Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Here is the revised draft, thanks to everyone for their input on this, it was really helpful.

Mainly, what do you guys think about the revised missions? I tried to roll in as much of the 6th ed rules in as I felt were good for a tournament setting based on my experience, Team Zero Comp input, and your all's suggestions.

I altered the missions to be more similar to what is in the book, added the Scouring and Big Guns Never Tire, as well as alternated the scoring method of the main Victory Conditions without a huge variation. I think this is a nice mix of tactics but still remains true to the basic principles we have found to work really well. What do you guys think?


6th ed 40K Tournament Guidelines

Points: 1,500pts

We are going with 1500pts for these early 6th ed tournaments as we’ve found that the new rules slow the game down quite a bit, and we are sure people are going to be taking more time looking up rules, rolling up Warlord Traits, etc. and would rather have more time per round so as not to rush anyone. As we go through the season and people get more accustomed to the game, we will start to increase the points cap.

Missions

Round 1: Bay Area Open Scenario Alpha, Modified Hammer and Anvil Deployment

Round 2: Bay Area Open Scenario Beta, Dawn of War Deployment, The Scouring

Round 3: Bay Area Open Scenario Gamma, Vanguard Strike Deployment

Round 4: Bay Area Open Scenario Beta, Dawn of War Deployment, Big Guns Never Tire

Round 5: Bay Area Open Scenario Alpha, Modified Hammer and Anvil Deployment

Round 6: Bay Area Open Scenario Gamma, Vanguard Strike Deployment

Round 7: Bay Area Open Scenario Alpha, Dawn of War Deployment

The Bay Area Open Scenario is one we have built over a great deal of time, play testing and player feedback. It is a scenario that strives for fairness, and simplicity with multiple paths to victory. We want you to focus on playing your best game, not focusing on trying to figure out a mission you aren’t familiar with.

The Bay Area Open scenario has 3 Victory Conditions always happening simultaneously. Each is worth a varying number of Victory Points dependent upon the mission (Alpha, Beta or Gamma). There are also 3 Bonus Points per mission. The Player that earns the most Victory Points during a game, wins. If both players earn the same amount, they tie. There are no degrees of victory, if you win by 1 point or 12, it is just a win. The player packets will have a score sheet for each mission clearly showing how much each objective is worth for each game to make it easy to keep track of.

=Mission Order of Operations:

1. Place Seize Ground Objectives. Players roll off, player rolling highest places first objective. One objective always goes in the center of the board.
2. Roll for Warlord Traits (Each player rolls 1D6, chooses any of the three traits with that number for their trait).
3. Roll for Night Fighting.
4. Roll for First Turn. The player rolling highest chooses their deployment zone and deploys their Emperor's Will objective. The player going second does the same.
5. Place Fortifications if any are present. The player that won the first turn roll off places their's first.
6. Deploy forces, with the player that won the roll off deploying first.
7. Game then proceeds as normal.

1. Victory Condition 1: The Emperor’s Will. Each player places an objective on a 40mm base in their deployment zone, after deployment zones have been decided prior to deploying their forces. This objective must be 6” from a table edge. The player that controls more of these at game’s end wins this Victory Condition. In Alpha this is worth 2 points, in Beta 3 Points, in Gamma 4 points.

2. Victory Condition 2: Crusade. Three objectives on 25mm bases are placed outside of either player’s deployment zones before the roll for first turn. One is always placed in the exact middle of the board. The other two by each player (player rolling highest places the first objective), at least 6” from a table edge and 12” from another objective. These objectives have the Mysterious Objectives rule, but the player triggering it rolls 2D6 on the Mysterious Objectives table and takes the result they want. The player controlling the majority of these objectives at game's end wins. If both players control the same amount, neither achieves this objective. In Alpha this is worth 3 points, in Beta 4 points, in Gamma 2 points.

3. Victory Condition 2: Purge the Alien. Each unit is worth a number of Kill Points equal to its point cost divided by 50, rounded up. For example, a unit worth 40pts would give up 1 Kill Point if destroyed or broken at game’s end, and a unit worth 305pts would give up 7 Kill Points if destroyed or broken at game’s end. The player with more Kill Points at game’s end wins this condition. Noting this on your army list prior to the tournament makes this very easy to keep track of. NOTE, in missions where Big Guns Never Tire and The Scouring are in play, the units that can also take objectives are worth 1 more KP each than normal. If your Warlord Rolls the trait that gives him 1 VP for each Character kills in a Challenge, he earns 1 KP for each Character he kills in addition to any other KP he may have earned. In Alpha this is worth 4 points, in Beta 2 Points, in Gamma 3 points.

The Bay Open Scenario also uses Bonus Points in every mission. The Bonus Points are worth 1 Victory Point each and are the same for every game.

1. Bonus Point 1: Slay the Warlord. If you destroy your opponent’s Warlord, you earn this point.

2. Bonus Point 2: Line Breaker. You earn this point by having a scoring OR contesting unit with at least one model at least partially in your opponent’s deployment zone at game’s end. Note, a unit cannot hold an objective AND earn this Bracket Point, it can only choose to do one or the other.

3. Bonus Point 3: Preserve Your Forces. You earn this Bracket Point by having half or more of your STARTING scoring units alive at game’s end.

Every game uses the book rules for Reserves, Night Fight, Seize the Initiative, Random Game Length, controlling objectives, etc.

Modified Hammer and Anvil

This follows the standard deployment as outlined in the book with one modification. The player going first reduces their deployment zone by 12” along the long edge on one side. The player going second does the same along the opposite edge. This results in a deployment zone that is 24” out from the short board edge, and 36” up the short board edge. Note, objectives may not be placed in the gap space. Outflankers arrive via long table edges, with the roll os a 1-2 being the long edge nearest the owning player, a 3-4 being the opposite, and a 5-6 being the owning player’s choice.

" border="0" />

Allowed Armies

• All current Codices, and White Dwarf armies will be allowed.
• Allies per the Rule Book will be allowed.
• Forge World units will be allowed so long as they are neither a Super Heavy nor Gargantuan Creature. The most recent version of the rules must be used. This means not just the "40K Approved" units, but any that do not fall within the above restrictions.
• Forge World Army Lists will not be allowed.
• Each player MUST have his pertinent rulebook with him to show his opponent.
• Fortifications will be allowed, but not Fortresses of Redemption or Skyshield Landing Pads as they are physically too large and require too much modification to the terrain on the table to be practical for a tournament. We may alter this in time, but for now we are restricting those two pieces of terrain.

Warlord Traits and Psychic Powers

1. Warlord Traits will be determined using the following modified system: Each player rolls a die and then chooses which Trait with that number he wishes to use.
2. If you roll a psychic power the model can’t use, you may reroll on the table until you get something you can use.
Rules Judgments
Rules issues will be dealt with swiftly by a roaming judge. We use a hierarchy for determining rules issues as follows:
1. Main Rule Book
2. FAQs and Erratas
3. Consensus of judges present at the time. Please note, that these judgments are final.

Painting

All models must be painted to a 3 color minimum. We count primer as a color. If you have any models that are not painted to a 3 color minimum, you will be ineligible for prize support at the end of the event. We will use a Paint Rubric for judging paint.

Bracketing

We use Swiss Pairings, meaning that players with the same record play each other. Pairings within a bracket are randomly determined first round (friends and club mates can request not to play each other first round) and then by strength of schedule thereafter. For final rankings, the field will be stratified by accumulated Victory Points.

Comp and Sports

There will be no comp scores at this event. We feel that the game has an inbuilt comp system with the rulebooks and Codices. We do not feel that a second, player created level of comp is necessary. So bring whatever army you want to play!
Sportsmanship will be handled as a simple thumbs-up, thumbs-down check box on the results sheet.

The temptation to ding someone on sports after a tough loss is often too much for many players to resist. We therefore are providing a very narrowly defined set of terms under which a player may mark their opponent with a thumbs down mark on sportsmanship. This system is intended to punish those who are being abusive, but to not allow chimpmunking. After a great deal of real world use, we have found this system to work very well.

Legitimate reasons to give an opponent a thumbs down on sports:

1. Your opponent was 15 or more minutes late to the round.
2. Your opponent was verbally abusive. This does not mean you argued with your opponent or that your personalities clashed, but that they were verbally abusive and insulting.
3. Your opponent intentionally cheated. Be prepared to support your case to a judge.
4. Your opponent slow played. We define slow playing as not completing 4 game turns of play. In the case of 20 or less minutes left to play, divide the time remaining between players to complete one full GAME turn. Time each other during this period to ensure that each player has an equal amount of time to complete a full game turn. If one player does not finish within their limit, the other player can force them to stop and then begin their turn. This mechanic is in place to ensure no one is slow played out of a turn of play.

What does NOT constitute a thumbs down on sports?

1. You argued over rules with your opponent.
2. Your opponent beat you.
3. You didn’t like your opponent’s army.
4. Your opponent likes Star Trek Voyager. Picard was the best!! NERD RAGE!
A negative mark on sportsmanship will be met with administrative action as follows:
1. First thumbs down: A verbal warning from a judge, up to reversing a win to a loss.
2. Second thumbs down: Reversing a win to a loss, up to disqualification from any prize support.
3. Third thumbs down: disqualification from any prize support, up to expulsion from the event with no refund of the ticket price.
4. Fourth thumbs down: Expulsion from the event with no refund of the ticket price.

WYSIWYG

All models are expected to be WYSIWYG as much as is reasonable. Proxies are not permitted. Counts As armies with counts as allies will only be permitted if they represent a clearly concerted effort to build a unique army around an obvious theme. For example, an Adeptus Mechanicus army using extensive kit bashing and conversions will be fine. If you go this route, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A HANDOUT TO SHOW YOUR OPPONENT THAT SHOWS WHAT EACH UNIT IN YOUR ARMY IS ALONG WITH ITS STATS AND PERTENANT RULES! You must also present this to them prior to the game so that they have time to understand what they are playing against. There will be no exceptions to this.

If your army uses only a single Codex but if for example you have Crimson Fists models using the Blood Angels Codex, or Chaos models using the Space Wolves Codex, that is acceptable. Allies for this type of army however, MUST be represented by their actual models. This is to avoid confusion. No exceptions.

If you are using converted or scratch built models with Forge World rules, this is acceptable so long as your model is as close to the represented model as possible in terms of equipment, size and shape. We will not be lenient with this.

If you have any questions about your army, ask us prior to the event so that we can let you know if what you have will be acceptable or not.

Terrain

Terrain will be prearranged and laid out by the TO’s prior to the event. We will not be using terrain placement rules per the book as it is too time restrictive. If you come to a table and feel that it is not sufficiently or fairly arranged, or that it may have been moved by the previous players, alert a TO who will arrange the terrain appropriately.

Mysterious Terrain: Will not be used.

Fortifications: If any fortifications are being used, they will be placed prior to army deployment by both players, after they have determined deployment zones. The player that chose their deployment zone first, places his Fortification first. Scratch built fortifications will be allowed so long as they are closely the same shape and size of what they are meant to represent. Again, if you are unsure, ask before the event to avoid disappointment.

Hills: All hills are open terrain, granting cover via LOS blocking/interference as normal.

Barriers: All barriers grant cover per the book and are not considered to be Aegis Defense lines unless they were purchased and placed by a player.

Buildings/ruins: All buildings and ruins are assumed to have a ladder or other means for moving up and down. Rules in the Rule Book will be used for Ruins and Buildings.

Rock Towers, Crates, and Can Towers: Are impassible and block LOS completely (even if there are actual gaps in the terrain pieces).

All other terrain functions as outlined in the book.

What to Bring

• Your Army
• Tape Measure, Dice, Game Aids, etc.
• 3 Objective Markers on 25mm bases, 2 Objective Markers on 40mm bases.
• 9 Typed Copies of your army list. Be sure to include write how many Kill Points each of your units is worth on your list for ease of reference.
• All pertinent rules for your army. Codecis, White Dwarf Articles, Foregworld Rules, etc.
• If you are using a counts as army, YOU MUST HAVE YOUR PLAYER HANDOUT FOR YOUR OPPONENT IDENTIFYING WHAT EACH UNIT IN YOUR ARMY IS, NO EXCEPTIONS!! You don’t need to have one for every player, just one for the judges, and one to show each opponent.
• A rocking pair of Jean Shorts. Chicks dig em.

Really like this idea. (apart from FW stuff lol)

=Basics
Agree

= We will be using a "BAO" (Bay Area Open) style mission similar to what we did last year.
Looks like a smart way to handle missions, I feel like this is where we will see the most variety in tourneys.

=Psykers
Good approach.

Points Level
I support lower point value, especially while the metabase is taking shape. I feel from a logistical POV that people are going to be tempted to play too many points for 6th and this will increase the mistakes and slips back to 5th. I really never liked 2500 points and now I think double-force org is potentially the biggest threat. (hence 1999 and under is a good option)

Forge World
Allies are way worse than FW now. Basically adding FW units in 5th edition was the equivalent of bringing an allied force as you could get units which plug blatant holes in your codex. Now that I can do that with allies, FW is not much of an issue anymore.

=Counts As Armies and WYSIWYG
eeeeeeeeh... this is going to be a huge issue IMHO. I feel like people are going to abuse this to extremes as some people only see WEAPONS and don't see toughness profiles or armor save. An Ork boy model is not a Tau fire warrior or a Iguard trooper. A Ork boy in a tee shirt is not a space wolf or space marine. I feel like for a 'counts as' ork to be either of those, you need CLEARLY SMALLER orks like Yoofs or 2nd edition models for weaker toughness models or you need significant over-armored orks to represent 3+ armor. By time you have a counts as unit that meets what it takes to be those other units, it is almost going to have no ability to function as anything else. If I make 4 Orks in power armor with massive weapons and put them on Super Cyboars as allied SW TWC, there is going to need to be effort where they won't be able to possibly be anything from the ork codex by time they are done.

I have to say the proxy talk has already gone through the roof, especially with the space marine/chaos space marine as so many people play chaos as BA or SW.

I think TOs should be super proactive and really ask for pre-submission of any 'COUNTS AS'.

=What are we missing?

Looks good. I think the first 3 months of events will be huge for feedback.

I also feel like the big 'missing' aspect right now is the rules arguments and lack of FAQs out there. People are going nuts with some of the arguments and some issues have very legitimate holes. I feel like maybe the top 10 issues need to be identified and FAQed per event. I feel two things right off the bat which are far sweeping are challenge wound over flow and "what is my power weapon?" impact everyone and are really tough right now... I am sure there are going to be other game breaking arguments which need answers way before someone shows up with a list based upon a particular interpretation.

@Gregor

Thanks!

And can I ask what your biggest resistance to FW is? We don't want to force our preference on people, but we really like FW particularly the AA units and Flyers they bring to the table to allow armies a level playing field in that regard.

What holds you back the most from thinking it woul dbe fun to have FW?

@nklesch

Thanks a ton for the feedback!

Yeah, Counts As is going to be really tough. It's a subject so easily abused but also so easily made to be AWESOME!

If someone models up sweet conversions like you mentioned, then we WANT that to be at our events as that is half the fun of going to a big tournament: seeing the beautiful armies. Often, creative conversions are the best parts of these.

Then, we also get the gamer that is abusing it (sometimes unintentionally) and just confuses and upsets his opponent.

However, it can also get crazy confusing to tell the difference. It's like a supreme justice said about the difference between porn and art: I can't define it but I know what it is when I see it.

It may come down to a judgement call or pre-submission like you mentioned. The only issue there is that in a big event, that can get crazy to keep organized.

@Reecius

Outside of missions, this generally looks to be the way most tournaments are heading. We are still working on our draft rules, but also looking at work other events are coming up with. I still think it is way too early in the game to us to make any major decisions, but we have a general idea of where we are headed. I do not see AdeptiCon banning any particular aspect of 6th edition, but I do believe there are ways to make it work a bit more smoothly.

BASICS
Not 100% in agreement with the removal of Mysterious Terrain/Objectives. I understand the desire to eliminate randomness, but we pretty much throw any hope of controlling that out the window the second we generate Round 1 table pairings. I find the Feast of Blades idea of 'All Mysterious Terrain is the same once revealed' interesting in terms of leveling things, but I need to consider it more closely.

I think removing certain Fortifications is perfectly fine. My original thought was to impose a maximum % of your total points that could be spent on Fortifications. IIRC 10% of 1850 would allow you to purchase a fully kitted out Bastion, but would keep the Fortress of Redemption out of play. That said, simply stating like you do here, is perfectly reasonable given table size and your terrain make up.

Warlord Traits. We had this exact same idea not too long ago. At first glance I thought this looked like a decent solution, and it could very well be one in the immediate future, but I think you will have problems down the road when new books are released and certain characters now have 4 or more viable trait tables. This would give those characters an unfair advantage unless you had some additional bulky lair of rules restricting the number of tables you could choose from.

Allies. 100% in agreement.

Terrain. This is our current discussion. Time is of great value at these events and preset terrain can speed play up. How do you propose to maintain the tables after people get done shifting pieces to make room for display boards or fortifications? I like the general of idea of a preset table where you replace one terrain feature with a fortification if purchased.

Yep to everything else.

MISSIONS
Is the path to victory like the AdeptiCon missions? Achieve more objectives to win? Of course I like this style if it is! I am always leery of VPs as an objective. They can be time consuming and most prone to errors out of all the mission results. We tried to stay away from them the past 2 years for that very reason. That said, I completely agree that KPs are simply no longer viable as a majority mission. More or less using the Secondary book objectives as tie breakers is interesting, although I still might be tempted to work some of them in are primary objectives in lieu of VPs (which of course isn't possible for you if you want to have all rounds play the same missions). Agreed on First Blood.

Overall - looks like a solid system.

OTHER STUFF
Psykers. Yep.

Points Level. 1500 has some appeal. I think in the immediate future it makes good sense as it will make for smaller/faster games.

Forge World. I can get behind this. Most of the old objections/reasons for banning FW no longer exist. Although I am sure spammed Lucius Pattern Drop Pods and Hades Breaching Drills will still upset people. The increased access to Fliers and AA is an all around boost to most forces. I guess we will need to see where FW units land after the updates.

Counts As. Yeah. Ugh. Hated dealing with this under 5th, will hate it more under 6th. Our policy states:

Count-as armies are allowed at AdeptiCon as long as they follow all the above rules and restrictions. The onus is on the owning player to alleviate any and all avenues of confusion that might result from using count-as models/armies. Countas models MUST be WYSIWYG, appropriately equipped and sized accordingly in order to best represent the model/unit in
question. Count-as armies should demonstrate reasonable effort when it comes to conversions, simply using an existing army with a different codex (as a proxy) is NOT allowed.

It isn't very definitive simply because I do not know how you could deal definitely with this issue. Our goal is not hinder creativity, but to limit people from using things like their Eldar as Grey Knights in order to field a Paladin block. It is honestly another reason 1500 might be a good idea. Less models, less counts as, less time trying to figure our what is what.

MISSING
How long are the rounds? Are you using the same appearance/sportsmanship system as last year?

Really looking forward to seeing the results/feedback from some large 6th edition events.

In games where there are objectives worth different point values then maybe auto assigning their locations.

In missions where there are auto assigned locations for those objectives I think it would be ok to auto assign a mysterious objective trait to them - but not making it mysterious. Just say that the X point objectives are 'this' and the Y point objectives are 'that.'

Might perserve the over all 'feel' of this edition for the casual gamer while not offending the hard core no random liking tournament player.

First blood is very important. It helps mitigate the last turn objective grab so many tournament playes rely on to win. Game after game in a timed tournament setting is determined by the guy going second making sure the game slows down so random game length is taken away and the game ends on turn 5. That way they can make a free grab for objectives, which everyone mission is, and win the game.

If you want to get rid of First Blood, which is not unfair, learn to hide a model or don't take anything that can get killed on turn 1, then you have to make sure every game must continue until it's natural conclusion or else the advantage the second player gets is to great in these events.

Everything you've said seems to make sense Reecius. I particularly like the enthusiasm for FW models. Hopefully the US tournament scene starts to allow this, and acceptance for FW models filters over here to the UK

Looks pretty well thought out, Reece.

I think you should reconsider Mysterious objectives. First blood is also important, and you should reconsider.

They help to balance out a lot of the game. Flyers are super powerful and the ability for an objective to give a unit Skyfire helps to keep some of those flying circuses' in line. First Blood also helps to balance out the missions more, it provides even more incentive to deploy forces well and use the terrain on the table. Otherwise this looks decent.

Reecius wrote:
=Basics

Mysterious Terrain; hmm, we haven't used this much either while we are still getting to know the rules, but it does make terrain much more of a factor, which can be good, can be bad. Plus it's one of the only ways to get Skyfire (I know you address this later).

Mysterious Objective; agreed.

Fortifications; I don't see what difference the size of the thing matters? Are your tables that full of large terrain pieces you won't be able to fit them on? I doubt you'd see more than a couple anyway... just seems silly to allow some, but not others. The bastion's are about the same volume as the Skyshield - you can fit more under/over the landing pad than the bastion so why not ban the bastion if space is an issue?

Warlord traits; either remove it entirely or just deal with the random roll. Sometimes you'll get a useless trait, sometimes you won't. I think removing some of the random from it will benefit some armies a lot more than others. Case in point; Imperial Guard HQ's don't really benefit much from any of the traits (maybe Strategic) whereas MEQ HQ's can get much more mileage from any of the three choices.

Reecius wrote:
= We will be using a "BAO" (Bay Area Open) style mission similar to what we did last year.

Seems good. The Hammer and Anvil deployment isn't great for end-end tables but I fail to really see the difference between Spearhead and the Vanguard Strike, except Spearhead is much more restricted...

Victory points is a good idea.

Objectives giving Skyfire... not sold on that one personally.
If player A has thought seriously about fliers and how their army can/can't handle them and turns up with allies or aegis/bastion quad guns and player B just brings their 5th ed list with no thought how to handle fliers - is it fair that player B can just move up a bit to an objective then start blasting fliers out of the sky?
The Aegis with quad isn't that expensive and AFAIK every army can take one if they're worried about fliers.

Reecius wrote:
=Psykers

If you roll a power you can't use, either because of Force Charge or the inability to use it such as a Broodlord rolling a shooting power, you can reroll till you get one you can use.

I can get behind that one - I think that should have been in the BRB anyway - how much fun is it to roll up two powers that your Psyker can't use? This is one of the more slowed things in (or left out of) the rules.

Reecius wrote:
Points Level

1500 pts - if only while people are still getting used to the rules. A sensible limit that means you actually have to think carefully about what to take.

Reecius wrote:
Forge World

The biggest objection previously was that FW upset the balance of the game.

Actually, the biggest objection is that the FW books cost more than NASA's yearly budget. Not everyone can afford them and to those players that can't - they suddenly have to deal with a bunch of new units they've never seen before, let alone know the rules for.

If you're going to allow FW units in your tournament, you need to insist that those players bringing them must bring the relevant IA book with the rules in to show the opponents if requested.

Final thought; if fliers are that much of a concern, can't you cap them to say, 25% of the total points?

I like where this is headed Reece.

I am still of the opinion that selecting a warlord trait is ultimately going to be the way. Once 3 or 4 codex's come out, there will be more tables to select from, thus making the proposed style very unbalance in favor of the newest codex's.

I am confused as to why people are assuming selecting a trait will unbalance the game? People will get to re-roll reserves? Fortifications do that, can make the HQ scoring?

Everyone can select from the same lists, how is that not fair?

The hobby is expensive. We shouldn't get into arguments about how expensive it should be.

I am all for FW (obviously the warhammer 40k stamped stuff) being let in.

100% that the players must have the model(or an amazing conversion) and the actual rules for that model.

As I said here http://www.3forint.com/2012/07/tournament-organization-in-6th.html, if a good standard tournament format emerges, then it may be feasible to play 6th in a tournament format.

But there are a lot of things going against it making it as a tournament game. Mostly GW. There are going to be many things that will absorb a fair amount of time in the 6th book. So I think round times will be longer until people figure out a way to speed things up.

Blood Lord Soldado wrote:Everyone can select from the same lists, how is that not fair?

There's a couple that are really good for certain lists.

Inspiring Presence for Foot Guard (Orders on Ld10? Thanks!)
Immovable Object for St Celestine or any Necron.
Legendary Fighter for the choppy warlords is VERY good. Considering some missions have a pretty narrow margin of victory.
The Dust of a Thousand Worlds for any army that has bikes/jetbikes/etc that don't come with MTC would be pretty important.

Those are off the top of my head. I know I would always take Immovable for Celestine, Legendary Fighter for my TWC Lord, TDoaTW for my BikeBoss and Inspiring Presence for my CCS.

pretre wrote:

Blood Lord Soldado wrote:Everyone can select from the same lists, how is that not fair?

There's a couple that are really good for certain lists.

Inspiring Presence for Foot Guard (Orders on Ld10? Thanks!)
Immovable Object for St Celestine or any Necron.
Legendary Fighter for the choppy warlords is VERY good. Considering some missions have a pretty narrow margin of victory.
The Dust of a Thousand Worlds for any army that has bikes/jetbikes/etc that don't come with MTC would be pretty important.

Those are off the top of my head. I know I would always take Immovable for Celestine, Legendary Fighter for my TWC Lord, TDoaTW for my BikeBoss and Inspiring Presence for my CCS.

So then you agree that selecting these for a particular army can be useful, but still balanced vs another army that also gets to select from the list?

Dok wrote:As I said here http://www.3forint.com/2012/07/tournament-organization-in-6th.html, if a good standard tournament format emerges, then it may be feasible to play 6th in a tournament format.

But there are a lot of things going against it making it as a tournament game. Mostly GW. There are going to be many things that will absorb a fair amount of time in the 6th book. So I think round times will be longer until people figure out a way to speed things up.

It worked perfectly fine in our tournament last weekend with 25+ players. Changes need to be made to the missions, which if we all remember back to 4th there were specific tournament missions anyway not to mention all the GTs have their own missions so no big deal here, but I would be leery to make too many sweeping changes. Warlord Traits should be random. Period.

Those of us who have logged significant numbers of games with the new rule set have seen that the games go by just as fast as before. You need to understand wound allocation though for the game to work and unfortunately there are many people who still can't understand wound allocation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Blood Lord Soldado wrote:

pretre wrote:

Blood Lord Soldado wrote:Everyone can select from the same lists, how is that not fair?

There's a couple that are really good for certain lists.

Inspiring Presence for Foot Guard (Orders on Ld10? Thanks!)
Immovable Object for St Celestine or any Necron.
Legendary Fighter for the choppy warlords is VERY good. Considering some missions have a pretty narrow margin of victory.
The Dust of a Thousand Worlds for any army that has bikes/jetbikes/etc that don't come with MTC would be pretty important.

Those are off the top of my head. I know I would always take Immovable for Celestine, Legendary Fighter for my TWC Lord, TDoaTW for my BikeBoss and Inspiring Presence for my CCS.

So then you agree that selecting these for a particular army can be useful, but still balanced vs another army that also gets to select from the list?

Nope. Not balanced.

keithb wrote:The hobby is expensive. We shouldn't get into arguments about how expensive it should be.

I am all for FW (obviously the warhammer 40k stamped stuff) being let in.

100% that the players must have the model(or an amazing conversion) and the actual rules for that model.

Now if somebody can take a undercosted overpowered forgeworld unit, there is a good chance that we can take an ally that is just as good or even take the same FW unit as an ally.

In 5th edition, we didn't have this option to plug holes in our codex when Imperial armies got all the cool cinematic toys. Now we do.

Blood Lord Soldado wrote:

pretre wrote:

Blood Lord Soldado wrote:Everyone can select from the same lists, how is that not fair?

There's a couple that are really good for certain lists.

Inspiring Presence for Foot Guard (Orders on Ld10? Thanks!)
Immovable Object for St Celestine or any Necron.
Legendary Fighter for the choppy warlords is VERY good. Considering some missions have a pretty narrow margin of victory.
The Dust of a Thousand Worlds for any army that has bikes/jetbikes/etc that don't come with MTC would be pretty important.

Those are off the top of my head. I know I would always take Immovable for Celestine, Legendary Fighter for my TWC Lord, TDoaTW for my BikeBoss and Inspiring Presence for my CCS.

So then you agree that selecting these for a particular army can be useful, but still balanced vs another army that also gets to select from the list?

Not sure that it is balanced. What does a Dark Eldar or Tyranid army get from any of these that is equivalent to a nigh-unkillable scoring unit or the ability to generate tons of extra victory points (Immovable and Legendary)?

The issue is, randomly 1 person getting this while his opponent gets nothing per say (-1 to opponents reserve rolls vs an opponent that has no reserves) is not balanced either. The idea of rolling then selecting from tables only works until a codex comes out and has Chaos Space Marine only tables.

Maybe removing them all together is a better solution.

I kind of like the idea of rolling once and picking from one of the three tables.

Blood Lord Soldado wrote:The issue is, randomly 1 person getting this while his opponent gets nothing per say (-1 to opponents reserve rolls vs an opponent that has no reserves) is not balanced either. The idea of rolling then selecting from tables only works until a codex comes out and has Chaos Space Marine only tables.

Maybe removing them all together is a better solution.

Too many sweeping changes to the core rule book won't make tournaments better or make the game "more tournament worthy". Making sweeping changes to the core rules will kill the tournament scene. Why? Because no two tournaments will ever agree to run everything by another tournaments set of house rules. So we are going to end up with a huge disparity of what to expect store to store or GT to GT and the scene will fall apart from the sheer number of players who don't want the headache of learning a new rule set for each tournament or building entirely different armies for every GT. Too many changes will kill the tournament scene I guarantee you that.

I have played a tournament with 6th ed rules, including random psychic powers, and random warlord traits and it worked. Like I already said the missions need serious work and Fortress' of Redemption/Landing pads probably are too big for use in tournaments. But everything else worked just fine, if we don't give the rules as is an actual shot then we are going to doom this game from the out set. Try it in a competitive environment first, I implore you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:I kind of like the idea of rolling once and picking from one of the three tables.

I would be ok with that, if it were for every game. But again the issue comes up of a non-standard standard for every tournament. You won't get every TO to agree to these changes.

Selecting your exact trait will be unbalanced, imo...

Selecting your trait is bad, b/c you can build entire lists around it if you know you'll be able to select it, and it's free ... the traits were NOT balanced around being able to list-design specifically for one.

The solution is some form of modification to prevent the whole .... he got a great one, I got an awful one, now it's not a "fair" game ... especially in a tournament setting where on every other table, potentially game-changing rolls are always different, and so the whole field isn't really playing the same mission.

The problem is figuring out what modification is the most appropriate for the setting ... and it may be "no warlord traits," or some of the other suggestions made here.

Could you imagine the scoring one with the Eldar Harlequin / Eldrad / Vect deathstar?

OverwatchCNC wrote: Too many sweeping changes to the core rule book won't make tournaments better or make the game "more tournament worthy".

I am on board with everything else Reece is proposing. I think calling removing the warlord randomness a sweeping change is a little over-stated. I am of the opinion that removing the table and roll is the best way to handle it, but I do understand that people want to use all aspects of the new rules and I do appreciate that. I also agree that having a uniform way of playing tournament 40k is more important than my opinion, which is why I am / was proposing the alternate method that is simple in application. Again, rolling and then selecting from the tables has a limited shelf life and is band-aid fix to something that can be addressed from the get go. (Or can it?)

It's a rough spot to be in, particularly since you're trying to sell tickets, and I'll be there for at least one of those September events that I have an interest in being a success!

As I see it, you're most likely to draw guys with a format that is familiar. While this has the risk of setting a trend of larger events being run basically as 5th ed. .tournaments with 6th ed. core rules, which will make the tournament scene more fractured initially, you need butts in seats from an organizers perspective, and even from a player's perspective, I think most of us would agree that we'd rather go to a larger event, especially when we're talking about something you'd likely be traveling to. No one wants to make a bunch of plans in advance, take time off of work, cash in chips with wives/families/girlfriends/etc., and generally uproot your life for weekend and show up to a tournament with 25 guys because no one was comfortable going to an event with unfamiliar rules.

That being said, I'm on team Frontline doing this as much 'business as usual' as possible.

In specific:

Basics:

Everything here is as I would do it (half the tables will forget about Mysterious anything anyway! ). Aegis Defense Lines are a non-issue and Bastions are a deathtrap with a giant target painted on it, based on our little bit of experience, everyone is comfortable with Seize and Random Game Length, and the new Night Fighting rules are actually pretty good.

I'd at least consider removing Warlord Traits altogether, since they are a random factor that could potentially unbalance things the same as Mysterious terrain. Just my thoughts.

The Mission:

I'm no fan of the BAO mission as I think it creates too much potential for draws, but everyone is very familiar with it and until a more authoritative 6th missions packet starts to take shape, it is the format I'd be most likely to commit to for a bigger event, since it's tried and true.

Hammer and Anvil being out in large events due simply to the table layout was no surprise to anyone I'm sure; I'd consider using First Blood as a bracket point instead of Preserve: First Blood is dependent on things like luck in the first turn and Seizing and so on, but a player can deploy in such a way that they minimize the risk of giving that point away, and everyone is just as much at risk of giving it up, while Preserve becomes an army-build issue where some lists are going to hand out that point like candy and some lists may not even give it up once, and it creates situations where a player could be stuck giving that point up in order to try and win. Since the bracket points determine pairings and break ties for placings, you could run into a situation where a guy gets an easier day or ends up with an award based on his opponent's army builds.

As an aside, the Relic is a joke for competitive play. I'd be shocked if I ever saw that in a tournament.

Psykers:

The BRB includes a re-roll for powers above your Mastery Level anyway, but allowing a re-roll for unusable powers seems legit.

Points:

Guys will have more experience with the game in two months, and higher points opens the Allies and Fortifications doors a bit wider, but I'd say that 1500 is the best bet. 1750 at max.

Forge World:

LOL nope! Most guys will be shouldering the yoke of still ironing out the kinks of the new system, in addition to playing a bunch of games against armies they've never squared off against, builds they've never seen, and players they don't know, in a game system they don't have a lot of experience with. Put a FW cherry on top and you're creating the potential for problems. There's enough out there for guys to have to deal with that's printed in books they can go to their LGS and buy, let alone FW stuff.

That being said, GW accualy is Dolan and I'm getting ready to not be surprised when they FAQ everything from FW into the main game, LoLLerZ!

Counts as:

Huge landmine here. It's a big event and it creates a lot of front-end work to approve counts-as stuff before game 1, but it might be necessary. Counts-as Allies are right out. If on the one hand you're going to say that the exceptionally expensive and quite difficult to acquire Forge World component enriches the game and should be allowed, and then let oddball, inaccurate models in for counts-as allies, freeing guys from having buy the models, that's Chewbacca Defense all the way. Having to remember two armies' worth of potential counts-as is just going to create rough feelings in games. It's like when Marty went to the diner in Back to the Future...

"can this wonky scratch-build be a Vendetta??"
"you want a Vendetta, pal, you gotta pay for it!"

Missing Anything?

Not really. Keep things simple and in line with the current format for now, the event will be more successful for it.

Of course, my own local events are as 6th as possible, but I'm not trying to pull in a hundred guys (yet!)

I would say you should allow all forgeworld. Just like everything the player should use the most up to date rules but by allowing it all you wont have people who can't use something because it was not in the latest book when they finally put the stamps on them. Imperial Armor Apocalypse 2 (not second edition) has a full list in the back of the book for what force org slot each item is. The reason I say allow people to use the forgeworld army lists is that they are basically underpowered but if someone spent the time and money to put one together then it really sucks for people not to let them play them.

The problem with Forgeworld is that not everyone is familiar with all of the FW books. It adds another level of preparation.

Including FW allies, even?