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.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

don_mondo wrote:I've never known him to be 'anti-tourney'.

He referred to tournament gamers as a 'fringe group' that they 'don't cater to'.

And now he announces tournaments.

Wheeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The exact quote, as I remember it was:

"Tournament gamers are considered by the Studio as a fringe group which we don't want to cater to when drafting our models' release schedules and army books".

But . Who cares about factual accuracy when you can take potshots at someone!

The meaning is the same. Tournaments require rulesets that are balanced and error free. Now, no rule set is going to be error free, that's impossible.

But it wouldn't take much to tighten GW's rules up. They're saying that that isn't important to them, and this came around the time when all the various 'official' GW events were drying up.

Now they've changed their mind.

It's not a cheapshot. You're dogged following of me into each thread taking shots at me Kan, that's cheap. Feth off.

Less fething off please, you know it's against the rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The yellow triangle is your friend.

The yellow triangle is pointless.

Just like the admin E-mail address.

Alot of people are complaining about the possible Composition scoring.

I think the structure of 5th edition missions and codecs went a long ways to correcting what the old 3rd/wth ed comp systems were trying to achieve. With troops needed to score, and KP's often being weighted against elite/fast/heavies, that throws out about 75% of the problems most people had with comp scores. If you dont take scoring units now you're gimping yourself far worse than any comp system would.

If they do try a comp system- it had better be some brilliant piece of game mechanics to fit 5th edition. Although, this is GW we're talking about- so brilliant gaming mechanics are on the agenda right after their 5th consecutive price drop- and a straight year of no marine releases

Mistress of minis wrote:Alot of people are complaining about the possible Composition scoring.

I think the structure of 5th edition missions and codecs went a long ways to correcting what the old 3rd/wth ed comp systems were trying to achieve. With troops needed to score, and KP's often being weighted against elite/fast/heavies, that throws out about 75% of the problems most people had with comp scores. If you dont take scoring units now you're gimping yourself far worse than any comp system would.

If they do try a comp system- it had better be some brilliant piece of game mechanics to fit 5th edition. Although, this is GW we're talking about- so brilliant gaming mechanics are on the agenda right after their 5th consecutive price drop- and a straight year of no marine releases

3rd edition *NEEDED* comp. Troops sucked. HQs all had Retinues and could easily be 50% of your army. No such things as objectives to capture or squat, all units basically were scoring or at least able to constest. All people played was 'cleanse' which was kill them all or board quarters.

Some of the biggest things 5th has done to lessen the need for comp is to make TROOPS actually needed and wanted and to turn most HQs into single ICs instead of a Single IC and a 700pt retinue. That has gone a long way.

All 'comp' will do in a modern 5th edition realm is attempt to crap on metalists and try to promote variety. Honestly... The only thing *MORE* boring than playing an Internet metalist that I have played multiple times before is to play one by a person who downloaded it off the internet, who has no idea how to be creative and is going to play it the same way 'the man on the Internet told him to'.

While requiring 100% WYSIWYG and painted does squash a lot of the people who download lists and have no idea how to play, I don't always see a problem with promoting variety of units and discouraging 'SPAM' to be competitive. Of course... I also see tourneys as a social activity and a way to share painted minis and don't expect real 'true and balanced' competition because frankly it is incapable of existing in 40k... So I have no problem with Comp if it promotes variety and more unique armies and painted minis.

The only tournaments I entered for 40K was the 2002 GTs in Canada and England and they were awesome. I might actually take part in one this year and hope I do as well as I did in 02.

Does anyone know what the new tourney rules will be???

Noisy_Marine wrote:

sexiest_hero wrote:I'm all for it as long as I can kick him in the balls for the chaos and dark angels codex.