Topic: 10th 40kOnline UK Tournament

[Chuckles, The Space Marine Clown]

Not hugely keen on the idea of a 2000 point game with the amount of scenery BFG can muster...

Bezerek won last time (and deservedly so), no reason to make it easier for him

[Changeyname]

Not hugely keen on the idea of a 2000 point game with the amount of scenery BFG can muster...

Agreed, I have no issue with varying the game sizes we play over the day but pushing it to 2000pts would be a little harsh considering personally I think that we barely had enough scenery to cover the 1500pt games... 

[Rathstar]

what about 'escaltion' like what bfg run, as that has 4-5 games going from (i think) 500pts to 2000pts

Not too keen on the smaller games, as it becomes too much of a paper, scissors, stone game. Larger games allow you to have a more balanced list, plus smaller games favour armies with good troop choices (as the amount you have to spend on troops is a bigger proportion of your whole army).

Rathstar

[Shas'Oink]

what about 'escaltion' like what bfg run, as that has 4-5 games going from (i think) 500pts to 2000pts

I think that it would be better not to simply replicate an event that the BFG already run. Additionally, there is the trouble that everyone will have to put together about 4 army lists, and if these need to be checked then that is a lot more work for people! (g00gle5!)

2 at 1500 and then 2 at 1750 MIGHT still be quite tight on time, I'll have to have a chat with g00gle on how things went organisationally last year.

of course, the smaller game could use the old 40k in 40mins patrol rules... (as opposed to 500pt armies which can favour some builds over others) as these seemed to work pretty well. One way we can spice things up is to rule that the small force (be it 400 or 500pts) is drawn from units that are in the larger army. Though I'm not sure if this encourages or discourages patrol like forces?!?

[Rathstar]

I agree that we hardly want to reward g00gle5 for running such a great event by making him check 4 times as many lists.

I think any game as low as 500 pts should use the combat patrol rules to remove ordnance, 2+ saves & 3+ wound characters. Lower pts games can be unbalanced but at least they are less likely to be if we use the patrol rules. However it still favours some armies more than others, such as dark eldar (all vehicles allowed) over eldar (no wraithlords or vehicles apart from war walkers).

Rathstar

PS. I'll be attending what ever the rules are.

[Changeyname]

TBH I don't know how BFG run their escalation but if I were doing it I'd make sure that all four lists built on each other as they go up, so you cannot have anything in the smaller lists which dont then appear in the bigger ones

That said, it would mean we'd all have to familiarise ourselves with the current incarnation of the combat patrol rules which IIRC are in the Battle Missions book

I'd say just leave it as the suggested 1500pts x 2 and 1750pts x 2 games and simply have the 1750pts list as a copy of the 1500pts with the extras added on top, less work for google checking them and more tactical consideration for us having to make the two lists competitive while largely similar in build

[Guildmage Aech]

Or going back to the 1500 for all 4 games isn't a bad plan, 1500 is an excellent points value for games. I would like to say that I do like the idea of having 4 games opposed to 3 because its more opportunities to play other forum members and have a game instead of a quick "hey, its you!" over a sandwich at lunchtime.

It might not be a good idea to clone another of the BFG's events though, a few of their members like going so it would be a bit less repetitive for them.

Not hugely keen on the idea of a 2000 point game with the amount of scenery BFG can muster...

Bezerek won last time (and deservedly so), no reason to make it easier for him

Grrr! *shakes fist*

[Killing Time]

4 x 1500 would be fine, but I do like the idea of an escalation type event. It wouldn't have to be a clone of a BFG event as we could certainly personalise it in some way.
I certainly feel 1750 is the top end.

KT

[Tarrin the Space Marine]

How about 1250 for two games. And you have a defined 500 point bolt on for 2 games.
Nice and easy.

1250 is not a bad size.

I would also like to suggest the variety rule from vanquish, where you cannot duplicate units outage of troops. Stops unit spam.

I hopefully will be free to play.

[Chuckles, The Space Marine Clown]

Not a massive fan of that suggestion, seeing as Hive Guard are Tyranids' only genuinely reliable ranged anti-tank...

[Killing Time]

I'm not a fan of restricting peoples FOC choices either.
It has good intentions, but ultimately it hurts some codicies a lot worse than others, and the powergamers still come out on top.
It's very easy to put six completely different Grey Hunter choices on the table and have them all be excellent troop choices. You can't do the same with Necrons unless you artificially add one extra model to the unit... and that's hardly worth it.

KT

[Chuckles, The Space Marine Clown]

He did say Troops would be exempt... but I still don't think it's a good idea

[Killing Time]

Ooops. Missed that.
But as you say, I'm not a fan either. The point still stands I think.

[Tarrin the Space Marine]

was just putting an idea forward.  anyway the 1250 + 500 still stands as a suggestion.

[Chuckles, The Space Marine Clown]

And we were just explaining why we don't think it's a good idea. No judgement made on the person who suggested it. You know we love you really 

[Irisado]

I'd say just leave it as the suggested 1500pts x 2 and 1750pts x 2 games and simply have the 1750pts list as a copy of the 1500pts with the extras added on top, less work for google checking them and more tactical consideration for us having to make the two lists competitive while largely similar in build

If you're going to go down the route of different points levels, then this seems to be the simplest way to go about it, and it would avoid giving the organisers too many headaches in my opinion.

Also, a simple format along those lines might encourage those of us who haven't attended before to get involved  .

[Tarrin the Space Marine]

Maybe we should make it as complicated as possible so Irisado doesn't get involved. * 

Chuckie,
I thought the comments were to the 2nd part of my suggestion, not the first. 
I'll kick ass at whatever points we choose.


*Mainly as the rest of us want to stand a chance.  Seriously though sir, would be good if you can make it.

[g00gle5]

Good evening, gentlemen!

Right then, lots of good conversation going on, let's keep this thread as a brain storm session for ideas for this tournament before I (or traditionally O!nk) set up a proper thread with a first page post as reference.

I've finally got myself into the right mindset now and am fully up for organising this lovely shin-dig of ours again.

And this time I will be purely organising; it will be the first tournament since I started attending (from the 2nd one) that I won't be playing games in as well. I felt after the last one, with me not only adding in extra rules, upping the points limit but also losing organisational help on the day from a few key members it was just too much of a struggle to do all of it and I always feel gutted I don't get to wander around and watch the games anyway, so in all respects it will make the day run a lot smoother and I will also have just as much fun (and less stress!).

Things I'm going to lay the law down with:

It will be four games. Four games gives us a clear winner, three often does not.

1750 for all four is possible with me just organising but I'm flexible with variable points limits as it is a push.

I will try and do something about the scenery issue so don't think of this as a limiting factor as this point. It could be worth discussing if we add a pound or two to the entry cost this could help to cover additional scenery costs as a last resort. Scenery is on the club's agenda every time we meet so don't think it isn't something we aren't aware of.

With me just organising it gives a lot of room to make it more fun, and possibly more complicated if we are that way inclined -- bear in mind at the moment I currently organise the entire tournament in our 15 minute breaks between games, so having two and a half hours gives me a lot more time to do behind the scenes stuff.

The achievement system went down very well last time despite it was sprung on you all on the day. Expect me to spring some secret, fun and minor influencing scoring system on the day again.

With that new information available, continue discussion!

[Chuckles, The Space Marine Clown]

Aw man, I was looking forward to having another one of our crazy games! I was even going to ask if you minded me paying some extra points to give my hive tyrant a 6+ invulnerable save he could make ridiculously often! What am I going to do now?

Seriously, while I think it's a shame (especially for you), I think you are right that having you simply organize the thing rather than compete will probably help things. I don't think that having 4 1750 point games is entirely viable even with that change though (although I might be wrong about that, and if nobody else agrees then I am happy to go along with the majority decision). I like the idea of having some 1500 and some 1750 point games as that adds some variation to the proceedings, and I reckon it could easily be made to work without making everybody's life too difficult.

[popsical]

Maybe we could have a survival of the imperium day?  see if the enemies of man win more or less than the pawns of the corpse emperor.
Just as a side show.

changing points seems a little contrived, what about 4 battles at 1650pts