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.

maybe 100 is an arbitrary number. I cant speak for whoever posted the idea but it seems they were attempting to create a mechanism for restricting horde armies. Perhaps some test games are required to pin down the right number...

OK so 10 isn't as good as all of them. Still if they pull that off within a year (starting now) it would still be a refreshing change from what I'm used to.

@hoodwinked: Are you saying they push the rules then dial them back as needed? This approach works too, there prolly is more than one way to do it, but im not sure GW is that commited to it

armypainter wrote:

You were hoping that competitive play wouldn't be competitive?



I get it, im whining. I dont mind getting my soundly beaten three times in a row, its happened before and its all part of the hobby. Its just disheartening to get soundly beaten three times in a row by the exact same army by people who will become Buzz Killington when they get unlucky. All i want is some variety and humility in defeat... i realize now i'm asking a lot LOL

Why?
Tournaments are for tournament play.
Friendly play, scenarios, and campaigns are for club gaming.

Just ask for fun games.

Any framework you come up with - as you can see - will result in some people just flipping their lids because insert here doesn't work.

Yeah, you'll run into some people who just want to smash you even if it's a friendly casual game, and run back here to gloat. But you'll also find some people who are more in tune with your approach to the game.

lol, i feel i've been taken out of context enough times that my point has been lost.

People wanna smash you on forums too, people wanna smash people gonna smash...

Im all about getting better i just wish GW was too

Those weird list restrictions are fun sometimes. It's a mental exercise to try and build within a framework. A lot of the campaigns I have run limited choices based on planets held or cities, etc. It's the same reason I like the narrative missions on occasion.

I gave up on competitive play when Ard Boyz became a thing and WAAC became rewarded and encouraged. It was no longer fun for me. I don't knock the players who like it, but I'm just not one of them and usually decline to play like that.

The nice thing about 40k is that it's a game and you can get out of it what you make it to be. Me friends and I use the Cities of Death terrain rules in all of our games because it makes the game more enjoyable to us. I didn't need anyone's permission to do that. Play the game the way you enjoy playing it and leave others to do the same.

armypainter wrote:


@Scott-S6: I played in a pretty serious gaming club that ran tournaments for GW and attracted other gaming clubs. I dont mean to sound contrite, im just confident with my gaming experience. Im pretty sure you are aware of some of the overpowered and overplayed lists i am speaking of.

That kind of club level event is exactly what I was talking about. That's where the guys that "know" they're good because they've been beating the same half a dozen people for years come up against something they weren't expecting and start pouting and crying cheese.

If you play with guys that are routinely on the top tables at national and international events you'll find attitudes are quite different.

For a start, there is no such thing as cheese, just more or less effective.

As for rewarding play decision making, you're welcome to grab the latest point and click spam list and see how you do at a major event. I think you will be very surprised. If that's all there was too it then you wouldn't see the same names regularly in the top ten, would you?

Regularly adjusting points values doesn't change the fact that some units and combinations will always be a bit better than others. All it does is force people to play to change their tournament armies more often.