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.

What would you like to see different in how a Tournament is set up and would you enter.


I was thinking it over and wondered if anyone does anything like the styles of tourny that I'm about to mention.



1)Instead of building and bringing your army to play, your army goes off to be judged on paint and layout while you play generic 1,500-1,750(any points really) armies that you draw.

2) Same as above but you instead draw a codex and have 30 minutes to build your list.

3) Or my favorite. You build your list and army then enter them into the draw. Every round you draw to see what army you're playing.


Had these ideas as when thinking of how to do a no "cheese" complaint(don't believe there is really such)tourny that had an extra dimension to the competition.


Your ideas for tourney's and comments on the ideas presented please.

bump^

good Ideas very good ideas but unlikely theyll happen very very good ideas

What are the main stopping points for such Tourney formats.

Firstly, I personally would not feel entirely happy loaning my army to who-knows-who for however long. I would if I trusted everyone there, but it would just be too easy for one random model to... go missing.

Secondly, I've never played with Tau, Necrons, or Dark Eldar. I'm sure that even finding out what everything does would take a fairly silly amount of time, let alone using it tactically.

And finally, what's to stop someone deliberately entering a really, really bad army, on the basis it probably won't hurt him, and even if it does it'll hurt others in the tournament by exactly the same margin?

EDIT: This came across pretty negatively. Amongst friends, I like the idea, especially if it's tweaked to ensure that the various drawbacks are minimised - a display board with a slot for every model solves no. 1, and always using your own list for the final game solves no. 3. No. 2 probably isn't a concern for most tournament players. But you wanted to know the drawbacks, so...

I appreciate the feed back.

I'm playing around with an idea to have a style of tournament not about having the most competitive army but about the individuals ability to think tactically.

I'd appreciate more ideas and feed back along these lines. Also, if someone thinks something would just be fun to do that most tournaments aren't currently doing I'd love to see it dicussed.

Wow, I figured dakka wrong on this one.

Thought that their would be a bunch here that would like to see a new tourney or two with different structures. Structures that focus on how well you actually play and your overall knowledge of the game.

Based upon the response though, guess it will stay just a thing for my gaming group to do.

I'll still give this another couple of days before I ask for the thread to be killed.

One last bump. I'm trying come up with a new format to pitch to our FLGS

A few of my random thoughts:

Balance: One person should build the lists so that there is some thought to making armies that are not just rock paper scissors. Left to randomness, one person builds a terminators in a landraider army while another person makes a guardian heavy list with no chance of stopping the raider or the terms once they are unleashed. One person desiging the lists can help keep things from going over the top. Challange: One person making lists won't be able to account for the figures people might have available.

The point size would need to be fairly small 500 or 750 ideally or no more than 1000 max. Players would need to learn the special rules of the army and any units before playing so the size needs to be kept small to avoid information overload.

Challange: I know I spend a lot of time on conversions and painting with my figs ... Its rough enough when i break my own mini's, but when someone else breaks my models I wouldn't be participating in that kind of event any more. It would be most ideal if the store provided figures (from it's demo lines etc) for this kind of event.

Challange: Some armies are just unfun and un-interesting to people. I love all of the armies and collect 9 40k armies so adapting tactics is natural to me. The guy that only wants power armored super marines may not have fun playing eldar guardians or gunline guard. Part of the fun of this hobby is making your list and testing it's metal. Making your list also provides incentive to buy and paint new figures, the main reason that stores host touramnets is because it generates interest in the hobby and promotes sales.

For different formats I would suggest things like: Events rather than tournaments. Look at the different kind of events warmahordes has ... Stampede, and jacks only, etc. It lets you play the same game but adds some new ways to enjoy your hobby for a day. Also, events like the GW has their stores host to sponser their lines work well too. Things like the assault on McCragge, tank derbys, etc.

Also, adapting the old RTT missions and missions from other sources make for an interesting event.

Anyway, I think this type of format you are lookign at would only work with close gamer friends that know and trust each other. At the FLGS I doubt this would have much chance of success.

Meph

A no cheese tourney?

here is an idea
small armies, 1000 pts or less.
player A uses army a
Player B uses army b
Player C uses army c
and so on

Players A and H are pitted against each other in the first round
Player A uses his army a, player H uses his army h, in the second "round" player A uses army h and player H uses army a. (they play the second round against each other again)
in the first round winning is worth 3 points, losing is worth 1. in the second round winning is worth 5, losing is worth 2, that way if a player cant win with his own army, but CAN win with his opponents army, he is up by 1

this way people who make cheesy "I Win Button" lists that have very little tactical requirements to win will end up getting rolled in points by people with balanced lists that thrive more on smart tactical decisions.

it also gives players who do not know an army to see it in action at least once before they are required to use it.

also- not as much risk of models being stolen or broken, because the owner of each army can still physically move the units, as they are still playing the same game, on the same table.

I don't want random people handling my minis.

I do like the WFB thing of having a set of specific Objective / Mission / Scenario modifier Cards that you can play each game, depending on your opponent. That's really cool.

Examples:

Assassinate! = at the start of the game, select an Enemy HQ - if killed, he scores as an additional Secondary Objective

Orbital Strike! = play at the start of any turn; place d3 S8 AP3 Ordnance Barrages

Earthquake! = play at the start of any turn; all terrain is difficult and semi-dangerous (re-roll dangerous ground); at the start of each other turn, roll a d6: on 4+, the Earthquake ends, opponent may re-roll.

Eclipse! = play at the start of any turn; night-fighting is in effect; at the start of each other turn, roll a d6: on 4+, the Eclipse ends, opponent may re-roll.

And so on...

You guys are getting stuck on the other people handling you minis concept.

If that bothers you then consider the idea that you leave your show peices to be judged for paint, modeling and conversions. The Tourny organizers set up safe viewing areas that are roped off for viewing but only the judges are allowed to approach the minis.

Then while this is going on. The Tourney supplies basic armies of each race or type that were determined and announced ahead of time.

The armies are determined by the people who entered sending in several army list from different armies. The store checks to make sure the chosen lists are valid (playble) lists not an obvious joke list.

The tourney organiers then provide said armies(Limiting redundant ones). You then draw for the armies you will play in each round with the exception that your written army is already pulled and you have to play it in your last match.




The other way would be to have a generic box build armies with magnetized weapons.
You then draw for your army each round, with steps taken to eleiminate repition(Pulling the same army over and over).
Then you have 30 min/1hour(?) to write your army list.
When times up you submit your list. If its not a legal list according to tournament rules then you forfiet that round.
Then you play said army.

Just some ideas a few of us have been kicking around.

Honestly, I can't see this working.

It's tough enough on the TO to provide 8 or 4 tables worth of terrain, plus a ringer army. And it's hard enough to get people to paint their own armies.

So my question is simple: who is going to provide 8 or 16 painted armies for others to play?

The tournament organizers.

GW could easily do this. Not only would the tournaments be more of a fair assement of the players tactical abilities, it would also introduce more players to armies that they might have ever tried.

Never know, someone might lose a preconcied notion about how a certain army plays and makes it their next army.