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 think we should give clocks an honest try for tournaments but that said they can be played like everything else.

All about the shortcuts.

Some will have the underside of bases magnestised, and the army stored in a vertical, shelved case. This speeds up deployment, as the units are packed together.

Batch rolling. Make sure you've got enough dice! If, for example, your units regularly chuck out 20 shots from turn 1, do ensure you've got 20+ dice on hand. During your opponents turn, whilst he's doing movement, get your dice organised. Clear down any that aren't wound markers, and group them into same sized amounts (say, five). Just knocks a few seconds off dice gathering time when rolling saves etc.

You can get those sticky marker things for your codex, so you can quickly move to each unit's page. Again, saves a few seconds. Have unit cards for your dudes for your reference, Codex for your opponent.

When crafting your army for the tournament, keep in mind that there will be necessary time limits. No point fielding your Greentide with those.

Accept there is no time for incredibly precise movement measurement. If your plan depends on that, it's a bad plan for a tournament. Rough and ready movement is good, but allow your opponent final say on whether it looks about right (you can measure for every model if you've got a smol army of course).. Also accept that in current GW games, where templates are gone, ensuring precise spacing is more likely to be seen as deliberately playing for time than in previous editions.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Primark G wrote:
I think we should give clocks an honest try for tournaments but that said they can be played like everything else.

Sorry to jump on your post here, as this isn't a response directed at yourself specifically....

But clocks at tournaments. Who provides them? If the players, how do you ensure they've not been fiddled with? Because you'll get poor sports making that accusation sooner or later. If the TO - who's paying for them?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Primark G wrote:
I think we should give clocks an honest try for tournaments but that said they can be played like everything else.

Sorry to jump on your post here, as this isn't a response directed at yourself specifically....

But clocks at tournaments. Who provides them? If the players, how do you ensure they've not been fiddled with? Because you'll get poor sports making that accusation sooner or later. If the TO - who's paying for them?

you can get chess clock apps? I have one on my phone encase i go to a kings of war tournament which requires one.

Audustum wrote:

 gorgon wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:

dragonelf wrote:
we are playing 2000 points games, and we usually take around 4 hours to finish our games in our group, I struggle to imagine myself deploying and finishing 5-6 rounds in three hours.

If you're going to set a 3 hour time limit, why not drop the point total to 1500? I've also heard talk bandied about of their being penalties for non-completion, like -x tournament points for both players if a game isn't completed. Playing at a reasonable point level that shouldn't leave people sweating hard for time, and if need be, an appreciable penalty for not completing the game (or turn 4, 5, whatever you want to say must be completed) seems like the way to go.

That's what any filthy casual player would do, right? "Hey, I only have a couple hours, let's play at 1500." It's the obvious, natural way that one regulates the commitment level of a given game of 40K.

But tourney players want to bring all their toys. And so the community wrangles with various distortions of the game (chess clocks, etc.) to try to make that possible. Yes, it's backwards, but it's also consistent with all the backwardness involved with trying to turn Warhammer 40K into a pro sport.

Uhh, it's also necessary for some armies. Your condescension aside.

Imperial Knights are vastly different in 2,000 Vs. 1,500 (fielding 2 knights and 1/2 armigers vs. 3-4 knights or many armigers). Custodes are vastly different in 2,000 Vs. 1,500 (one Outrider detachment is 970ish). Grey Knights too (GMDK's are a good 235 a pop, even basic troops are 105 minimum).

Sure, them Orks and even Space Marines might not be that different, but 1,500 severely handicaps some armies. It's at 2,000 for a good reason.

At any given points level, some armies will have a better time of it and others will have a worse time of it. How many competitive pure IK and pure Custodes armies are there even at 2000?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
All about the shortcuts.

Some will have the underside of bases magnestised, and the army stored in a vertical, shelved case. This speeds up deployment, as the units are packed together.

Batch rolling. Make sure you've got enough dice! If, for example, your units regularly chuck out 20 shots from turn 1, do ensure you've got 20+ dice on hand. During your opponents turn, whilst he's doing movement, get your dice organised. Clear down any that aren't wound markers, and group them into same sized amounts (say, five). Just knocks a few seconds off dice gathering time when rolling saves etc.

You can get those sticky marker things for your codex, so you can quickly move to each unit's page. Again, saves a few seconds. Have unit cards for your dudes for your reference, Codex for your opponent.

When crafting your army for the tournament, keep in mind that there will be necessary time limits. No point fielding your Greentide with those.

Accept there is no time for incredibly precise movement measurement. If your plan depends on that, it's a bad plan for a tournament. Rough and ready movement is good, but allow your opponent final say on whether it looks about right (you can measure for every model if you've got a smol army of course).. Also accept that in current GW games, where templates are gone, ensuring precise spacing is more likely to be seen as deliberately playing for time than in previous editions.

This is all good stuff and no reason it can't be adopted by first-time tournament players. Ultimately when you go to tournaments you are signing up to a timed game of 40k, so you do have to make an effort to play in the prescribed time - I'm new so tough luck doesn't cut it. Even if you don't play lots of games you can take these sort of points into consideration in planning for tournaments. First time I went to a tournament I practiced my deployment solo at home so I could go from case to start T1 as quickly as possible. Deciding where your moving in your opponents turn rather than waiting until your own turn starts is also a massive time saver and tends to be overlooked in where the time went.

Audustum wrote:

 gorgon wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:

dragonelf wrote:
we are playing 2000 points games, and we usually take around 4 hours to finish our games in our group, I struggle to imagine myself deploying and finishing 5-6 rounds in three hours.

If you're going to set a 3 hour time limit, why not drop the point total to 1500? I've also heard talk bandied about of their being penalties for non-completion, like -x tournament points for both players if a game isn't completed. Playing at a reasonable point level that shouldn't leave people sweating hard for time, and if need be, an appreciable penalty for not completing the game (or turn 4, 5, whatever you want to say must be completed) seems like the way to go.

That's what any filthy casual player would do, right? "Hey, I only have a couple hours, let's play at 1500." It's the obvious, natural way that one regulates the commitment level of a given game of 40K.

But tourney players want to bring all their toys. And so the community wrangles with various distortions of the game (chess clocks, etc.) to try to make that possible. Yes, it's backwards, but it's also consistent with all the backwardness involved with trying to turn Warhammer 40K into a pro sport.

Uhh, it's also necessary for some armies. Your condescension aside.

I was presuming that the whole thing was tongue in cheek, given the 'filthy casuals' comment.

And the fact that the best way to make sure you can get a game in is... make it not so large? That is the thing about 1500 points - that's already plenty big enough for a player to bring all their toys, so no one is really left wanting.

moonsmite wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Primark G wrote:
I think we should give clocks an honest try for tournaments but that said they can be played like everything else.

Sorry to jump on your post here, as this isn't a response directed at yourself specifically....

But clocks at tournaments. Who provides them? If the players, how do you ensure they've not been fiddled with? Because you'll get poor sports making that accusation sooner or later. If the TO - who's paying for them?

you can get chess clock apps? I have one on my phone encase i go to a kings of war tournament which requires one.

Hehehehe. Apply that "they have been fiddled" accusation except doubtly so. Or you need to add pre-game app origin check into a habit. Ditto for dice rolling app. How can you be sure that dice rolling app isn't custom made so it gives just a little boost to dice rolls? Not enough to make it obvious like rolling only 6's but even 5% boost to rolls is pretty good...

tneva82 wrote:

moonsmite wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Primark G wrote:
I think we should give clocks an honest try for tournaments but that said they can be played like everything else.

Sorry to jump on your post here, as this isn't a response directed at yourself specifically....

But clocks at tournaments. Who provides them? If the players, how do you ensure they've not been fiddled with? Because you'll get poor sports making that accusation sooner or later. If the TO - who's paying for them?

you can get chess clock apps? I have one on my phone encase i go to a kings of war tournament which requires one.

Hehehehe. Apply that "they have been fiddled" accusation except doubtly so. Or you need to add pre-game app origin check into a habit. Ditto for dice rolling app. How can you be sure that dice rolling app isn't custom made so it gives just a little boost to dice rolls? Not enough to make it obvious like rolling only 6's but even 5% boost to rolls is pretty good...

There are all kinds of easier ways to cheat that we generally dont question. You may as well ask who supplies the physical dice - its far easier for 99% of people to weight those than for them to modify code. Or who supplies the tape measures to make sure you arent getting an extra 5% distance? Are you going through your opponents' maelstom decks to ensure they have 36 unique unmarked cards?
Supply of the chess clocks is by far the least worrisome part of the clocks issue.

@OP: tournaments for a number of reasons have to set time limits on games. From my experience attending and running tournaments, 2000pts in 3 hours was enough for 90% of games to be completed.
If youre having trouble with that, then your options are
1. Practice until you no longer have trouble.
2. Play a different army that doesnt use as much time.
3. Dont finish your games.

Practice is they key point. You should know at the very least your own rules inside and out. You should preferably have a good knowledge of the enemy army as well, so you dont waste time querying your opponent. You should know how your army deploys (this will rarely change between games). You should think on your opponents turn about what you need to do, rather than spend your time debating.
Beyond knowing rules, a good grasp of the potential of your units helps in planning your turn ahead of time. I know that a squad of obliterators will almost certainly kill whichever tank i point them at, so I can my turn based on likely outcomes and not have any difficult "should i attack A or B" choices.

Playing a different army is an option. It doesnt have to be a different faction, but different builds of the same faction may be quicker. In general, shooting armies are faster than combat, and low model count faster than high.

Not finishing games is an option, but not a good one in my opinion. Lots of times you'll end up thinking "if only i had another turn i could have won". Plus theres your opponent to think about - you two are playing a game together, for fun. Did your opponent have fun? Did they leave wishing that they had gotten an extra turn but blame you for taking too long to deploy? This i s something you should avoid.


Though i dont necessarily agree that both armies should get equal time, you only deserve equal time as your opponent. People bring up the example of 300 orks vs 3 knights - sure, the knights need less time. But that doesnt mean the ork player can get in the habit of taking 2hrs of a 3hr game, because one day theyll run into another 300 ork horde.


So moral of the story. Yes, you should be able ti finish 2000pts in 3 hours, and yes most people can. If you can't, practice or change until you can.

Trasvi wrote:
There are all kinds of easier ways to cheat that we generally dont question. You may as well ask who supplies the physical dice - its far easier for 99% of people to weight those than for them to modify code. Or who supplies the tape measures to make sure you arent getting an extra 5% distance? Are you going through your opponents' maelstom decks to ensure they have 36 unique unmarked cards?

Dunno. I can crank up loaded dice app that has EXACTLY the kind of loading up I want(I don't want all 6's and I don't want it to be noticably big difference. Actually I would be adding more toward 3-5 side than say more 6's) than I can alter weight load of dice so that it isn't visible.

Also I find often enough dices being shared so opponent would get same benefit...Now giving unknown your phone periodically to do the rolling...Nope not feasible.

I find its very rare to share opponents dice. I dont avoid it, but most people bring their own dice (often themed to their army) and roll those almost exclusively. And yes, most people are appropriately wary of simple .Rand() based dice apps - GWs offering on the other hand is something different.

But i was more talking about your idea that somehow someone would rig a chess clock. Its possible, but extremely easy to get caught (sum of times wouldnt add up) and half the time you end up with the wrong clock!

The point is there are many many easier ways to cheat that we don't attempt to verify, and many many other games that use chess clocks whete the issue has never come up.

tneva82 wrote:

moonsmite wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Primark G wrote:
I think we should give clocks an honest try for tournaments but that said they can be played like everything else.

Sorry to jump on your post here, as this isn't a response directed at yourself specifically....

But clocks at tournaments. Who provides them? If the players, how do you ensure they've not been fiddled with? Because you'll get poor sports making that accusation sooner or later. If the TO - who's paying for them?

you can get chess clock apps? I have one on my phone encase i go to a kings of war tournament which requires one.

Hehehehe. Apply that "they have been fiddled" accusation except doubtly so. Or you need to add pre-game app origin check into a habit. Ditto for dice rolling app. How can you be sure that dice rolling app isn't custom made so it gives just a little boost to dice rolls? Not enough to make it obvious like rolling only 6's but even 5% boost to rolls is pretty good...

"hey, we started both with 1,5h clocks (3h total). I'm down to 10m, your 50m (so 2h passed) but we are only 1.5h hours from the round start time.", "Judge this guys app is modified".

Seriously, how do you expect to cheat on a chess clock app without getting caught by a time discrepancy between RL and your phone.

It's not whether you can or would - it's about those who will claim it anyway. You're just swapping one argument for another is my fear there.

Possibly unfounded, but I've met enough bad losers in my time to feel it worthy of bearing in mind.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It's not whether you can or would - it's about those who will claim it anyway. You're just swapping one argument for another is my fear there.

Possibly unfounded, but I've met enough bad losers in my time to feel it worthy of bearing in mind.

TFG will always be TFG and look for ways to be TFG. But a chess clock is a lot harder to game and a lot easier for a judge to notice as deliberate and punish then an open round time.

I don't think anyone is accepting unknown and personally written dice rolling or chess clock apps. The GW dice app is the only one I'm aware anyone is trying to use and presume when chess clock apps become more commonplace the rules pack will stipulate the apps that can be used. if we're going for full eco-terrorism why not players have a doctored codex on their phone where they've changed all the unit stats. Seems just as likely a scenario as the other scare mongering!

Trasvi wrote:
I find its very rare to share opponents dice. I dont avoid it, but most people bring their own dice (often themed to their army) and roll those almost exclusively. And yes, most people are appropriately wary of simple .Rand() based dice apps - GWs offering on the other hand is something different.

Even if GW dice app was 100% trustworthy and 100% random it would still not help much. As without actually investigating opponents phone you couldn't be SURE it actually is GW's dice app or not...

Having managed to deploy a WW2 Soviet Horde (with two units of 40+ bases) in less time than my opponent managed with an elite parachute force (with units numbering closer to 8) most of this is practice.

enforce time limits for deployment - have a bell or something - if you haven't deployed by the bell whats left was delayed elsewhere and won't be in the battle today.

the only way to tackle deliberate slow play is to have likely one adjudicator for every four or so tables and actually stay near them and watch the games.

otherwise its just one of them things people will be frustrated by for years

moonsmite wrote:
Chess clocks, will force the large army's to think about how to speed their play up.

its used in kings of war for stopping slow play. be interesting to see if ever used for 40k

Kings of war has multibasing and/or rank and file movement trays its much easier. YOu can use movement trays in 40k, but there comes a point when the unit needs to break out of the tray for pile in/ consolidate moves to tie up enemy units and it gets messy again.

KoW also has very defined universal rules across all armies with X number of attacks etc... 40k has A LOT more variables.

The only way to fairly deal with and distribute time is timed turns/chess clocks.

WarmaHordes uses this format (at least when I last played in 2nd Edition). It means A. both players have an even amount of time to execute their mission, it's not fair to say Player A with 30 models and less dice to roll with a specific and probably knife edge objective in mind should have less time than the 200 model horde with 1,000 dice to roll.

It's your choice to take a certain army and build to a tournament, and you should use what you have to your advantage, putting people on a level playing field as much as possible. Time is one of those factors.

Not to mention, Horde style armies usually "cheat" (I use the term loosely) by models moving at different movements than their maximum due to the amount of models so on and so forth.

It's a nightmare, but competitive levels are the factor for events, if you're having a casual £5 tournament with minimal prize support, who cares how strict things need to be? But £20 entry with hundreds or thousands of pounds on the line? You better believe it's fair to make sure everything is right and even.

- Someone mentioned Magic in passing and competition levels, I believe that depending on your ranking in Magic, you enter tournaments at a later level, so for example you may join at round 3 with a 2-0-0 record, meaning you're only going to play other players at a 2-0-0; Magic tournaments tend to run 12+ rounds which makes this easier, however.

 gorgon wrote:

 Bookwrack wrote:

dragonelf wrote:
we are playing 2000 points games, and we usually take around 4 hours to finish our games in our group, I struggle to imagine myself deploying and finishing 5-6 rounds in three hours.

If you're going to set a 3 hour time limit, why not drop the point total to 1500? I've also heard talk bandied about of their being penalties for non-completion, like -x tournament points for both players if a game isn't completed. Playing at a reasonable point level that shouldn't leave people sweating hard for time, and if need be, an appreciable penalty for not completing the game (or turn 4, 5, whatever you want to say must be completed) seems like the way to go.

That's what any filthy casual player would do, right? "Hey, I only have a couple hours, let's play at 1500." It's the obvious, natural way that one regulates the commitment level of a given game of 40K.

But tourney players want to bring all their toys. And so the community wrangles with various distortions of the game (chess clocks, etc.) to try to make that possible. Yes, it's backwards, but it's also consistent with all the backwardness involved with trying to turn Warhammer 40K into a pro sport.

I feel the opposite. I want to bring all my toys in a relaxed game with a friend. In a competitive match I'd like to prove that skills and experience matter, and limiting the point budget may be challenging, forcing me to make important decisions about list building.

tigerstyle wrote:
The only way to fairly deal with and distribute time is timed turns/chess clocks..

Agreed. IF either point level of tournaments are lowered or time limits increased enough that the horde armies can play the game through.

As it is now simply splitting half would be unfair solution.

Splitting time in half is never an unfair solution. As what happens when 2 horde armies meet? So each player really should only get half the time. That said I agree that points need to go down (time limits really cannot go up more than they are 3 hours is a long time when you have multiple rounds in a day). Clocks don't ensure a game gets to 5 turns, they just ensure equal time. It is possible for 2 players to only get through 2 turns on a clock, and for the game to become a race at the end to try to clock out the other guy first.

moonsmite wrote:
Chess clocks, will force the large army's to think about how to speed their play up.

its used in kings of war for stopping slow play. be interesting to see if ever used for 40k

We've been using chess clocks with no issues here. Most games end with 15 or so minutes to go.

tigerstyle wrote:
The only way to fairly deal with and distribute time is timed turns/chess clocks.

WarmaHordes uses this format (at least when I last played in 2nd Edition). It means A. both players have an even amount of time to execute their mission, it's not fair to say Player A with 30 models and less dice to roll with a specific and probably knife edge objective in mind should have less time than the 200 model horde with 1,000 dice to roll.

Chess clocks are not a realistic or fair option in 40K because much of each player's turn is actually played by the other player: reactive shooting (like t'au early warning override or necron deathmarks), deny the witch, overwatch, and then half or more of the fight phase. You can't just switch the clock for each player's turn because often there's a significant, but fiddly, amount of each player's turn that's controlled by the other player. I own a game store that runs a lot of tournaments, and we already own chess clocks for use with Warmachine. Everytime we've considered using them for 40K, though, we've come back to this fundamental incompatibility.

Benn Roe wrote:

tigerstyle wrote:
The only way to fairly deal with and distribute time is timed turns/chess clocks.

WarmaHordes uses this format (at least when I last played in 2nd Edition). It means A. both players have an even amount of time to execute their mission, it's not fair to say Player A with 30 models and less dice to roll with a specific and probably knife edge objective in mind should have less time than the 200 model horde with 1,000 dice to roll.

Chess clocks are not a realistic or fair option in 40K because much of each player's turn is actually played by the other player: reactive shooting (like t'au early warning override or necron deathmarks), deny the witch, overwatch, and then half or more of the fight phase. You can't just switch the clock for each player's turn because often there's a significant, but fiddly, amount of each player's turn that's controlled by the other player. I own a game store that runs a lot of tournaments, and we already own chess clocks for use with Warmachine. Everytime we've considered using them for 40K, though, we've come back to this fundamental incompatibility.

Easily fixed. If the opponent is making a save? Hit the clock. Does the opponent want to overwatch? Hit the clock. It's just a little button, it's not hard to hit it.

To make sure it's fair, no player may switch the clock while any dice they rolled are still on the table. Roll for wounds, pick up the dice (or let the opponent grab them) and smack the clock. The opponent rolls, removes models, picks up the dice, and hits it back.

Rules question? Stop the clock and call the TO.

That level of fiddliness would significantly lengthen games, and sort of defeat the purpose. I didn't even mention saves because they usually take so little time, but reaching for a button both before and after every instance of someone needing to save (often dozens of times per turn) sounds awful. Making saves is a process that often takes just a few seconds, which means clock-flopping could easily double the length of time one of the most common aspects of each game takes. But even if you just accept that your opponents' saves are coming off your clock, the charge and fight phases will often suffer considerably from fiddly clock-flopping dilemma. It just isn't feasible.

It isn’t a big deal it is a judgement call. Your opponent rolls a single save don’t bother to switch, if they are taking some time to count out dice or have a bunch of rolls to make, switch the clock. During the fight phase swap when you roll for your models. I felt the same as you before actually using a clock a few games.

I can't really see a good reason not to use clocks now.

Benn Roe wrote:
That level of fiddliness would significantly lengthen games, and sort of defeat the purpose. I didn't even mention saves because they usually take so little time, but reaching for a button both before and after every instance of someone needing to save (often dozens of times per turn) sounds awful. Making saves is a process that often takes just a few seconds, which means clock-flopping could easily double the length of time one of the most common aspects of each game takes. But even if you just accept that your opponents' saves are coming off your clock, the charge and fight phases will often suffer considerably from fiddly clock-flopping dilemma. It just isn't feasible.

Have you ever watched speed chess? It takes no time. I announce "4 wounds", then the other guys starts rolling while I hit the clock. I hit it after I finish my action (picking up dice, removing models, etc) while the other player has already started rolling. Then I count out the dice for my next attack.

The only player really affected is the poor ork player, who needs both hands to roll and pick up dice...and dead orks. :(

I could see it done with actual chess clocks, but apps are not feasible. You need big buttons and a bulky clock to allow all of that switching.

Spoletta wrote:
I could see it done with actual chess clocks, but apps are not feasible. You need big buttons and a bulky clock to allow all of that switching.

And a 4x6 table is a little bigger than the standard chess board. Personally I think that barring any deliberate slow play (which would be extremely obvious in this case) I'd just let my opponent take their saves on my clock. Remember, clocks aren't being introduced to counter a massive cheating wave, they're being introduced because a majority of games weren't being finished on time for a variety of reasons (including rules unfamiliarity).