Is this something I missed, or has just nothing been announced? Any clue what the Points values will be? I figure a nine month lead time to paint up an army is decent, but it is tricky to get started on something fresh without any direction to go on.

That 'Throne of Skulls' thing wasn't the Vegas GT format, was it?

Full details have not come out yet, but I am guessing it will be very similar to the UK version.

Vegas 2011 - Throne of Skulls
2000 points for Warhammer
1500 points for 40K
750 points for LOTR

The last information is that it would be the Throne of Skulls exactly the same as in the UK.

Ironman XVIII (40k Januasy 15) and Golden Snotling (Fantasy March 12) in Vegas will use the same format.

Yeah, 1500 for 40K? Stupidity!

It may be stupid, but it means a lot less painting!

1500 is for limeys and sissies!

I actually like 1500 points these days. I used to always try to play larger games but the smaller ones I find are much more challenging because I can't just take a steamroller list. And 2000 is a whole lot better for Fantasy battles.

grumbles... throne of skulls is a hobby day... so yea... you won a ticket into a hobby day....

The problems and reasons i wouldn't attend are
1) the random pairings every round...
2) The "reach around" favorite army format...
3) the winner is determined by how well everyone with the same army as you did... and the mathematical formula for it doesn't even make sense if you are the ONLY one to bring a specific army...

truly fail...

The people i've met who are going to the Big GTs want competition... Not a glorified gamesday mega battle..

Random pairings will most likely be random between people with the same record. I can't imagine they wouldn't do this as it's a simple button click to do it. Favorite army format does suck but there isn't any comp or actual sportsmanship scores. And lastly most the people I know that have won a ticket will probably head there. Remember more than a few of the tickets given out already were for pretty non-competitive formats.

It'll be a fun weekend with gambling and drinking after gaming. It'll still be fun I'm looking forward to it. Plus it's a chance to meet other players who do well around the country which will be fun too.

Hulksmash wrote:Random pairings will most likely be random between people with the same record. I can't imagine they wouldn't do this as it's a simple button click to do it. Favorite army format does suck but there isn't any comp or actual sportsmanship scores. And lastly most the people I know that have won a ticket will probably head there. Remember more than a few of the tickets given out already were for pretty non-competitive formats.

It'll be a fun weekend with gambling and drinking after gaming. It'll still be fun I'm looking forward to it. Plus it's a chance to meet other players who do well around the country which will be fun too.

: ) I said I wouldn't go... There are plenty of people going simply for the trip to vegas with 40k as an added activity...

But I don't have a huge disposable income for gambling... or the stomach for it. That goes second for the drinking... but I do have the stomach for that

Hrm.....if it *does* copy the Throne of Skulls format, might have to count me out as well. I don't really have much interest in flying across the country for that kind of....well, whatever kind of event it is.

Yes, god forbid people just go and play some games for fun. Not to mention that, if it was completely wack, there's nothing else to do in Las Vegas.

Monster Rain wrote:Yes, god forbid people just go and play some games for fun. Not to mention that, if it was completely wack, there's nothing else to do in Las Vegas.

No reason to be nasty. We are just expressing our personal opinions.

The FAQ for the tournament states that you will be randomly paired with people with similar win loss ratios.

Dashofpepper wrote:Hrm.....if it *does* copy the Throne of Skulls format, might have to count me out as well. I don't really have much interest in flying across the country for that kind of....well, whatever kind of event it is.

What's so hard to figure out Dash? It's a DRINKING event!

I'm working on a training regime to get my alcohol tolerance back up to at least 50% of my college level. Drinking with Spettigue at Games Day showed me just how much I lost as I progress into my golden years.

I'm looking forward to it. It should be a lot of fun

Spettigue doesn't count. The man is 90% alcohol already so for him it's like drinking water.......

vhwolf wrote:The FAQ for the tournament states that you will be randomly paired with people with similar win loss ratios.

Well this is a bit better : )

But unless events start putting up airfare also... its a huge investment.

Did any events have Airfare?

Have any events said they were paying for the GT ticket??

frgsinwntr wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Yes, god forbid people just go and play some games for fun. Not to mention that, if it was completely wack, there's nothing else to do in Las Vegas.

No reason to be nasty. We are just expressing our personal opinions.

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound nasty.

I'll be a little more more liberal with the Orkmoticons next time. My bad.

Still, why not view is as a chance to get in a bit of relaxed gaming with some of the best players in the country?

Monster Rain:

I don't get it though, are you getting relaxing gaming in, or are you playing in a tournament against some of the best players in the country? Many would be flying and paying quite a bit to do that.

Keep in mind that they are calling this thing the 'Throne of Skulls', not something like 'Pony and Kittens Singalong'.

Oh really?

Are you sure it's not called the Pony and Kitten singalong?

Exclusive events in Vegas are overrated anyway.

Monster Rain wrote:

Still, why not view is as a chance to get in a bit of relaxed gaming with some of the best players in the country?

When I want a chill-out game with Hulksmash, we get on Vassal, call each other up on Skype and have a game from the comfort of our respective homes. If I want some friendly games, I can get them at a tournament or not at a tournament. If I want to stake myself against the best of the best - I travel to a competitive tournament, which this apparently is not. I don't need to fly to Las Vegas to drink or




Las Vegas itself - the last time I was there was for Defcon 2005; I was a keynote speaker for ground zero exploits; Thursday through Sunday. I even got a "I am the Fed" T-shirt from the "Spot the Fed" game. Damned socks and sandals game me away. Lets see....my preferred game is roulette. I play a losing progression on black and red, and I always follow the house.

I brought $500 to gamble with. Thursday night I was at one of the casinos with the other faculty in attendance from West Point. I lost my $500 in short order; table never went two of the same color before I hit my cap. i went to the ATM and got out $1000 (losing progression right?) I went back to the roulette table and said to the lady on my right, "Ma'am, black or red?" She says, "Black!" The dealer spins, and I put $1000 on black...and boom; I've got $2,000. Between events at Defcon and during the evenings, I play my losing progression and pick up another $8,000. It works, but its boring, and more like work than gambling. You could put a robot there and have them do it for you. =p

At any rate, Sunday morning rolls around - I've spent about $5,000 dollars; got my girlfriend at the time some nice stuff, bought some furniture to have shipped home, some other stuff....I've got $5,000 left and decide to hit up the Hard Rock Casino before we go to the airport. Instead of starting at $10, I drop $1,000 on the table on red - table rolls black. $2,000 on black, and the table goes red. only have $2,000 left so I drop that on red too - and then I'm broke. Awww. :(

No need to repeat my addiction there. =p The system only breaks down when you get greedy - and its *very* hard not to step out and take some risks - that's the whole thrill of gambling in the first place!

Yeah, so terrible that Americans will be forced to play 1500 the level at which the game designers play tested and designed for. Want some proof check out my articles about the matter...

http://bloodofkittens.com/category/in-defense-of-1500/

http://bloodofkittens.com/2010/07/21/meat-for-meta-the-truth-behind-gw-playtesting

Tasty, You articles are a bunch of opinion based rants. Everyone can do that. Here's mine

I'll concede that 3rd Edition/early 4th were the 1,500pt era. GW stated it back then.

But current codexes (BA's, Nids and IG/SW's to an extent) are extremely more flexible and fluid at 2k. There are quite a few builds in the Tyrannid book (read almost all good ones) that require 2k to pull off. Not to mention that rock/paper/scissor is a lot more likely at 1,500 because you simply can't build an army to be as all purpose without the extra points. Making the game far more about match-up's than it is at higher point values. Personally from extensive play experience I have to say that the medium of 40k has shifted closer to 1,850/2k with games breaking down faster the farther you move from them.

Enjoy having your head in the sand and not realizing the game has changed. It HAD to so that GW could keep increasing profits. Next I bet you'll say that Fantasy should still be played at 2k cause that's what they used to playtest it at way back when....

If GW did not think the game was meant for 1500 they would not have decided to make the tournament 1500 points. I will say the game plays different at 1500 than 2000 you have to be able to use your chosen army better when you can't put everything in it.

lol@tastytaste using his own blog as a reference to support his argument.

So then the game in 3rd and 4th edition here in the US was meant to be played at 1750-1850 depending on the year cause that's what GW made the tournament points at? Sorry Vhwolf, that arguement doesn't really fly.

I play in a 1,500pt tournament every month to month an a half in a non-comp and non-sport tournament that is based purely on win/loss record. It's a 4 game tournament that is a good time. But I see more variety at 2k. It's not about using your army better. It's hoping you get the right match-ups. Bascially 1850-2k is tactical, 1.5k is closer to rock/paper/scissor.

Poor Americans having trouble wrapping your head around 1500? Well, at 2000 list design consists of "How many [insert IG/space wolf vehicle] can I have"?

olympia wrote:Poor Americans having trouble wrapping your head around 1500? Well, at 2000 list design consists of "How many [insert IG/space wolf vehicle] can I have"?

Quoted for being the sad, sad truth.

Really Monster? How many IG lists have won a tournament at 2k around SoCal? 0 GT's and non of the tournament's I've attended this year or heard about second hand. 2 Space Wolf armies have won a "GT" in the 4 in SoCal (Reece and I's) which both only run 8ish AV units and I'm pretty sure they haven't won any others on the west coast. I can run 8ish vehicles at 1,500 easy

It's not wrapping our mind around 1,500. A lot of us have it figured out and do enjoy it as a different style of play. It also makes a 4-round tourney possible in a single day (1h 45m rounds). But it is very match-up dependent. My personal experience only. But based a lot of playing this year at 1,500 and 2k (and no where in between till this wekeend )

The points are not the real problem, even though low points are kind of boring.

the problem is that you have to qualify at competative tournaments to get the chance to play and then when you get there its this throne of skulls (crap)

so we get to play in some wack job fun gamesday type non-tested fanboy event.

please color me not impressed by there support of the hobby

If you cant do it right ask adepticon or bols to run it for you.

I just moved here, Hulk. Back east in my area it was exactly as Olympia described.

The RTT I attended this weekend was different, so hopefully the trend around here is different.

@Monsterrain

Ah, all is forgiven You'll like it out here. Lots of tournaments (2 a month generally) and normally some pretty good players.

Hulksmash wrote:So then the game in 3rd and 4th edition here in the US was meant to be played at 1750-1850 depending on the year cause that's what GW made the tournament points at? Sorry Vhwolf, that arguement doesn't really fly.

I play in a 1,500pt tournament every month to month an a half in a non-comp and non-sport tournament that is based purely on win/loss record. It's a 4 game tournament that is a good time. But I see more variety at 2k. It's not about using your army better. It's hoping you get the right match-ups. Bascially 1850-2k is tactical, 1.5k is closer to rock/paper/scissor.

The thing you are not taking into consideration is that the game designers are in the UK not the U.S. and that the U.S. during the 3rd and 4th edition years was a rogue element as far as GW tournaments was concerned(we always have to do our own thing, even fought a war about it once ). Having the points level at 1750 was a comprimise between the US staff and the UK.

Your experiences at 1500 might be this way. However other people have other experiences. In the areas where I normally play in a combination of leagues campaigns and tournaments I have a different experience. I am not saying that one point level is right and the other is wrong just they they play tactically different. I am not saying that the designers don't play at all different levels just that they have made the decision to hold tournaments at 1500 for 40k because they feel it is a more balanced point level.

One thing to remember is that the designers don't design the game for balance they design it for a fun evening with your mates a concept they have always tried to integrate into their tournaments.

So the fact that 1,500 requires less time and is easier to run didn't have anything to do with them making that the point level. Based on GW's entire take on tournament play (according to Jervis) I doubt that balanced point level came into. It's a descision to make it easier to run (8 hour day instead of 12). And it's a format they already had a system in place for (again, easier to run, less effort).

And since the US stopped running the point value here doesn't matter since they don't have a system in place anymore anyway. I keep hoping that they'll change it up when they finally annouce the US packet but it depends on how much work it would take GW to change the format here.

And as for our experiences the only people locally that run 1,500pt anything are an extremely competitive group of players that don't believe in comp, sports, or non-book scenarios. Which means I'm going to have a very different view from an area that runs regular leagues and campaigns at 1,500. To each his own.

Hulksmash wrote:So the fact that 1,500 requires less time and is easier to run didn't have anything to do with them making that the point level. Based on GW's entire take on tournament play (according to Jervis) I doubt that balanced point level came into. It's a descision to make it easier to run (8 hour day instead of 12). And it's a format they already had a system in place for (again, easier to run, less effort).

And since the US stopped running the point value here doesn't matter since they don't have a system in place anymore anyway. I keep hoping that they'll change it up when they finally annouce the US packet but it depends on how much work it would take GW to change the format here.

And as for our experiences the only people locally that run 1,500pt anything are an extremely competitive group of players that don't believe in comp, sports, or non-book scenarios. Which means I'm going to have a very different view from an area that runs regular leagues and campaigns at 1,500. To each his own.

1. There might be some value to this but the fact is that they have set the point level at 1500 and that the majority of play testing is done at this point level. I don't think easier was the goal when they set up the Throne of Skulls I think the intent was to get more diverse armies at the events.
2. In March all of the tournament orginizers were told that it would be 1500 points and then in May they were told that GW would be running the Throne of Skulls Format this was reinforced more recently by saying that GW was using it but that each orginizer should feel free to use whatever system they wanted to as each event is a different experience.
3. In each area and each Metagame you will find different things going on some have melta spam some have hordes (heck in my regular game group no one plays Space Marines on a regular basis and in my Arizona group Tau is everywhere).

The argument of what is more balanced will always be influenced by who you are playing against and what the definition of balanced is as it can mean different things to each person in relationship to the game.

The OT was what format will be used in Vegas and as of today the word is it will be Throne of Skulls. (with GW that is subject to change up until the day of the event) for all of the people who are bashing the style of event why don't you at least give it a try before making a decision about its merits. (I am holding a trial event at a local store in Vegas to see how it runs before running it at Ironman XVIII)

At the end of the day we are all playing a game for different reasons and unless you are cheating there is no right or wrong way to play.

Monster Rain wrote:

olympia wrote:Poor Americans having trouble wrapping your head around 1500? Well, at 2000 list design consists of "How many [insert IG/space wolf vehicle] can I have"?

Quoted for being the sad, sad truth.

If that is true then 1500 is "Do I field rock, paper, or scissors?" Or if you are lucky to have one of the few codexes that allow you to create the option for "safty scissors" by having just enough to add a little rock to your scissors. From what I have seen this allows you to talk bigger and still lose to anyone with a solid rock or real scissors.

ymmv

@Vhwolf

1. There is 0 proof that the studio playtests at all or that they playtest at 1,500. And judging by the most recent codexes 1,500 isn't the standard anymore. Try making some of the more dynamic lists in the recent codexes and 1,500 and let me know how that goes. Hell make a decent nid list that doesn't have Tervigons and Hive Guard at 1,500. At higher point values you can create diversity where as at 1,500 you are required almost to fill certain parts with certain units to be even mildly competitive.

2. I know that TO's have been told they are going to use the ToS format for the Vegas GT. But that could change quite easily in the next 9 months up to the event. I've only got a mild hope in this area but my fingers are still crossed. I'll have fun either way. I'd just have more fun at higher point values. If it's not to get more games in I want to play with more stuff.

3. Having played all up and down the West Coast, across Texas, and having now flown to the East Coast I have to say that the dynamic is pretty similar across the country. The guys that win regularly will win with any army. There can be a local swing but I've found the more competitive the scene the less of a meta swing you see. As good players build take all lists you don't see a huge preponderance (sp?) of melta, mech, horde, or anything else. You see balanced lists built to play against balance. Which is possilbe at 2k and far harder at 1.5k.

Post of the info on here about the Ironman XVIII. I'd be down to make a quick trip out that way (only 4 hours each way ) to play in it. I'll personally play any style of event. But if your using that format your going to need a decent sized turnout or you can't really do it. Unless your taking out the "army" winners. What happens if you actually have a huge spread of army books? That would just turn it into a straight win tournament. Also you might want to figure out what you'll do about single army entrants since they by definition can't have an average and would be unable to win the tournament.

In fact the only thing I can say in the positive about the format is that there is no way they are going to get a clear winner the normal way so they went this route. I understand the reasoning and don't think they could make a "competitive" event with the numbers they are hoping to get. I'm looking forward to Vegas. Some of the best players in the country that I have met have their tickets and will hopefully make it too. It's gonna be sweet

kirsanth wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

olympia wrote:Poor Americans having trouble wrapping your head around 1500? Well, at 2000 list design consists of "How many [insert IG/space wolf vehicle] can I have"?

Quoted for being the sad, sad truth.

If that is true then 1500 is "Do I field rock, paper, or scissors?" Or if you are lucky to have one of the few codexes that allow you to create the option for "safty scissors" by having just enough to add a little rock to your scissors. From what I have seen this allows you to talk bigger and still lose to anyone with a solid rock or real scissors.

ymmv

Meh. I don't see it as being that big of a difference between the point values. I was more commenting on the fact that in some places the competitive scene is a never-ending parade of whatever the broken FOTM is, and that isn't even remotely fun or interesting in my opinion.

Monster Rain wrote:Meh. I don't see it as being that big of a difference between the point values.

I play Tyranids only. The difference in point values is stark, as Hulksmash pointed out.

For some codexes this is not as apparent, thus the actual problem.

kirsanth wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Meh. I don't see it as being that big of a difference between the point values.

I play Tyranids only. The difference in point values is stark, as Hulksmash pointed out.

I guess it comes down to whether or not one believes the Codexes are balanced. As I believe that they are, I have a hard time understanding the concept that when two armies are built with the same points restrictions that one of them would be at a disadvantage.

What armies would you say have an advantage at 1500 over Tyranids that wouldn't also be a factor at 2000 points?

stormboy97 wrote:The points are not the real problem, even though low points are kind of boring.

the problem is that you have to qualify at competative tournaments to get the chance to play and then when you get there its this throne of skulls (crap)

so we get to play in some wack job fun gamesday type non-tested fanboy event.

please color me not impressed by there support of the hobby

That's perfectly expressed. Quoted +1. Fight your butt off in a competitive tournament to win a ticket to...a hobby day? No thanks, not even if it were free.

The golden ticket is more about showing you can earn it than the actual tournament.

GW, god bless em, does not know how to run tournaments. At least not in the USA. (The UKGT looks like a pretty sweet event). They should just use the exact same format as the UKGT instead of this weird ass system they are implementing. Honestly, if it weren't the "tournament of champions" I wouldn't even go. The format looks really weird and not all that fun. I could definitely be wrong, but I am not that excited about the way they are structuring this event.

As for 1500 vs 2000.

The game is so much different at those points levels. Different armies rise up to the top of the heap. A lot of armies don't hit their stride until 2K.

I like 2K because it allows you to field an army that has the tools to take on nearly all eventualities. At 1500 you can very easily find yourself in a situation where you just don't have the tools to take on a certain list. It becomes less about skill and even more about match-ups than normal.

When both armies have all the tools to fight one another, which is easier to do at 2K, then the game is more of a level playing field.

1500 is fun, but not as fun, IMO, as 2000.

Dashofpepper wrote:

stormboy97 wrote:The points are not the real problem, even though low points are kind of boring.

the problem is that you have to qualify at competative tournaments to get the chance to play and then when you get there its this throne of skulls (crap)

so we get to play in some wack job fun gamesday type non-tested fanboy event.

please color me not impressed by there support of the hobby

That's perfectly expressed. Quoted +1. Fight your butt off in a competitive tournament to win a ticket to...a hobby day? No thanks, not even if it were free.

Mark Parker for the win

Well said! +2

Mark has earned a bonus point

If only one of a army type shows up to an event the average score for that army is 3 for a 1 day event or 5 for a two day event in the rules packet. I am guessing it is one point per round so for Ironman so am going with 4 points as it will be four rounds. I am waiting on one more piece to fit into place before I start talking about Ironman in earnest but I will start getting more information out around the first of October.

I am not going to talk about play testing and different point levels any more because unless someone really spends time playing at various points they just don't have a good reference. Suffice to say the game is fun, challenging, and different at every level.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Reecius wrote:The golden ticket is more about showing you can earn it than the actual tournament.

GW, god bless em, does not know how to run tournaments. At least not in the USA. (The UKGT looks like a pretty sweet event). They should just use the exact same format as the UKGT instead of this weird ass system they are implementing. Honestly, if it weren't the "tournament of champions" I wouldn't even go. The format looks really weird and not all that fun. I could definitely be wrong, but I am not that excited about the way they are structuring this event.

As for 1500 vs 2000.

The game is so much different at those points levels. Different armies rise up to the top of the heap. A lot of armies don't hit their stride until 2K.

I like 2K because it allows you to field an army that has the tools to take on nearly all eventualities. At 1500 you can very easily find yourself in a situation where you just don't have the tools to take on a certain list. It becomes less about skill and even more about match-ups than normal.

When both armies have all the tools to fight one another, which is easier to do at 2K, then the game is more of a level playing field.

1500 is fun, but not as fun, IMO, as 2000.

The UKGT is the Throne of Skulls Format as of May this year.

Monster Rain wrote:I guess it comes down to whether or not one believes the Codexes are balanced. As I believe that they are, I have a hard time understanding the concept that when two armies are built with the same points restrictions that one of them would be at a disadvantage.

What armies would you say have an advantage at 1500 over Tyranids that wouldn't also be a factor at 2000 points?

Not so sure about balance, really. But that is for another thread.

It is not really so much a matter of "Tyranids cannot cope with Space Wolves at 1.5k".
It is more along the lines of "Space Wolves can deal with everything Tyranids can field a 1.5k, but the Tyranids have to pick which set of Space Wolves options to counter at 1.5k."

Whereas at 2k+ everyone has their toys on the table and it is a matter of finding out which player uses them better.

While not 100% true, it seems to be a lot more obvious to the folks making the Tyranid list in that example.
(I am picking Tyranids and Space Wolves arbitrarily, there are other armies that this can apply to as I see it)

Editing to add:
I think Reecius summarized my issue with 1.5 vs 2k better than I did.

@Vhwolf
Ah, then I stand corrected.

I assume this funky structure is to encourage people to bring different lists. I will wait to pass final judgment until I have actually played in the event. It just seems like a weird format to me.

Dark Eldar are a great example.

At 1500 points - I almost have a full force org chart, and regularly beat face. I play them at 2k as well, but refuse to field them beyond, because they don't *gain* anything. Most armies have a tough time answering me at 1500 points - tack on 500 points and bring us to 2k and we're on even footing. Add any more points and I'm at a disadvantage.

Dashofpepper wrote:Dark Eldar are a great example.

At 1500 points - I almost have a full force org chart, and regularly beat face. I play them at 2k as well, but refuse to field them beyond, because they don't *gain* anything. Most armies have a tough time answering me at 1500 points

There must not be many Space Wolf players around your neck of the woods, huh?

Monster Rain wrote:
I guess it comes down to whether or not one believes the Codexes are balanced. As I believe that they are, I have a hard time understanding the concept that when two armies are built with the same points restrictions that one of them would be at a disadvantage.

Monster Rain wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Dark Eldar are a great example.

At 1500 points - I almost have a full force org chart, and regularly beat face. I play them at 2k as well, but refuse to field them beyond, because they don't *gain* anything. Most armies have a tough time answering me at 1500 points

There must not be many Space Wolf players around your neck of the woods, huh?

Why would Space Wolves matter if everyone is equal? Especially at all point costs. . . .

kirsanth wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:
I guess it comes down to whether or not one believes the Codexes are balanced. As I believe that they are, I have a hard time understanding the concept that when two armies are built with the same points restrictions that one of them would be at a disadvantage.

Monster Rain wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Dark Eldar are a great example.

At 1500 points - I almost have a full force org chart, and regularly beat face. I play them at 2k as well, but refuse to field them beyond, because they don't *gain* anything. Most armies have a tough time answering me at 1500 points

There must not be many Space Wolf players around your neck of the woods, huh?

Why would Space Wolves matter if everyone is equal? Especially at all point costs. . . .

Because it's a different Codex, which is balanced against the other Codexes at various points levels?

What are you getting at? I could have just as easily said IG, Space Marines or Orks. Space Wolves just came immediately to mind because Raiders are allergic to Long Fang spam.

@Monsterrain

It's more about lists that need depth to pull even vs. all styles of lists that it is about specific instances when it comes to codexes. I also believe the game is more balanced that it has ever been. But that is at the 2k level. At the 1,500pt level there are armies that excell:

1) DE
2) Orks
3) Seer Council Eldar

To name a few because these can either overwhelm in a certain way or can saturate their force orgs with cheap awesomeness. That gets limited at 2k because the extra points open up quite a few codexes (Nids, BA's, Daemons, SM's) to bring more well rounded solid lists. I'll say any army at 2k can take on any other (even necrons in the right hands ) but that isn't the case at 1.5k. Reece hit it on the head there.

Oh and at 1,500 even wolves have a problem with a well built DE list. I know mine would have and I had 16 Missiles and 4 MM's

@Vhwolf

Having played at all levels quite a bit I feel I have an excellent perspective. The game is fun at all levels. I just have found that "competitively" it is better at 2k. Experience may vary but even the recent codexes seem to agree.

Monster Rain wrote: Space Wolves just came immediately to mind because Raiders are allergic to Long Fang spam.

I was not getting at anything. It was more a reaction that the first example was what is considered to be one of the stronger codexes--had you said perhaps. . .Necrons(? even though Hulksmash covered THAT better too) I would have read your response a little differently.

Hulksmash wrote:@Monsterrain

It's more about lists that need depth to pull even vs. all styles of lists that it is about specific instances when it comes to codexes. I also believe the game is more balanced that it has ever been. But that is at the 2k level. At the 1,500pt level there are armies that excell:

1) DE
2) Orks
3) Seer Council Eldar

To name a few because these can either overwhelm in a certain way or can saturate their force orgs with cheap awesomeness. That gets limited at 2k because the extra points open up quite a few codexes (Nids, BA's, Daemons, SM's) to bring more well rounded solid lists. I'll say any army at 2k can take on any other (even necrons in the right hands ) but that isn't the case at 1.5k. Reece hit it on the head there.

Oh and at 1,500 even wolves have a problem with a well built DE list. I know mine would have and I had 16 Missiles and 4 MM's

@Vhwolf

Having played at all levels quite a bit I feel I have an excellent perspective. The game is fun at all levels. I just have found that "competitively" it is better at 2k. Experience may vary but even the recent codexes seem to agree.

Perhaps we should move this to a different thread? it seems like a decent topic worthy of its own thread and debate?

Monster Rain wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Dark Eldar are a great example.

At 1500 points - I almost have a full force org chart, and regularly beat face. I play them at 2k as well, but refuse to field them beyond, because they don't *gain* anything. Most armies have a tough time answering me at 1500 points

There must not be many Space Wolf players around your neck of the woods, huh?

Yes, there are plenty. You think all my tournament games have been against non-SW players, when it seems like 33% + of tournament lists are Space Wolves? At 1500 points, its a matter of my Dark Eldar either breezing through my competition, or having a challenging game, depending on the list and the skill of my opponent. At 2,000 points its a matter of me potentially breezing through my opponent, having a challenging game (mostly), or facing a nightmare of an opponent. At 2500 points, its a matter of having an extremely challenging game, or a nightmare scenario.

Space Wolves *are* the most powerful codex out. That's indisputable, and well evidenced by tournament finishers everywhere among other things. They are *not* however an auto-win against everyone else.

The top dog at 1500 is Chaos Space Marines.

They have been winning and placing top 5 in the UKGT since their new book came out.

At 2K Wolves rule the roost.

At 2.5K you start to see strange armies begin to kick ass, like Crons. IG becomes a nightmare at 2.5K.

The reason being that deep dexes or dexes with very expensive but powerful units scale up much more efficiently than other books do.

At 1500, CSM can bring all their best stuff. At 2K, as Dash pointed out with DE, the extra points are actually diluting their overall power level. The rest is just filler as they already have their most efficient units on the board.

Books like IG, with very powerful and plentiful choices in every FOC slot, can just keep scaling up and up while maintaining a very potent power level.

It truly is a different game at 1.5L, 2K, and 2.5K.

But like others have said, it's still fun, just different. I prefer 2K for the flexibility it gives both players. It just feels more fun to me.

Reecius wrote:The top dog at 1500 is Chaos Space Marines.

They have been winning and placing top 5 in the UKGT since their new book came out.

At 2K Wolves rule the roost.

At 2.5K you start to see strange armies begin to kick ass, like Crons. IG becomes a nightmare at 2.5K.

The reason being that deep dexes or dexes with very expensive but powerful units scale up much more efficiently than other books do.

At 1500, CSM can bring all their best stuff. At 2K, as Dash pointed out with DE, the extra points are actually diluting their overall power level. The rest is just filler as they already have their most efficient units on the board.

Books like IG, with very powerful and plentiful choices in every FOC slot, can just keep scaling up and up while maintaining a very potent power level.

It truly is a different game at 1.5L, 2K, and 2.5K.

But like others have said, it's still fun, just different. I prefer 2K for the flexibility it gives both players. It just feels more fun to me.

The man is correct!

I'm planning on bringing my Tyranids for the Vegas event.... the thing is, at 1500 we don't do all that well. 1850-2000 Tyranids feel a lot more comfortable. Some of our larger units start to look even more overpriced at 1500, and you really can't justify putting in a 400-500 Deathstar Tyrant or fit the repetitive "9 Hive Guard+Tervigons" without having any flexible room. The point level restrictions drastically change how armies work. CSM at 2000-2500 is rather mediocre when you compare the army scaling up in points to IG. Dash hit it right on the nail when he mentioned DE lose power over 2000 from a conversation I had with Toxicwisdom. At 1500-1750, your almost maxing out your FOC, leaving you with stupid/not nearly as effective additions to the army.

See you guys there!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hulksmash wrote:@Vhwolf

1. There is 0 proof that the studio playtests at all or that they playtest at 1,500. And judging by the most recent codexes 1,500 isn't the standard anymore. Try making some of the more dynamic lists in the recent codexes and 1,500 and let me know how that goes. Hell make a decent nid list that doesn't have Tervigons and Hive Guard at 1,500. At higher point values you can create diversity where as at 1,500 you are required almost to fill certain parts with certain units to be even mildly competitive.

Talking about Tyranids fitting in tournaments at 1500-1850, I went and talked about the metagame for a good 15 minutes about the repetition of Tyranid army lists in the video linked below. Anytime I go to an event, I see the same 6-9 Hive Guard, 2-3 Tervigons + Trygons/Tyrant Deathstar/Genestealers with slight variations. My Vegas list will most likely end up looking like that, which kills the entire flexibility of the codex and my playstyle.

I'm taking a break from them for now, dabbling into Daemons for tournaments.

If anyone's interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XlJ836ClF4

Interesting to hear people think Chaos is good at 1500, as that is what I'll be bringing if I don't get my Codex Marines finished. Scratch that; I meant started.

IMO the whole throne of skulls tournament system as I heard it described sucks. Moving from mostly competitive tournaments to qualify for it to a hobby day is really lame.

It would be like if you qualified for the magic pro tour and they said ok we give you points for your deck theme now and you compared to people playing the same colors as you.

As far as the points levels I have no idea why 1500 is the points level. Wouldn't higher points be better for GW cause you have to buy more models and they make a better profit? 2k tournaments are better for GW cause they sell more models. No idea why 1500 is the norm in the UK.

Different points levels does shake the game up. Its like Vintage, Legacy, Extended, Standard in Magic. Lets you play with different things and keeps things interesting. Although higher points gives you more choice and makes things less rock paper sissors.

Hulksmash wrote:@Vhwolf

1. There is 0 proof that the studio playtests at all or that they playtest at 1,500. And judging by the most recent codexes 1,500 isn't the standard anymore.

WRONG!

I have talked to play testers about this very subject and they do play test at 1,500. If you took the time to read the articles I have about it on my site you will understand that. Unless you are a playtester for GW or work in GW design team how do you know? IF their is no proof that 1,500 is the standard then how do you know that 2,000 now is? Or does GW's very own events playing at 1,500 not proof enough?

You've talked to one guy who doesn't playtest anymore Tasty. And it does confirm exactly what I said. That they used to playtest at 1,500. I never denied that for a second. But I do feel, as do many others, that the most recent codexes aren't balanced for 1,500. I think 5e changed all of it. It's cute that your selectively picked that out of my post when the intent was obviously meant currently, not that they never had but hey, anything to get hits right?

And GW's own events have always been different point values Tasty. You can say that it was "America" doing it's own thing but GW did run events for around a decade that weren't 1,500pts. That's the funnier part. That by that arguement the time we know they were playtesting at 1,500 was the time that they weren't running events at that. Interesting...

Dashofpepper wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Dark Eldar are a great example.

At 1500 points - I almost have a full force org chart, and regularly beat face. I play them at 2k as well, but refuse to field them beyond, because they don't *gain* anything. Most armies have a tough time answering me at 1500 points

There must not be many Space Wolf players around your neck of the woods, huh?

Yes, there are plenty. You think all my tournament games have been against non-SW players, when it seems like 33% + of tournament lists are Space Wolves? At 1500 points, its a matter of my Dark Eldar either breezing through my competition, or having a challenging game, depending on the list and the skill of my opponent. At 2,000 points its a matter of me potentially breezing through my opponent, having a challenging game (mostly), or facing a nightmare of an opponent. At 2500 points, its a matter of having an extremely challenging game, or a nightmare scenario.

Space Wolves *are* the most powerful codex out. That's indisputable, and well evidenced by tournament finishers everywhere among other things. They are *not* however an auto-win against everyone else.

IG stomps on DE at all point levels.

But I do appreciate that DE is somewhat competitive at 1500 points. They are a mess in larger games since the codex is so antiquated.

Ditto CSM and to a lesser extent Orks.

Kevin Nash wrote:

IG stomps on DE at all point levels.

That depends on several things, including individual tournament ruling on the Nightmare Doll, whether the DE player goes first, how many chimeras are in the IG list, Hydras....

The same foot-slogging infantry swarm of stubborn, grenade-wielding mass nonsense that can pretty much beat up on my Orks every time is a breeze for my DE with horrofex support; I won't lie though - IG and Space Wolves are my two least favorite matchups, and a tournament I go through without having to face them is a good tournament indeed!!

The guy who interviewed with Tasty's blog talking about 1500 points ... he was part of the larger playtesting group used by GW until they stopped sometime this decade. Our Whiskey & 40k nights are hosted by a guy who has been playing GW games for a quarter century, and the original group members were all part of the same wide playtesting group that the interviewee was a part of.

They, um, did not require playtesting at 1500 points; 1500-2000 were typically the ranges used, however; it's been that way for a while now, so I don't get the attempt to claim otherwise.

The format being used is problematic not because of some flying rodent gak nuts claims (by ANYONE) about what the "standard" is, when the rules themselves suggest a RANGE as the standard ... it's actually problematic b/c so many of the events that qualify for it didn't use 1500 points at all. In running our own invitational next year at the Open convention, we're specifically making sure that the missions are truer to the book than the NOVA missions were, regardless of bias or impression of balance ... why? Because people will be getting invites based upon their performance in events across the country ... and it would be silly to use a format that not all participants were more or less equally familiar with.

GW specifically stated they didn't care what points value we used, and didn't want to influence us as GT organizers, when we all asked; so, most of the events were in the 1750-2000 point range, with VERY few (if any) GT qualifiers being at 1500 points. Hosting the finals, then, at 1500 ... is bass ackwards, regardless of what the "standard" is or isn't. So that side of the argument is kind of pointless.

Furthermore, claiming that because it's a GW hosted tournament, and it's their game, it's fine no matter what they use ... is also pointless. If MLB built a materially smaller ballfield than that used by most teams throughout the year, and forced the world series to happen on it ... people would have a right to complain that the subsequent results were inherently illegitimate. Same logic can largely be applied here ... regardless, however, the issues abound with or without said baseball analogy.

On the subject of different points levels and different ways of scoring, my general feeling is that any way to enjoy our hobby is a good one. I like to play all points levels and all types of scoring, I'm not so worried about the details... to me being versatile with your generalship as well as your collected army makes the game have more depth. I like that different games require me to build anything from 200 points to 2500 from the same collection.

On the subject of these Throne of Skulls rules, anyone got a link to them so I can read them instead of getting it second hand from this thread? My google-fu is lacking... thanks!

I thought I showed you the Throne of Skulls Rules Dustin. I will try to remember to bring them on Saturday. You can find them on the UK GW website

Thanks Vern. No wonder I couldn't find it on the US site...

Well, I'd be surprised to see if the tournament is a "Throne of Skulls" style GT. While it seems that most people I've spoke with don't like that format, I have yet to see any of them ever run in the SoCal area. (Which seems to have tournaments almost every other month.) It is different, but I'd like to play in one first hand to see if it is any better or worse than what has been out there.

Personally, I think that a lot of people with Golden Tickets might be dissapointed as they hear more. For instance, GW is not stating that if you have a Golden Ticket, that you get to play for free. I would imagine that Golden Ticket winners will still have to pay not just for air-fare and lodging, but for the tournament as well. Actually, if you think about it, all the Golden Ticket really tells GW is that they have a better chance of filling the hall and selling out the tournament.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a registration system like this: Las Vegas Grand Tournament for 300 40k players and 300 Fantasy players. Up until a certain date, the Golden Ticket winners have first dibs on registration. After that, we will open it up to the general public to fill the venue...

So, let's say that you're like Dash and would be flying across the country... After spending roughly $600 on air fare, another $400 on lodging, $150 to play in the tourney, and $200 on misc, you've now spent $1350 since you have a Golden Ticket... Are you still coming? Heck, I'd rather spend that money and go back to Adepticon... (But that's just me.)

It's an obvious concern for a lot of people. You'd think that they'd at least let the guys who collected a Ticket play for free but it could go either way. I'm hoping it's free because with that format asking a lot of the ticket holders to pay for the tourney itself is just asking for people to not go at all.

Oh well, we'll just have to see I guess.

If we have to pay for a ticket and it's a gakky system, I may pass.

If the comp is off the charts, as in the tournament winners from across the country all do show up, I'll come just for the challenge.

They should set this up as a very competitive event. That would draw all the best players. Not a silly hobby event. Have those at Gamesday.

Throne of Skulls certainly had an impact on deciding to run the NOVA invitational next year, for sure.

I was under the impression winning a Vegas Ticket only meant you won the opportunity to buy the ticket; not a free ticket. Has this changed or am I completely off base?

I would hope that since you competed to go and thus are invited, you wouldn't have to pay to go on top of that. If so, lame.

Maybe lame, but I could have sworn that was how it was set up.

MVBrandt wrote:Throne of Skulls certainly had an impact on deciding to run the NOVA invitational next year, for sure.

Mike your event was full of awesomesauce and win!

For those that questioned it before, the answer came at the very bottom of GW's latest newsletter. (Congratz to my good friend Drew who pointed this out to me)

The GW Las Vegas Grand Tournament next year will be a Throne of Skulls style GT. This is a direct quote from the latest GW newsletter at the bottom:

The circuit is made up predominantly of Independent Tournaments from around North America which are put on by gaming clubs or groups. The Champion for each game system will be decided in the summer of 2011 in Las Vegas at The Throne of Skulls Tournament!

There you go. Throne of Skulls.

This actually answers a few questions... The first is that the Throne of Skulls tournaments are 1500 points for 40k and 2000 points for Fantasy. The second is that everyone playing better do some cool type of presentation with their army and their list, because bonus points for those can mean as much as an overall game victory.

The subjective score components run a big risk; a LOT of people attending are going to know who a LOT of the other people are; plus, there's the possibility for in-advance collusion on some of these fronts.

If A then B; if "you" can't win b/c of a big loss, vote "me" as your fave, etc.

Kind of just a confusing thing all around. Still, the overall circuit organizer gave us the heads up it would be TOSkulls months ago, and most of us made mention of it; funny that none of us felt motivated to adopt the format.

MVBrandt wrote:The subjective score components run a big risk; a LOT of people attending are going to know who a LOT of the other people are; plus, there's the possibility for in-advance collusion on some of these fronts.

If A then B; if "you" can't win b/c of a big loss, vote "me" as your fave, etc.

Kind of just a confusing thing all around. Still, the overall circuit organizer gave us the heads up it would be TOSkulls months ago, and most of us made mention of it; funny that none of us felt motivated to adopt the format.

We have adopted it in Vegas for the Ironman and Golden Snotling tournaments.

Looks like we got confirmation that the Vegas GT will be Throne of Skulls. http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=13200005a

I don't know about the rest of the Golden Ticket players but I am now much less likely to be going to Vegas due to the format.

I'm still going. It's a weekend in Vegas with something to do during the day when it's so damn hot Plus it'll be fun to meet people from across the country. For me it depends on whether they charge me or not for the ticket as a Ticket winner. If they do then I might balk but then I might not. Depends on what else is going on really.

Kirika wrote:IMO the whole throne of skulls tournament system as I heard it described sucks. Moving from mostly competitive tournaments to qualify for it to a hobby day is really lame.

It would be like if you qualified for the magic pro tour and they said ok we give you points for your deck theme now and you compared to people playing the same colors as you.

As far as the points levels I have no idea why 1500 is the points level. Wouldn't higher points be better for GW cause you have to buy more models and they make a better profit? 2k tournaments are better for GW cause they sell more models. No idea why 1500 is the norm in the UK.

Different points levels does shake the game up. Its like Vintage, Legacy, Extended, Standard in Magic. Lets you play with different things and keeps things interesting. Although higher points gives you more choice and makes things less rock paper sissors.

LOL at everyone saying their qualifying from "competitive tournaments". Having gone to my first GT this pass weekend I believe their far from competitive (untill they take out comp and reduce painting scores atleast).

Hell my friend went 5 and 0 and got nothing. There were only 2 players that did that. (both were space wolves). Instead some random player ended up grabbing a ticket to vegas. Most the people around us didnt even even know what army he played.

This is not true about EVERY tournament that qualified people.

MVBrandt wrote:This is not true about EVERY tournament that qualified people.

Alright I take back my statement. Atleast for the lucky people that went to ones that didnt have ridiculous comp and painting scores.

Actually the Slaughter, Smackdown, Nova, and Wargamescon didn't do comp and their painting scores weren't totally wacky in comparison to say the Broadside Bash where an army that regularly will score 25/30 or 33/40 in painting at other events pulled an 11/30......

And as long as one of the tickets is going to the Best General you can consider it competitive which a lot of events did this year. Just as a heads up.

The Broadside bash is soft score central. I only go because my friends are there.

Hahaha, we should all bring the most disgusting, over the top competitive armies possible to the BSB this year! The guys running it are really nice guys, but hardcore fluff nazis. They actually discussed, openly, the idea of having a tournament with no battle points. Yikes.

@italiaplaya
Most tournaments aren't like that. Try out some other ones, they are really good fun. Most of the big tournaments now are either no comp or moving to no comp.

Not anywhere I've played. Guess I've just been unlucky to live in areas that have a CGM in them...

Mvbrandt would you consider putting on a counter event? For the competitive people who have tickets to attend? Just curious...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mvbrandt would you consider putting on a counter event? For the competitive people who have tickets to attend? Just curious...

Dashofpepper wrote:Dark Eldar are a great example.

At 1500 points - I almost have a full force org chart, and regularly beat face. I play them at 2k as well, but refuse to field them beyond, because they don't *gain* anything. Most armies have a tough time answering me at 1500 points - tack on 500 points and bring us to 2k and we're on even footing. Add any more points and I'm at a disadvantage.

I agree, DE @ 1500 is almost unfair with the amount of stuff you can fill. Even at 2000 I end up wargearing out stuff to make 2000. Nids struggle at 1500 and most other armies dont have all their toys at 1500 where as other armies have a closet full of toys.

frgsinwntr wrote:Mvbrandt would you consider putting on a counter event? For the competitive people who have tickets to attend? Just curious...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mvbrandt would you consider putting on a counter event? For the competitive people who have tickets to attend? Just curious...

Well, there's the NOVA Invitational. I really don't intend to just go straight out and say "GW your Throne of Skulls format sucks, all ya'll ticket holders can come to a "real" tourney" or anything of the sort; I don't even feel that way. Don't bite the hand that feeds you and all that.

Throne of Skuklls is not what I would call a competitively evaluative format; it's half-cocked, and seems to have been thought up by someone trying to forcefully bitch and moan about "competitive" events via the creation of a blatantly non-competitively *evaluative* one of his own. Regardless of motive, it is still what they want to use and probably will be fun / competitive (if not EVALUATIVE, the key difference here) b/c of the concentration of high caliber players.

Kind of an important note - a lot of people will call events casual vs. competitive, or hobby vs. competitive, and I think that's the wrong way to talk about it. Adepticon last year was competitive, Adepticon this year will be competitive. Adepticon last year was NOT competitively EVALUATIVE, and Adepticon this coming year WILL be competitively evaluative. Why the latter difference? 240 players in 3 rounds, vs. 256 players in 8 rounds. If the caliber of players at an event and caliber of lists is generally strong, the event will be competitive no matter how the format functions ... so is true for the TOS/Vegas Finals. BUT if the event has an insufficient number of rounds, bs scoring mechanisms, too much soft score injection in competitive side awards (and vice versa), etc., it fails to be competitively evaluative. In short, going to the Vegas Finals will net you a competitive experience and a fun time ... but will fail to establish a winner that even the majority of observers (and attendees) are really happy / comfortable with.

Just in case anyone was wondering (I think Reecious and some others might have been)...

I just got an email from a rep at GW (John Shaffer) in charge of handing out the prizes for the 'ard boys winners (I asked a few questions so he was nice and responded). He said that the top 3 at each 'ard boys will in fact get a free ticket to the Throne of Skull tournament and that they will have their ticket and a tournament pack sent out in the upcoming months. I take it to mean that everyone else with a Golden Ticket from other qualifying events will also get a free ticket and tournament pack sent out to them.

Hope to see everyone there!

Also, I noticed the UK throne of skulls 2011 packet says that the game for 40k is going to be 1750 and not 1500, unless I read the wrong 2011 doc? This probably means the US one will be 1750 or thereabouts (though I always liked bigger games because I could bring more toys!).

Anyone have an idea on the date? I never caught that info anywhere =(. Oh well, congrats to everyone that managed to get a ticket!

The Throne of Skulls events have been running in the UK for a while and have been successful. It is not like this is a brand new system that is being unveiled to US players, it is just the first time we are getting a taste of this new style.

The other tournament systems they run at Warhammer World can be found on their site:
http://warhammerworld.typepad.com/warhammer_world_news/events.html

The UK Throne of Skulls Pack and update can be found here: (note that 40K is 1500 points)
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=2200008&aId=11300007a

The US Throne of Skulls packs are due to go up on the GW US site any time now. I think what they are aiming for is the same system will be able to be run in all countries. It really isn't too different from the GW events of old, and they do have more of a focus on gameplay than painting and modeling. Dates and full rules for the US version will be in there. I think we are looking at a July 2011 date for the Vegas finals.

The National Circuit Tournament Organizers were informed that all the "Golden Tickets" will be mailed out to the recipients at the end of the circuit in May 2011.

Also, please remember that GW has not done GT's in the past two years and next year they have one planned that we know about. There is a new crew putting together events (including the Vegas ToS) and they have been very supportive of the independent events, which happens to be where most of the action is. They are putting in some great efforts, but it will be a while to see how the big Finals event turns out.

Another thing about Throne of Skulls in the UK, I believe they put a small amount of tickets available for sale on the website in addition to the different qualifying events. They usually sell out in an hour or two, so keep an eye out to see if something like this happens in the US.

Lastly, has anyone actually tested the new system yet?

We are running our One day, Three game, Forge World Friendly event at MechaniCon with a rules pack similar to ToS with just some tweaking to accommodate for 3 games instead of 5. We will get player feedback and share that with the community and the GW event staff. If anyone else runs a ToS event, please share your experiences. Obviously it is not made for the competive-driven gamers, but it does have traits similar to the larger events run over the past 15+ years. I am very excited to see a large annual event provided by GW and I hope it is well worth the wait.

Nowhere on the uk TOS doc does it say 40k games are at 1750.

This will be funny when a space wolf player goes & crushes all 5 games but because the other space wolf players did so well the only Ork player that kills it will win best overall.

I was reading the packet for some other random UK GT thing, my bad! 1500 is a bit restrictive but oh well, it should be fun!

asugradinwa wrote:Nowhere on the uk TOS doc does it say 40k games are at 1750.

This will be funny when a space wolf player goes & crushes all 5 games but because the other space wolf players did so well the only Ork player that kills it will win best overall.

Just imagine what will happen if one Necron player wins just a single game!

Fearspect wrote:

asugradinwa wrote:Nowhere on the uk TOS doc does it say 40k games are at 1750.

This will be funny when a space wolf player goes & crushes all 5 games but because the other space wolf players did so well the only Ork player that kills it will win best overall.

Just imagine what will happen if one Necron player wins just a single game!

too bad they do an "Average"......

Although if I can get a bunch of people to bring Tau armies and throw thier games.......

Obvious hyperbole is lost on some...

why should how other people do effect me winning my games

this is worse than having comp shoved down our throats

Fighting my way through serious competition to win a Golden Ticket to the Las Vegas GT....

Is like winning first on the Golf Pro Tour qualifier to find out that you've just gained access to the Saturday Family Mini-Golf Putt-Putt Extravaganza!

No thanks.

I will not be attending this sham of a tournament. My interest in the hobby is in my ability to compete, to create functional armies, to demonstrate my prowess and test my mettle against other similarily minded people.

Hulksmash wrote:Next I bet you'll say that Fantasy should still be played at 2k cause that's what they used to playtest it at way back when....

2K works great for fantasy in 8th edition!

Just thought I'd throw that out there...

Golden Ticket or no Golden Ticket, I'm going to Vegas.

Simply put, I don't play in enough tournaments to really care if I'm in the tourney or not, but I love going to Vegas and since it is within a few hours driving distance there's no reason not to go. Now, if I happen to win a ticket to play in the LVGT, then great. (The only GT I've played in this year was Adepticon, and I only see me playing in one more tourney between now and July.)

However, this could be an awesome weekend to go. I could sleep late, go down and watch a game, eat at a buffet, put some money on the Steelers, play in a poker tourney, then go back and see the results. I could even get in and play on the GW tables on Friday and Saturday night after eveyone is done. Heck, knowing GW they'll generally have a table or 2 up for open gaming as well as a hobby/modeling table and some preview items to check out.

All in all, I could get a couple games in, hang with some friends and have a great weekend without even playing in the tourney.

Ticket or no ticket, it's Vegas baby!

^^This a thousand times over.

Though I do have a ticket I'll probably be there assuming no major financial issues come up. It'll be a fun weekend in Vegas. And to be honest it'll still sell out when they put the extra tickets up. Even with the format it has. The old GW GT systems were far worse (i.e. no painting rubric, comp, random extra points) and those tournaments sold out for 40k within a week across the country. I'm looking forward to it.

Yeah, I'll be there and probably make it a week-long trip.

Please note: If this were occuring in almost any other city than Las Vegas, there is no way I would go.

Hence the reason it's in Vegas Fearspect. Even GW recognizes that fact