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.

I'm not implying the scoring for particular missions cannot be adjusted. I agree that you cannot simply go win/loss for a 3 round tournament and expect any separation. And adjusting the scoring will in and of itself adjust how people play. But some of the scenarios, or specific modifications within scenarios, were just crap and had no relationship on game play. Rather, it seemed like they were there simply to penalize/reward certain army builds instead of rewarding strong game play.

I don't think it's unreasonable for GW to take a vested interest in manipulating the "meta" of the tournaments they run- having the top tables invariably end up an even split of SW and IG makes for an unhealthy tournament scene. Using scenarios to alter the viability of various lists makes for a more interesting tournament.

That said... playtesting is always a good thing. Making sure scenarios are functional and don't swing the pendulum too far in one direction is also important.

It's only one event out of many- there are many tournaments that use "standard" style scenarios, and they are a lot of fun, too. One major tournament out of the year that changes up the established order is not that big a deal.

It's being canceled.

I have it on good authority that the name wasn't phallic enough.

I think for the most part the missions for Ard Boyz have been fine. There were some stupid ones like the diplomat one that was mentioned. There were also a couple I really enjoyed and thought they added another tactical angle to the game, like the deep striking objectives one, or the random node value one. Then there are missions like the "anything that can move 12" counts for 3kp" trash that I just do not agree with. I understand that they wanted diversity in the finals so they tried to bone mech spam lists, but I think they went a little far with it. I think 2pts per would have been sufficient, but I will admit it was humorous to see so many people running around @ 35-40 KP in their list.

As far as I am concerned they could roll out three of the worst missions I have ever seen this year, and if they changed the time limit to 3hrs per round I would play all three with a smile on my face. The last couple years in both the prelims and semis I have had my first round game end on turn 4 and cost me points. In a tournament with a field of 40 people a few points lost due to an early game end can easily cripple your chances to advance. One game was due to the guy either being the craftiest slow player ever, or a babbling idiot that loved talking about Baal Preds. Another was us having to call over the TO for simple rules disputes like his tanks being able to use area terrain cover saves. Or my favorite, he has 4 out of 9 guys in cover and wanted to "Just call it a 5+". On top of him not knowing the rules he acted like everything I tried to clarify I was lying to him and he would ask his friend a couple tables over. It got to the point that one of the assistants finally just stood next to our table for the last 30 minutes of our game. Which I believe is the only reason why we even made it as far as we did.

Ard' Boyz 2011, 3 hour rounds. Vast majority of people are already traveling for this, whats another 1.5hrs to the day? Make it happen Santa.

Kaotik wrote:Ard' Boyz 2011, 3 hour rounds. Vast majority of people are already traveling for this, whats another 1.5hrs to the day? Make it happen Santa.

A good point of veiw. I think having enough time to play through the entire rounds is always good. I may get some input on 'Ardboyz again this year, and can make sure that idea gets looked at. With non-standard missions and larger armies, it's good to have the extra time. Sticks to beat the guys playing slowhammer also are handy.

Comment on Last year: GW did a lot of things in a chaotic manner last year, and a lot of things such as 'ardboyz got tossed from person to person, and done on the fly. Mr. Kirby came to america, fired the current CEO and took over, then announced a sudden move to Memphis. Half the staff moved, half didn't. The half moving had to pack up their lives in the northeast, make trips to Memphis to find housing, and make the move down. A lot of crap got half done because of the utter confusion of moving the HQ. 'Ardboyz was one of the things on a back burner that didn't get the attention it should.

This year they have people working on it months ahead of time, the same with Games Day, and quite a few other things. Having to relocate to Memphis last year made things chaotic on all fronts.

If I hear anything concrete on 'Ardboyz, I'll post it up. I expect that 'Ardboyz will always have non-standard missions. Some people enjoy them, some people will just have to deal with them. If people have concerns, questions, or comments on 'Ardboyz, you can send me an email or pm and I'll try to pass along comments. No guarantees anything happens beyond that.)

Kaotik wrote: Ard' Boyz 2011, 3 hour rounds. Vast majority of people are already traveling for this, whats another 1.5hrs to the day? Make it happen Santa.

I agree with this (as well as the rest of your post) completely.

I play fast, and finished every game; but some people I know either do not play fast (intentionally or unintentionally), and others felt the time limit precluded them from taking an optimal build or particular army. I too think 3 hours should be the norm.

Another suggestion would be to have penalty points for both players for every round not completed. Its one thing to play for a 3 or 4 round draw; it is quite another to do that and then see points wiped away by a slow play penalty.

Three hour rounds would indeed be really nice. Mikhaila had them in the PA Finals, and it felt luxurious after the 2.25 - 2.5 rounds I'd gotten prior.

Not sure about the idea of penalty points, though, it may be necessary. One of my friends got slow-played out of a finals slot in 2009. Hrmm.

I only did the 40k AB last night and the previous year. I don't think time limit was a factor except in one game two years ago, when I was a nid horde vs a green tide. However I wouldn't mind extra time.

Kaotik wrote:I think for the most part the missions for Ard Boyz have been fine. There were some stupid ones like the diplomat one that was mentioned. There were also a couple I really enjoyed and thought they added another tactical angle to the game, like the deep striking objectives one, or the random node value one. Then there are missions like the "anything that can move 12" counts for 3kp" trash that I just do not agree with. I understand that they wanted diversity in the finals so they tried to bone mech spam lists, but I think they went a little far with it. I think 2pts per would have been sufficient, but I will admit it was humorous to see so many people running around @ 35-40 KP in their list.

I actually really liked that mission. Anything that shakes up the meta is a good thing, IMHO.

And if you manage to be at a disadvantage (some guy I know had something like 50 KP[mech/pod space marines] in his army and his opponent had like 15[IG blobs and tank squadrons]) and win which he did, I think it means that you are able to adapt to challenges and overcome disadvantages and are a better player for it.

Monster Rain wrote:
I actually really liked that mission. Anything that shakes up the meta is a good thing, IMHO.

And if you manage to be at a disadvantage (some guy I know had something like 50 KP[mech/pod space marines] in his army and his opponent had like 15[IG blobs and tank squadrons]) and win which he did, I think it means that you are able to adapt to challenges and overcome disadvantages and are a better player for it.

I agree.

It feels like today's players want full mission disclosure before hand so they can optimize thier lists for particular mission objectives before a game is played. Gives them an advantage over casual tourney goers who don't have the time, knowledge or models to optimize a list per mission. A form of 'skill' I suppose.

I remember back when missions were not known until the game started. And you had to either plan on the fly, take a balanced list or suck up a loss.

The problem with secret missions for the prelim and regional rounds is that it turned out a few stores leaked the missions to locals. A few bad apples ruined the barrel.

That said, the consolation is that when they release the missions publically a week or so out, we get a chance to send in questions, and they've been able to edit & update them a couple of times.

I'm going to agree with Mannahnin

I find it hard to believe there are many people out there that have time to play this game on a weekend, who can't change things up given a weeks notice.

I also think that shaking up the "meta" is good also with missions, provided the missions are balanced. 3kps for a mech thing is good, but having the mission out a week ahead allowed for people to clarify things like "do drop pods count?" how about fleeing units? and etc...

Glad to hear that they're still doing 'ard Boyz. It's the one time of year that we can break out are strongest lists and test ourselves against the best players in our area.

Not the ONLY time of year ...

True. Events which don't include any form of list restriction (like MVBrandt's NOVA) are much more the rule than the exception, nowadays.

Speaking of which, Mike, you should probably add a link or banner or something to your sig.

MVBrandt wrote:Not the ONLY time of year ...

Agreed, there's Throne of Skulls as well.

Eldanar wrote:

Kaotik wrote: Ard' Boyz 2011, 3 hour rounds. Vast majority of people are already traveling for this, whats another 1.5hrs to the day? Make it happen Santa.

I agree with this (as well as the rest of your post) completely.

I play fast, and finished every game; but some people I know either do not play fast (intentionally or unintentionally), and others felt the time limit precluded them from taking an optimal build or particular army. I too think 3 hours should be the norm.

Another suggestion would be to have penalty points for both players for every round not completed. Its one thing to play for a 3 or 4 round draw; it is quite another to do that and then see points wiped away by a slow play penalty.

This could work, but only with a set limit.... if you cannot make it to the end of 4 rounds in the time allotted, then a slow play penalty would be implemented.

Mannahnin wrote:The problem with secret missions for the prelim and regional rounds is that it turned out a few stores leaked the missions to locals. A few bad apples ruined the barrel.

That's more of an issue with shady store owners though, not the missions, right?

Mannahnin wrote:That said, the consolation is that when they release the missions publically a week or so out, we get a chance to send in questions, and they've been able to edit & update them a couple of times.

Any TO worth his salt should be able to make these calls without appealing to a GW Faq though, don't you think?

Oh, and 3 Hour rounds. Now and forever.

Monster Rain wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:The problem with secret missions for the prelim and regional rounds is that it turned out a few stores leaked the missions to locals. A few bad apples ruined the barrel.

That's more of an issue with shady store owners though, not the missions, right?

SECRET missions. Come on, man. We're talking about missions being kept secret, and I was explaining why they don't and can't do that anymore except for the final. Missions got leaked, and there's no way to prevent it happening in the future except in the Finals.

Monster Rain wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:That said, the consolation is that when they release the missions publically a week or so out, we get a chance to send in questions, and they've been able to edit & update them a couple of times.

Any TO worth his salt should be able to make these calls without appealing to a GW Faq though, don't you think?

What? Some of the missions have had significant editorial errors or badly-phrased sections. While a good TO can certainly deal, it saves him work and a headache if GW fixes it before the day, and it also makes the event more consistent.

mikhaila wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:Not the ONLY time of year ...

Agreed, there's Throne of Skulls as well.

I LOLed....I really did, thank you Mikhaila

mikhaila wrote:
A good point of veiw. I think having enough time to play through the entire rounds is always good. I may get some input on 'Ardboyz again this year, and can make sure that idea gets looked at. With non-standard missions and larger armies, it's good to have the extra time. Sticks to beat the guys playing slowhammer also are handy.

Comment on Last year: GW did a lot of things in a chaotic manner last year, and a lot of things such as 'ardboyz got tossed from person to person, and done on the fly. Mr. Kirby came to america, fired the current CEO and took over, then announced a sudden move to Memphis. Half the staff moved, half didn't. The half moving had to pack up their lives in the northeast, make trips to Memphis to find housing, and make the move down. A lot of crap got half done because of the utter confusion of moving the HQ. 'Ardboyz was one of the things on a back burner that didn't get the attention it should.

This year they have people working on it months ahead of time, the same with Games Day, and quite a few other things. Having to relocate to Memphis last year made things chaotic on all fronts.

If I hear anything concrete on 'Ardboyz, I'll post it up. I expect that 'Ardboyz will always have non-standard missions. Some people enjoy them, some people will just have to deal with them. If people have concerns, questions, or comments on 'Ardboyz, you can send me an email or pm and I'll try to pass along comments. No guarantees anything happens beyond that.)

Year before last there was a mission that said HQ counted at 4 points apiece and the old SW players were forced to take 4 at that points level due to being forced to take 1 per 750pts. I do not remember the OP name, but there was a thread on this forum from someone involved in Ard Boyz and talking through the missions. I made that comment here about the imbalance, and within 24hrs he had changed the ruling on the GW site to where SW HQ were only worth 2pts apiece in that mission. I thought that was pretty sweet that they were taking feedback on the missions a couple weeks beforehand, and doing their best to make things as fair as possible. Now this does not play well with the people who would rather the missions be secret, but it does allow for them to be well thought out and balanced. I dunno about most people, but I would definitely prefer to have the latter of the two. I did not see a similar thread this year, and assumed it was just because they decided not to release the missions until the last week. However knowing now all the logistical crap they had going down I fully understand why they had no time this year.

Thanks in advance though Mikhaila for dropping the suggestion on the longer round times, and I really hope they listen.

Even though the missions were released only a week in advance this year, they still got a couple of revisions & clarifications done in that week. You must have just missed the threads.

How about only one location this year instead of three? Makes no sense to have three locations. The prizes are horrible at all locations and your not playing against the best of the best like you hope too. There what was 12 people in the West coast area 24 or so in the east coast and central 44-60? People if i remember correctly?


They need to have just one event for the finals and they need to make it worth going to the event otherwise there is no point going after Semi finals.

I wouldn't say it makes "no" sense to split it. The advantage is that it makes it easier to get to one, thus increasing attendance. If the three locations this year had 12, 24, and 50-ish people, then that's a total of 86, as opposed to last year's 63 (IIRC).

That being said, I agree that it makes MORE sense to have one central Final. You have to contend against the toughest, there is one overall winner, and hopefully they can make the prizes respectable again. It cost me a lot more to fly to Chicago than to drive to PA, but it was more exciting and more of an event.

Honestly doesn't matter. If you have 63 guys your not gonna prove who was the "best" in 3 games. Ard Boyz is a great fun tournament but it's results are heavily based on draw since you need to club your enemy (be he a seal or not) hard to get the points you need to win it. So 3 locations make as much sense as 1 really.

Yeah Im sorta amused people who have been to all the 'ard boyz still think it determines who the best is. When you have multiple people who are undefeated then not a single thing is proven

3 rounds isnt enough to determine anything other than who stomps their first round opponent the most

Kirasu wrote:Yeah Im sorta amused people who have been to all the 'ard boyz still think it determines who the best is. When you have multiple people who are undefeated then not a single thing is proven

3 rounds isnt enough to determine anything other than who stomps their first round opponent the most

Then why don't you sit down and write up a system that ACTUALLY works for determining the "Best". Right now ranking in Warhammer/40K is like the BCS.... yeah we get a "Champion" but are they really the "best"?

Given the popularity of the games and the sheer number of people playing it would take a year-long "tourney" to get the top players in one place. Working out the logistics would be a nightmare. I know several people that won entry into the semis that did not play in them due to the travel/time involved.

Ard Boyz is the best we have right now, so until some-one comes up with a better system........

Really Helgrenze? Have you seen quite a few of the events on the circuit this year? There are quite a few events that will determine the best player at them. That are formatted better and will probably bring in a higher number of quality players. Ard Boyz is an excellent marketing tool and a great way to pick up an extra 2500pt army a year. But that's really it

I've got to disagree.

The best player at one of he events you're describing could have bad dice rolls in one game and then not be in contention for first.

If you win the 'ard boyz finals it means you've at least come in top three at two tournaments and won the third and ostensibly most competitive. I don't think you could pull that off if you weren't a quality player.

The events I'm describing have 1 less game in them than all 3 ard boyz tournaments. And the same thing could be said for Ard Boyz. Except that a person can have a closely fought game in the newer events and still win instead of needing to curb stomp every opponent.

I'll stand by it not being the pinnacle of competitiveness.