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.
Hey everyone. I was reading through yet another "why is everyone worse than me, casual players need to never show their faces at any tournament" thread, and a lot of people were posting interesting ideas for a fluff-oriented tournament. I liked what I read, I would like to read more, and I intend to hold such an event in my home city.
So I was thinking of stealing the cooperative battle notion, but tweak it in a few ways to generate interest from more competitive players. The idea would be that everyone would contribute to a single battle that spread out across multiple tables in which the guests play against the TO's. Each table would effectively represent a single zone of combat where players would have to deploy their whole army (we don't want units scattered all across the mega-board. Reinforcements would all have to enter on their board as well. But, I do think it wouldn't be too disruptive to have units shoot and charge across the tables, perhaps even move onto other tables once they achieve their own main objective.
My thinking would be that we could still give out awards based on who achieved the most objectives, thus still adding an element to entice more competitive players.
So...any ideas on how I could make such an event work? Or, equally welcomed, do you have any fun fluffy events or ideas that you can share?
Active armies, still collecting and painting First and greatest love - Orks, Orks, and more Orks largest pile of shame, so many tanks unassembled most complete and painted beautiful models, couldn't resist the swarm will consume all
Armies in disrepair: nothing new since 5th edition oh how I want to revive, but mostly old fantasy demons and some glorious Soul Grinders in need of love
IOW, play an Apocalypse game where you label one side "the TOs".
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Depending on how long you want games to go, and how many players you have, you could do "staged deployment" scenarios wherein each player is only allowed to have X number of points from their list start on the board, and is then allowed to bring on X more points every other turn (following the normal deployment rules for those units).
So in a 2k points game, let's say, on T1, each player can bring on 500 points worth of models. On T3, they can bring another 500, then another 500 at T5 and 6.
What makes this interesting? Couple of things.
One, putting your deathstar unit on T1 might be a good idea... unless it's intended to deploy via Pod or Gate or whatever, and needs someone on the board to place a marker or whatever... if you can't keep that guy alive, you lose before T2 starts because you've been tabled.
The same deathstar might be placed T1... but the other player has put down his artillery units, Riptide, Knight, D-cannons, whatever... and now you're the only target on the table.
So it becomes a tactical exercise in what you can "afford" to bring that turn, what you can keep alive that turn, and what you can do to actually score points while the opponent is basically doing the same thing.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
Psienesis wrote: Depending on how long you want games to go, and how many players you have, you could do "staged deployment" scenarios wherein each player is only allowed to have X number of points from their list start on the board, and is then allowed to bring on X more points every other turn (following the normal deployment rules for those units).
So in a 2k points game, let's say, on T1, each player can bring on 500 points worth of models. On T3, they can bring another 500, then another 500 at T5 and 6.
What makes this interesting? Couple of things.
One, putting your deathstar unit on T1 might be a good idea... unless it's intended to deploy via Pod or Gate or whatever, and needs someone on the board to place a marker or whatever... if you can't keep that guy alive, you lose before T2 starts because you've been tabled.
The same deathstar might be placed T1... but the other player has put down his artillery units, Riptide, Knight, D-cannons, whatever... and now you're the only target on the table.
So it becomes a tactical exercise in what you can "afford" to bring that turn, what you can keep alive that turn, and what you can do to actually score points while the opponent is basically doing the same thing.
I like this idea, however,w hat if you can't get exactly 500 points? Do the leftover roll over?
I've been running a few campaigns for 40k and WHFB (before it died gloriously), and I think the WHFB latest campaign book has a similar scenario where players fight on different tables at the same time.
Don't have the book at hand but from what I remember the battle is being fought on a castle, so there are 3 tables: The gates, the underground passages and the inside of the castle. These could be easily replaced/extended with 40k locations like storming a Hive city/fortress as the main table and any other location as a surrounding area.
The condition to aid the main table was to either wipe your opponent and take whatever is left of your army to enter as reserves on the main table or controlling passages (or teleporters, transportation in 40k) and being able to send 1 unit at a time to support the main battle.
You could add the ability to shoot blasts to the main table as a result for controlling some specific fortification. However I think this wouldn't classify as a tournament and would be more like a fun fluffy game.
I didn't see that one. I will check it out, thanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoiler:
Psienesis wrote: Depending on how long you want games to go, and how many players you have, you could do "staged deployment" scenarios wherein each player is only allowed to have X number of points from their list start on the board, and is then allowed to bring on X more points every other turn (following the normal deployment rules for those units).
So in a 2k points game, let's say, on T1, each player can bring on 500 points worth of models. On T3, they can bring another 500, then another 500 at T5 and 6.
What makes this interesting? Couple of things.
One, putting your deathstar unit on T1 might be a good idea... unless it's intended to deploy via Pod or Gate or whatever, and needs someone on the board to place a marker or whatever... if you can't keep that guy alive, you lose before T2 starts because you've been tabled.
The same deathstar might be placed T1... but the other player has put down his artillery units, Riptide, Knight, D-cannons, whatever... and now you're the only target on the table.
So it becomes a tactical exercise in what you can "afford" to bring that turn, what you can keep alive that turn, and what you can do to actually score points while the opponent is basically doing the same thing.
That is an intriguing idea. I might be able to combine that with some of the others I have heard.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoiler:
Lord Yayula wrote: I've been running a few campaigns for 40k and WHFB (before it died gloriously), and I think the WHFB latest campaign book has a similar scenario where players fight on different tables at the same time.
Don't have the book at hand but from what I remember the battle is being fought on a castle, so there are 3 tables: The gates, the underground passages and the inside of the castle. These could be easily replaced/extended with 40k locations like storming a Hive city/fortress as the main table and any other location as a surrounding area.
The condition to aid the main table was to either wipe your opponent and take whatever is left of your army to enter as reserves on the main table or controlling passages (or teleporters, transportation in 40k) and being able to send 1 unit at a time to support the main battle.
You could add the ability to shoot blasts to the main table as a result for controlling some specific fortification. However I think this wouldn't classify as a tournament and would be more like a fun fluffy game.
Ahh, I remember something like that. It would be interesting if the battles took place on different tables, but they could link up in some way. The only thing I am concerned about is too many units getting mixed up on different tables, thus slowing it down. But...it might work if it combined with the earlier suggestion. Players could commit units to another round by sending them off the table through a warp gate/etc. They still need to try to win their battle, but also balance that out with the need to assist in the next round.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/12/03 02:53:59
Active armies, still collecting and painting First and greatest love - Orks, Orks, and more Orks largest pile of shame, so many tanks unassembled most complete and painted beautiful models, couldn't resist the swarm will consume all
Armies in disrepair: nothing new since 5th edition oh how I want to revive, but mostly old fantasy demons and some glorious Soul Grinders in need of love
First and greatest love - Orks, Orks, and more Orks 
largest pile of shame, so many tanks unassembled 
most complete and painted 
beautiful models, couldn't resist 
the swarm will consume all
nothing new since 5th edition 
oh how I want to revive, but mostly old fantasy demons and some glorious Soul Grinders 
in need of love 
10k points
3k points
2k points
3.5k points
2.5k points
