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.

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.