comp system I have posted. and flawed or not its what it is. I do think you are mistaken about not being able to field a list using BT that you would have fun playing. But if the comp rubric bothers you that much... skip it and wrangle a "friendly" game that isn't in the tournament. There is no "minimum" comp score required to play in the tournament. If you table your opponents or otherwise max out all three missions almost regardless of your comp you will almost certainly place in the top three...
    SJ wrote:
    I didn't ask for your reasoning, I heard you the first time. I'm telling you to take responsibility for your comp system. If you think it's worth playing with, then advocate for it, take the blame for it for good or ill, don't try to shift the discussion to GW's failings.

    I DO think It is worth playing with. It is what it is. I wrote it. I used THE EXACT SAME RUBRIC last year with no complaints. You have also stated you are already not going to attend PAX East (due to time/money/family constraints) Why are you so fired up to attack the rubric I've posted? Is your intent to get folks riled up? if so you have succeeded. Debates about comp vs no comp tend to do that these days anyway.

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    edited January 2012
    Asher wrote:
    Wanting to have a "Just for fun, take what you want" tournament is admirable, It is a good thing to want to run. I would absolutely attend a tournament with that philosophy.

    However, this is not what you will achieve with this comp system. Even if you don't end up with a lot of spammy power gaming lists from a few codexes you will still be overly penalising the fluffy bunny players for taking what they want to take, for fun.

    It's your tournament and you can run it however you want. I really do hope that you get the kind of participants and atmosphere you want, but that comp system is creating a horribly unfair playing feel that will reward the kind of builds you want to avoid.

    How does your fluffy Chaos list score under the system out of curiosity?

    Not well. :P

    I think it's like a 5 or so.

    (1 HQ 2 Elites 2 Troops 1 Heavy)
    Typhus
    3 Termies in a raider
    Icon of Nurgle
    1 Termie w/twin LC
    2 Termies with CF

    Chaos dread with PlasCan and extra armor

    2x 7Plaguemarines in a rhino (Champ with fist, 2x PLasguns)

    and three Oblits.

    Sam Butler on
  • Anon the FelonAnon the Felon In bat country.Registered User regular
    Boy, sure looks like you tailored your comp conditions so that you took -0, and other people took penalties for what they had bought/painted while unaware of your abstract army composition conditions.

  • Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    Sam Butler wrote:
    SJ wrote:
    Their game, your tournament. You are responsible for the system your tournament uses and no one else. If you want a comp system, don't try to reason your way out of taking responsibility for it by shifting blame to GW's release schedule.

    Then I'll sum up THE FULL AND TOTAL REASONING for you... again... The thought behind the comp system was to attempt to get folks to take more troops and less other stuff as "top heavy" armies are not horribly realistic. (Yeah I know I just referred to "realism" regarding to a game that spams nine foot tall hate monks with chainsaw swords...)

    What you are missing, still, is that you don't need to incentivize taking troops by arbitrarily docking points via comp. The mission objectives should do that for you.

    Additionally, the hardest lists in the game (objectively, full stop, period) are troop-spam armies. I can fit a dozen Chimeras in 1500 points, using nothing but troops choices, and eleven of them are scoring. Good luck winning that game as Eldar or Tau when you're being penalized for taking units that can actually kill things instead of their craptastic troops options. Even if you do, it won't matter, since winning every objective would net you 3 points over my static comp score.

    I understand that your opinion is that incentivizing troops makes for better games. Your opinion is wrong and bad, and you've been presented with quite a bit of evidence that firmly reinforces that statement. If you're concerned with people taking rock hard lists, just say "Don't be a dick;" it's PAX, people are generally pretty good about not being dicks. What you're doing just ends up screwing people.

    sig.png
  • altmannaltmann Registered User regular
    I just feel, that frankly, as was pointed out earlier in this thread, no comp would fit nicely with the PAX CROWD. Not other tourney crowds, but the PAX crowd specifically.

    IF was playing my guard, I might actually take ogryn, but under this comp system, I wouldn't, because they aren't troops and take up a slot I don't need if I'm trying to get my troops at or under my other FOC slots. And they are expensive, so I'd actually be PENALISED by taking them as they would leave less room for troop choices in order to offset the comp i would want to get.

    It's just... not really well thought out. Sorry.

    My Flickr. My Fruitfucker computer and my Annarchy computer. See my PAX 2006/07/08 Flickr sets

    "Look at that subtle off-white coloring, the tasteful thickness of it... Oh my God, it even has a watermark."
  • crazygcrazyg Registered User regular
    wow, theres no money in this folks and just a medal, play within the parameters and get bonus points or play a list you like and take the handicap. I play orks, so I'm fine with a lolsy list, the rest of you are just taking this a little to seriously.

  • SJSJ Registered User regular
    yes, of course, just do this arbitrary things and be arbitrarily rewarded (hope you already have the models to do that), or don't do this arbitrary thing and get arbitrarily punished

  • Moe FwackyMoe Fwacky Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    If you guys can't play nice, you don't have to play at all.

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    crazyg wrote:
    wow, theres no money in this folks and just a medal, play within the parameters and get bonus points or play a list you like and take the handicap. I play orks, so I'm fine with a lolsy list, the rest of you are just taking this a little to seriously.

    Yep.
    SJ wrote:
    yes, of course, just do this arbitrary things and be arbitrarily rewarded (hope you already have the models to do that), or don't do this arbitrary thing and get arbitrarily punished

    I guess if you choose to look at it that way.

    Or Option 3 Bring an army and challenge someone to a game on an empty table. The 40k tables will be largely unclaimed by any organized activities on FRI and SUN. (just demos) and depending on how many people register for the Tournament may have some availability Sat as well.

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Slots Remaining
    Warhammer fantasy (13/14)
    Warmachine (12/16)
    Warhammer 40k (19/24)

  • CaptainClangCaptainClang Flopper of Cards, Chucker of Dice, Painter of Minis, Clicker of Mice Near the place where it's always sunnyRegistered User new member
    I would love to see some Anima Tactics. We started playing it at my shop and it's pretty sweet.

    "It's quite simple to deal with a banana fiend. First, you force him to drop the banana. Then, you eat the banana, thus disarming him. You have now rendered him helpless."

    -some British comedy troupe
  • GooseyGooseGooseyGoose Registered User regular
    Anyone playing World of Warcraft Minis?

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    I would love to see some Anima Tactics. We started playing it at my shop and it's pretty sweet.

    What scale is it? If it's a similar scale to 40k (28-30mmish) Feel free to bring some stuff and run a demo on an open table...

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Anyone playing World of Warcraft Minis?

    Not as far as I know off hand. (at least no organized play) but if you have stuff and want to play ANY MINIATUREs BASED GAME using an unused table feel free. The more stuff overall that happens on the miniwargaming zone tables the better.

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    edited January 2012

    Slots Remaining
    Warhammer fantasy (13/14)
    Warmachine (11/16)
    Warhammer 40k (11/16)

    Sam Butler on
  • CaptainClangCaptainClang Flopper of Cards, Chucker of Dice, Painter of Minis, Clicker of Mice Near the place where it's always sunnyRegistered User new member
    edited January 2012
    Sam Butler wrote:
    I would love to see some Anima Tactics. We started playing it at my shop and it's pretty sweet.

    What scale is it? If it's a similar scale to 40k (28-30mmish) Feel free to bring some stuff and run a demo on an open table...

    It's a 32mm skirmish game. You just need a 4x4 table and some basic terrain(preferably with some buildings or ruins, as you can jump off of them onto people's heads) and you're good. I'll try to bring my stuff!

    CaptainClang on
    "It's quite simple to deal with a banana fiend. First, you force him to drop the banana. Then, you eat the banana, thus disarming him. You have now rendered him helpless."

    -some British comedy troupe
  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Sam Butler wrote:
    I would love to see some Anima Tactics. We started playing it at my shop and it's pretty sweet.

    What scale is it? If it's a similar scale to 40k (28-30mmish) Feel free to bring some stuff and run a demo on an open table...

    It's a 32mm skirmish game. You just need a 4x4 table and some basic terrain(preferably with some buildings or ruins, as you can jump off of them onto people's heads) and you're good. I'll try to bring my stuff!

    Fantastic. SO it is actually compatible with a "standard" 40k table...

  • Sam ButlerSam Butler Registered User regular
    Slots Remaining
    Warhammer fantasy (13/14)
    Warmachine (10/16)
    Warhammer 40k (11/16)

«13
Sign In or Register to comment.