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.

Make a 2000pts list, showing only the points for individual units (not their wargear)
You and your opponent swap lists and cross out up to 500pts worth of whole units. You then play each other without the crossed out units.
You cannot drop mandatory units that complete a Formation or detachment, unless the entire formation is under 500pt, in which case you can drop the whole detachment.
For Example: your opponent has a CAD with 2 HQs, 5 troops and 3 Heavies. You may drop any units, but must leave 1 HQ and at least 2 Troops

Does this sound like an interesting/fun way to play a 1500pt list?

Its sounds like a mess.

its honestly not hard to just make a 2k or 1.5k list.

Easy to cheese a list where any removal brakes a formation yet no formation is under 500

No. It would be too easy to tailor the army with the worst units.

So the idea is to make a balanced list and allow your opponent to drop stuff out of it. If you can't deal with a certain unit or combo of units, drop them. Your opponent can do the same. It is meant to encourage fair play without overly nerfing any particular army. It should also encourage smart tactic, since you have to re-evaluate your strategy before the game even begins.

How do we change the criteria so that cheese mongers don't try to "break the system"? I may try this for a local tourney where you bring the same 2000pts list each round, but each of your opponents may choose a different set of 500pts to drop.

How about making a restriction that says if no single unit, combo of units, or detachment is below 500pts, you opponent may exceed the 500pt drop? That way you HAVE to make a list with stuff that can be dropped or risk losing a ton more points.

You cant take the cheese out of the Tourney

its a fundamental part of competition.


you can easily remove the cheese from casual and semi competitive pick ups since they are pick up games

but Tourneys is a different beast all together.

taking the cheese out of a Tourny is like taking the cheese out of a taco.

 Desubot wrote:
taking the cheese out of a Tourny is like taking the cheese out of a taco.

Healthier?

 EnTyme wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
taking the cheese out of a Tourny is like taking the cheese out of a taco.

Healthier?

Exactly what I was thinking.

I would actually play this. It's far more like an actual war-time battle (where your opponent will likely destroy your logistics) without obliterating the balance. It also takes a good commander to read the opponent and to take out something that's crucial.

EDIT: If you saw what I ask ignore it, I didn't read the whole OP post. Mah bad.

Still totally up for this.

More like Tasteless.

You and your opponent need to try and make the worst wysiwyg lists you can that are still force org compatible.

Then swap lists and let the fun begin.

I would maybe allow a clause for making it 1200 points, with room for 300 points of upgrades up to the commanding players discretion.

well the idea would be that each opponent might be more vulnerable to different parts of your army and take out something different than your last opponent. It would also stop deathstars from happening, or at least make the very, VERY hard to get a list with one, since your opponent can simply drop the Thunder wolves, or a few key Characters.

It's basically the antithesis of having "all your eggs in 1 basket", since you don't want to lose that basket before the game starts. MSU lists would thrive in this style.

 Galef wrote:
MSU lists would thrive in this style.

Actually it's the exact opposite, because MSU lets you remove closer to the full 500 points. For example, if I have three 200-point tanks as MSU then you get to remove two of them. If I have a three-tank squadron as a single unit then you get to remove nothing. Therefore the ideal list is one where every single unit is either over 500 points, a mandatory part of a detachment that costs over 500 points, or barely over 250 points if you have absolutely no other choice. Then the most you could possibly remove is 251 points, and you might not be able to remove any points if the list is built right. Now I'm playing a full 2000 points against your ~1600 points of MSU.

 Galef wrote:
well the idea would be that each opponent might be more vulnerable to different parts of your army and take out something different than your last opponent. It would also stop deathstars from happening, or at least make the very, VERY hard to get a list with one, since your opponent can simply drop the Thunder wolves, or a few key Characters.

It's basically the antithesis of having "all your eggs in 1 basket", since you don't want to lose that basket before the game starts. MSU lists would thrive in this style.

At 1850, I play a gladius strike force battle company with a 1st company strike force.

Unless you reserve the right to remove upgrades (like missile launchers), then you'd only be able to remove a single sternguard squad. Everything else is required for the formations.

I mean, you technically could start removing rhinos. But they technically wouldn't have a points value...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That said, here is a fun counter-proposal:

Construct the game so that you have to write 4 - 500 points lists, and you let your opponent pick which 3 he wants to face up against.

I like this idea and would actively look to play in such a format.

I think the problem with your idea is that you're trying to cut out cheesy lists but your idea only works with people who wouldn't be trying to cheese the game already

 Traditio wrote:
Construct the game so that you have to write 4 - 500 points lists, and you let your opponent pick which 3 he wants to face up against.

This doesn't work because a 1500 point army does not break down neatly into 500 point sub-armies.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
Construct the game so that you have to write 4 - 500 points lists, and you let your opponent pick which 3 he wants to face up against.

This doesn't work because a 1500 point army does not break down neatly into 500 point sub-armies.

I'm not proposing that you write a 1500 list and then divide it in three. I'm proposing that you write 4 - 500 point armies and then put them together.

 Traditio wrote:
I'm not proposing that you write a 1500 list and then divide it in three. I'm proposing that you write 4 - 500 point armies and then put them together.

Which leads to a very boring army because most of that 500 points is composed of mandatory troops + HQs and it's very difficult to bring formations. So you end up with an awkward mess that isn't much fun to play instead of the intended idea of "play a 1500 point army after your opponent gets to veto some of your options".

 Traditio wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
Construct the game so that you have to write 4 - 500 points lists, and you let your opponent pick which 3 he wants to face up against.

This doesn't work because a 1500 point army does not break down neatly into 500 point sub-armies.

I'm not proposing that you write a 1500 list and then divide it in three. I'm proposing that you write 4 - 500 point armies and then put them together.

Nobody thought otherwise, it still doesn't work.

What happens when the units you have listed are the only ones you brought/own/otherwise have available?

Drop everything except your worst units. Hahah.

Cult Mechanicus Battle Congregation
Tech Priest (190)
Breacher Squad (11 x 50pt = 550)
Destroyer Squad (10 x 60pt = 600)
Destroyer Squad (11 x 60pt = 660)

What'd get dropped? It's legal, and no unit is below 500 except the mandatory HQ unit.

No, it sounds like a pointless complication that will usually result in both people having a worse time than they otherwise would've had. What's wrong with just playing a 1500 or 2k point game?

The point, I guess, is to match armies in a competitive manner by allowing your opponent to select certain units that they do not wish to paly against and drop them.

This is easy to do in casual games, and I feel most people do this already. I just want to make a formal and easy way to translate this to a tourney setting.


----------OK, NEW PROPOSAL--------

Build a single Battle-Forged 1250pts list. Now build two 500pt "Side board" lists. Side board lists can be fully contain detachments, but do not have to be as long as they fit within your 1250pt detachment.
A Side Board list cannot contain units that share the same datasheet as a unit or units in the other Side Board list. The intent is to have no "duplicates" within each Side board.

Before each round of the tourney, your opponent can choose which Side board list you can play.

--

I say maybe allow them to break up formations and detachments, but the formations and detachments retain their command benefits and special rules. Also each player should designate their warlord before this happens so that the character that's suppose to represent you on the battlefield remains in the game.

 Galef wrote:
The point, I guess, is to match armies in a competitive manner by allowing your opponent to select certain units that they do not wish to paly against and drop them.

This is easy to do in casual games, and I feel most people do this already. I just want to make a formal and easy way to translate this to a tourney setting.


----------OK, NEW PROPOSAL--------

Build a single Battle-Forged 1250pts list. Now build two 500pt "Side board" lists. Side board lists can be fully contain detachments, but do not have to be as long as they fit within your 1250pt detachment.
A Side Board list cannot contain units that share the same datasheet as a unit or units in the other Side Board list. The intent is to have no "duplicates" within each Side board.

Before each round of the tourney, your opponent can choose which Side board list you can play.

--

At that point, you're excluding people who have less than 2250 unique points of models for their army. Which is a strange restriction for a 1750 or 1500 point tournament.

Doesn't solve the problem. For example, a SM vs Eldar list

These aren't actual points btw, just examples to show what I mean.


SM:

Tac Squad with Grav x 3 (100 x3)
Librarian (60)
Other stuff (Terminators) (~1000)
Centurian Grav squad ~300


Eldar
Farseer ~100
Wraithknight ~350
Wraithknight ~350
Scatterbikes ~1200


Space Marine player scraps 1 Wraithknight and a handful of Scatters to 500pts
Eldar player scraps Centurians.

Its now Gravgun tacs, Termies and Librarian vs Wraithknight and Scatterbikes.




Or another example; Ork player removes 2 Riptides, Tau player removes all Lootas.

Nid player removes 3 tanks, IG player removes Tervigons

Any player removes SS Grav Gun Biker Command Squad from White Scars gladius; White Scars still has X Tacticals, X Centurians and X Bike squads with free razors and Scout/Outflank who cannot be removed as it would break the formation

I'd rather have comp rules to build lists around than have opponents get to simply remove things from my list or tell me what I can and can't use.

There are a couple of threads about stuff like this each week "How to make an interesting, or competitive list..." etc. Everyone is throwing around mechanics, math, percentages, dice rolls etc.

It's really quite simple: Play with people who won't be spammy douchewads.

I can't believe the inability of people to play in a group of friends who can simply agree that certain stuff is spammy/cheese/broken and simply don't do it. Short of playing a tournament or prepping for one, making a reasonable list takes ZERO effort.