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.

Here is the link to the results PDF from last weekend's GT. We made an error and Josh Varia should have gotten Runner Up Best General, so if anyone knows how to contact him, I would appreciate it so we can make amends.

www.scgwl.com\downloads\GT\results\Smackdown.pdf

ps- Please I would appreciate that this thread not degenerate into the penix jousting contest over orks that the last one did....

Thanks again for running, Phazael - I had a lot of fun, played some great games, and am very glad I made it down.

Levi & I beat each other to a semi-pulp in round 2; that 6-6 tie definitely hindered both of our chances for an even higher finish. But it was an awesome game - who was winning changed so many times, until neither of us was capable of winning any more.

Have you figured out what's going to happen w/the Slaughter in Space next year? Also a great event, but a little handicapped this year by temporal proximity to Adepticon.

pps- I need PMs from the top three with email and phone if possible, for the report to GW.

Your link doesn't seem to work.

Hey Q, another great tournament, you guys run a tight ship. Count me in for more, no doubt.

My two suggestions:

1.) More LOS blocking terrain mid board. Like those GW bunkers would be great. Anything to provide something to hide behind.
2.) No gravity flux or other such wacky in-game effects. I think it adds to much randomness into a game already very random due to dice.

But that is just me! On the whole, great tournament again.

PM sent for my info.

Reece-
I always toss one oddball mission in there to take people out of their comfort zone. The people who are good at risk management do better in these kinds of missions, as do the better generals (as opposed to the cookie cutter netlist guys), so all I can say is expect the unexpected. There will be a more standard ratio of mission types from Scott and I, however, so you can comfortable always expect 2 KP style missions and 3 objective oriented ones, though not all emphasizing scoring units. The KP and Corners scenario will pretty much always be our closer.

As for terrain, we had 25% coverage. We do want to add a third building per table and are building them as we speak. A central LOS blocker would be good for some tables, but there was no shortage of 4+ cover on the tables as it was and I made sure both sides had places to obscure vehicles. We will see what it looks like once we get our next round of buildings completed. NeonCon in Vegas will have three per table, for sure.

@Janth- I can say with complete confidence that the Slaughter in Space will be held at the Strategicon on Memorial Day weekend of next year. Its not set in stone, but thats the plan. This would be at a hotel near LAX and follow the same 5 round format with the Thumbs up Thumbs Down checks.

Phazael wrote:Reece-
I always toss one oddball mission in there to take people out of their comfort zone. The people who are good at risk management do better in these kinds of missions, as do the better generals (as opposed to the cookie cutter netlist guys), so all I can say is expect the unexpected. There will be a more standard ratio of mission types from Scott and I, however, so you can comfortable always expect 2 KP style missions and 3 objective oriented ones, though not all emphasizing scoring units. The KP and Corners scenario will pretty much always be our closer.

As for terrain, we had 25% coverage. We do want to add a third building per table and are building them as we speak. A central LOS blocker would be good for some tables, but there was no shortage of 4+ cover on the tables as it was and I made sure both sides had places to obscure vehicles. We will see what it looks like once we get our next round of buildings completed. NeonCon in Vegas will have three per table, for sure.

I don't mind the odd oddball mission.

While you had enough terrain, it might have been nice to arrange it differently. Every board was completely open across the middle - there were no choices to make regarding fire lanes, or trying to advance around terrain, or even where to deploy fire-base assets (Lootas go in the building; check). Put those two buildings per table in the middle, about 12" apart, and it's suddenly a much more interesting battlefield. (Maybe fill in some of the ground-floor windows, too - actual LoS blocking to anything bigger than an infantry model was pretty hard to pull off.)

@Janth- I can say with complete confidence that the Slaughter in Space will be held at the Strategicon on Memorial Day weekend of next year. Its not set in stone, but thats the plan. This would be at a hotel near LAX and follow the same 5 round format with the Thumbs up Thumbs Down checks.

Awesome - that's the perfect amount of temporal displacement. (Of course, driving through holiday-weekend traffic really sucks - I think I'll just leave Friday morning next time.)

I don't mind the oddball missions either, but I think the penalties/advantages for gravity flux may need to be muted a bit. But really, oddball missions are only truly bad if they're also a surprise or completely wreck armies - the fact that they release the missions ahead of time at least gives you a chance to try to deal with it.

Not every board was open across the middle, as evidenced by my 18-2 loss in game 5! The one table not open and I get it! augh!

My only complaint (minor) would be what we talked about last time - don't make the secondary/tertiary objectives overlap the primary. Mission 2, for example, you needed to get into the center of the board for primary, and then you needed an HQ in the center of the board for secondary. If you can't win the first, or struggle with it...you're almost definitely not doing the second either.

Edit: also, thanks for a great event. I grumbled a bit during but really I was just grumbling at my Tau. The missions really require a different army and I've finally learned my lesson.

25% Terrain.

Have to agree with what others have said. 4+ terrain is good, but we need some LOS blocking terrain. I was chopped down wholesale by Lootas on two different games and I had no LOS to stop it. Both games I was forced to take it in the face and do suicide lemming charges into them.

I had the same issues with the Tau player I faced off against, but since Tau don't have nearly the shear number of guns that ork Lootas do, it wasn't nearly as bad to deal with.

So that makes three games out of five where I charged into the open (with nothing else I could do). No LOS terrain at all, was the issue.

My other two games had those 2.5" hills, that at least on one was placed in such a way that it partially mitigated this open board shooting phenomenon that severely plagued four of my games.

I'd be looking forward to some buildings I can't see through in the middle or near the middle of the board in the future. Thanks.

In the future cn you add a column that has army played?

Great event, I had a good time.

Couple things:

1) Next time make it clear that favorite army doesn't have to be one of your opponents. Some people knew this and others didn't.

2) I know you like them but like we've talked about before. Random missions are bleh to me. Obviously opinion based but still feedback. My opponent in round 4 and I were so put off with the "special" scenario that we ignored the gravity rule.

3) Terrain was good. It was 25% but a few more building with the lower walls filled in would be a good thing to add though. Especially deployed in the center of the table.

Those were pretty much it. Another fun and well run event. I look forward to next years. Is the Memorial Day event going to count for this season for golden tickets or for the 2011-2012 circuit? Never to soon to start planning

My criticism would also be the terrain.

Back in 4th edition you could not see behind forests, and you had level 3 hills blocking LOS.

In 5th you need real LOS blocking terrain big enough to completely hide a big vehicle. You can obscure your vehicles sure, but there was no place to hide them. This gives the player that goes first a huge advantage, and it also makes static shooting units (that are normally hindered somewhat by their lack of mobility) a no-brainer. Lootas and long fangs have such a huge advantage without LOS blocking terrain.

You should ask yourself if you can hide a land raider/defiler behind a piece of terrain? If the answer is no, then there is not enough.

Blackmoor wrote:You should ask yourself if you can hide a land raider/defiler behind a piece of terrain? If the answer is no, then there is not enough.

Not "not enough" - just "not the right kind."

I loved the hills - they're actually big enough to hide infantry, or give a Monstrous Creature some cover. A set of double-height hills would be just fine for hiding larger targets.

Dave_Fay wrote:In the future cn you add a column that has army played?

Troy Criswell 173 Overall Orks
Reece Robbins 171 General Space Wolves
Levi Joos 166 1 2nd General Orks
Keith Silva 166 Painted Eldar
Kevin Brown 162 Sportsman Tyranids
Cooper Waddell 158 2nd Painted Chaos Space Marines
William Towsend 150 Demons of Chaos
Jeff Kaminsky 148 Chaos Space Marines
Yackface 147 Orks
Josh Varia 146 Tyranids
Allan Hernandez 145 Eldar
Patrick Kendall 141
Richard Calnon 139
Daniel Maloney 136 2
Michael Northover 133 Tau
Nilbert Players Choice Grey Knights?
Christian Alessi 129 Space Wolves
George Mason 129 Blood Angels
Keith Monach 128
Eric Baca 127
Bruce Monach 126
Kelly Jernigan 125
Dennis Gocks 118
Steven Smith 111
Marvin Waldman 108 2nd Sports
Kris Calnon 101 Lowman
Keith Holt

One wacky mission isn't a deal breaker for me, I just have a long standing personal dislike for them because they ALWAYS seem to bone me! My interests are completely self serving in this case.

Reecius wrote:One wacky mission isn't a deal breaker for me, I just have a long standing personal dislike for them because they ALWAYS seem to bone me! My interests are completely self serving in this case.

Funny. Every time I get into a clutch situation it's my dice that bone me.

Woot, look at me, 8th place. Now if I can just play a few games without open battlefields against either IG or Ork Lootas...

Don't think I have ever won any games against any Ork player... ever... (since the new codex)..... hmmm......

I thought the terrain was fine... though maybe people are complaining about my lootas

Also, I dont like wacky mission rules either, but, it does break up the monotony of the standard hub bub. So I say keep em.

@Monster Rain

Me too man, me too! My luck is like 2-3 games gak, 1 game amazing.

I want to get some more square dice as my chessex dice seem to roll ones and twos like they're going out of style.

@Sazzlefrats

How can that be, everyone on the internets knows Orks are the weakest book in the game!!!!!*!$*^&#!*#!#

You must be a n00b!

@Gothgar

I liked the terrain because my army shoots, but two of my games were who got first turn shootouts and I got first turn. LOS blocking terrain would have given more of a chance for a closer game to my opponents.

I didn't play int his event, but was wondering about your rubric on the PDF, for assimilation into local events.

The big thing that stands out is that every participant scored perfect 30s on Comp and Sportsmanship. Were those actual scores, or simply placeholders to fill out the software?

Looks like your Best Sportsman awards were given out based on total Favorite Opponent votes, with battlepoints as a tiebreaker, yes?

Reecius wrote:
@Sazzlefrats

How can that be, everyone on the internets knows Orks are the weakest book in the game!!!!!*!$*^&#!*#!#

You must be a n00b!

Well Obviously. :-)

TheRhino wrote:I didn't play int his event, but was wondering about your rubric on the PDF, for assimilation into local events.

The big thing that stands out is that every participant scored perfect 30s on Comp and Sportsmanship. Were those actual scores, or simply placeholders to fill out the software?

Looks like your Best Sportsman awards were given out based on total Favorite Opponent votes, with battlepoints as a tiebreaker, yes?

They just did thumbs up or thumbs down for Sports and Comp, and the first thumbs down was ignored.

I think it is a good system actually, but I dont think they should ignore a thumbs down, because to thumbs down someone it would have to be a really bad experience.

Oh someone dinging you cause they didn't win. Which was why Reece's army got a single thumbs down. I'm in favor of either no comp/sports or the format they used for this.

They have to ignore the first one. A "bad experience" for some people just means "I lost". Especially the thumbs down for comp...people with ridiculous armies saying your ridiculous army is slightly too ridiculous is comical.

lambadomy wrote:They have to ignore the first one. A "bad experience" for some people just means "I lost". Especially the thumbs down for comp...people with ridiculous armies saying your ridiculous army is slightly too ridiculous is comical.

Yeah, agreed that comp is stupid. I bring a hard list, and I expect to face hard lists. Bring what you can, build a fun hard list.

Sports is important, things like how you roll your dice, how you measure and move.... gak like that.

But I do understand that some people may be a poor sport about losing and just TD someone, so that makes sense that they ignored the first.

Yeah, I think the forgiveness of one thumbs down is the right play. If 4 people thought you were fun, and one didn't, that is more indicative of you being fun and one guy having a bad day. If you get two or more thumbs down, you were probably at fault.

My guy gave me a thumbs down on comp and he had a min maxed Blood Angels list with Mephiston! Haha, that cracked me up. Nothing against him personally, I would for sure play him again, but that was more because my army was the rock to his scissors than anything else.

I prefer no comp, but if we have comp, then this system seems to work.

Reecius wrote:Yeah, I think the forgiveness of one thumbs down is the right play. If 4 people thought you were fun, and one didn't, that is more indicative of you being fun and one guy having a bad day. If you get two or more thumbs down, you were probably at fault.

My guy gave me a thumbs down on comp and he had a min maxed Blood Angels list with Mephiston! Haha, that cracked me up. Nothing against him personally, I would for sure play him again, but that was more because my army was the rock to his scissors than anything else.

I prefer no comp, but if we have comp, then this system seems to work.

Was that the same game with the rerolls token controversy?

Sort of. He didn't let me know I could use a reroll token to reroll his seize the initiative, but it wasn't his responsibility to do so. I should have know.

Ugh, the reroll token. I hate it, mainly because my reroll failed, and someone else's really helped them against me. Someday some poor sap is going to have 5 reroll tokens used against him.

You can only use one per game. I didn't use mine form this tournament so I will have it for next time.