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 have heard mention of the SWISS format for tourneys, would someone be so kind as to explain what that is?

Probably not a good thread to get into format-ology. SWISS is more how you pair (same or close scores) than anything else, which most events do on one level or another. In terms of scoring, that's where you get into your tall grass ... some events do win/loss, some events do battle points/margin of victory, some events do win/loss/draw, and some events do all of them at the same time within the same event. YMMV as to what's enjoyable, and most are still awesome fun times ... just different strokes for different folks.

Just wanted to give a shout out to Mike (aka PanzerLeader here on dakka) for taking 5th with his Tyranids. He ran (I may be a little off):


Flyrant, 2x Devourers, Old Adversary
Flyrant 2x Devourers
Tervigon, Catalysm, Adrenal Glands, Toxin Sacs
Tervigon, Catalysm, Adrenal Glands, Toxin Sacs
Tervigon, Catalysm, Adrenal Glands, Toxin Sacs
11x Termagaunts
11x Termagaunts
10x Termagaunts
Doom of Malantai, Mycetic Spore
3x Hive Guard
3x Hive Guard
3x Biovore


His only loss of the tournament came against the eventual winner of the tournament, Ben Mohlie, in a very close battle. On his way there, he had to battle through DE venom-spam and a very tough IG w/12 sabre platforms/9 thudd guns. Very well done indeed!

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Sounds like Blackmoor is subscribing to the conspiracy theory now.

Most people seem to think that Tau are a top tier codex and do well at most tournaments. The fact that they have 0 representation in the top 16 is odd. Would you not agree?

Also how many FW heavy armies were there? I see one that made it to the top 3.

It's premature to judge Tau at this point. They are still really new. I think the rule of thumb is about half a year before you will see them start doing well as people are still building their armies and experimenting with what is working for them.

BTW, Tau has the widest range of allies so you can be sure they can and will address any mobiliy/troop issue they have.

does anyone have the list that were used on the top 4 winners? we got a lot of people asking. thanks

 jy2 wrote:
Just wanted to give a shout out to Mike (aka PanzerLeader here on dakka) for taking 5th with his Tyranids. He ran (I may be a little off):


Flyrant, 2x Devourers, Old Adversary
Flyrant 2x Devourers
Tervigon, Catalysm, Adrenal Glands, Toxin Sacs
Tervigon, Catalysm, Adrenal Glands, Toxin Sacs
Tervigon, Catalysm, Adrenal Glands, Toxin Sacs
11x Termagaunts
11x Termagaunts
10x Termagaunts
Doom of Malantai, Mycetic Spore
3x Hive Guard
3x Hive Guard
3x Biovore


His only loss of the tournament came against the eventual winner of the tournament, Ben Mohlie, in a very close battle. On his way there, he had to battle through DE venom-spam and a very tough IG w/12 sabre platforms/9 thudd guns. Very well done indeed!

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Sounds like Blackmoor is subscribing to the conspiracy theory now.

Most people seem to think that Tau are a top tier codex and do well at most tournaments. The fact that they have 0 representation in the top 16 is odd. Would you not agree?

Also how many FW heavy armies were there? I see one that made it to the top 3.

It's premature to judge Tau at this point. They are still really new. I think the rule of thumb is about half a year before you will see them start doing well as people are still building their armies and experimenting with what is working for them.

BTW, Tau has the widest range of allies so you can be sure they can and will address any mobiliy/troop issue they have.

Thanks for the congrats. That us very accurate representation of my list. Only difference was all initial gaunt broods were 10. I think you are right about the tau too. They had a strong showing at alamo in may, but results were heavily player skill dependent. Two very good tau players fought on table one in the last game and the remainder of the tau were generally much further down in the standings.

Way to go Mike.

Is there a listing of what the top armies were? Is there even a list of total armies played and broke down by type? Just curious.

As far as the tau go, I have seen and faced a few recently atthe local store (where I know mike from). Seems they are sort of unfocused on what to run and how to run what is on the table. I do agree with mike that it seems very dependent on the players skill with tau. I doubt I could run them competitively at first. I mainly run IG and orks, so, tau would take some getting use to playing. All I have learned is how to play against. Jot saying they will break out soon.

As usual Wargamescon was a blast. Very well run event full of great players. I want to give a shout-out to Alan B. and Mike K. who I had awesome games with. I agree with many of the critiques of the scenarios that have been posted already. There were far to many objectives, and "keep what you kill" point systems have a lot of problems. I think the organizers recognize this and I doubt it will happen again.

As for forgeworld, in my opinion 99% of forgeworld units are absolutely fine, there are only a handful that are out of hand and should be limited/excluded. I'm very much against no holds barred forgeworld as was used this year, but with some thoughtful restrictions virtually all forgeworld units could be allowed without issue.

For those who are interested, here is the army I won with. No one expects the MegaNobs!!

Necron Destroyer Lord: warscythe, weave, mindshackle scarabs

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

Wraiths: 6 wraiths, 1 whip coils, 1 particle caster
Scarabs: 5 scarabs

Annihilation Barge
Annihilation Barge
Tomb Spyders: 1 gloom prism

Warboss: mega armor, cybork body, bosspole

Meganobs: 7 nobs: 4 kombi-skorchas, 3 kombi-rokkits
Battlewagon: red paint job, deffrolla, 1 big shoota

Total 1850

I just got in from Austin and just wanted to say we had a great weekend at WarGamesCon. I played my Tau army, in fact believe I was one of the guys tabled by MrBlackSunshine_1978! I did not face anyone playing Forgeworld units in my 7 games though I did play against 3 Tau armies! The majority of the Tau players were stacked up in the Rouge Trader bracket on the second day. There were a variety of Tau armies with no one build sticking out however there were tons of Broadsides, some Riptides and lots of marker lights. I talked to several of the Tau players who said they could not optimize their list because they couldn't get the models they needed so they brought what they had. I guess Riptides and Kroot are not available in some parts of the country now. I did not see any Tau Flyers.

I do not have a problem with the missions or the way the tournament was run. WGC has always been a battle points tournament so I knew what to expect going in. Everyone I talk too said they had a great time with a couple of exceptions. We will go back next year! The games were on time. Judges were plentiful. I only heard of one dude rage quitting but he was playing against a Space Wolf player who didn't have any Forge World.

I will be posting synopsis of my games, photos of numerous armies and a overall tournament report on my blog:

http://www.the19thlegion.com/Blog/

Please check it out in the next couple of days for tons of pics and things that I observed. I do know that Rob Baer will be flying first class back home because of all the cash I dropped at Spikey Bits!!! LOL !

Also check out my gaming clubs website for photos and video battle reports!

http://southmsgamers.blogspot.com/

See some of the top 5 list at the link below

http://southmsgamers.blogspot.com/2013/06/how-to-win-at-wargames-con-2013-top.html

Spacecurves wrote:

As for forgeworld, in my opinion 99% of forgeworld units are absolutely fine, there are only a handful that are out of hand and should be limited/excluded. I'm very much against no holds barred forgeworld as was used this year, but with some thoughtful restrictions virtually all forgeworld units could be allowed without issue.

I agree 100%

Necron Destroyer Lord: warscythe, weave, mindshackle scarabs

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

Wraiths: 6 wraiths, 1 whip coils, 1 particle caster
Scarabs: 5 scarabs

Annihilation Barge
Annihilation Barge
Tomb Spyders: 1 gloom prism

Warboss: mega armor, cybork body, bosspole

Meganobs: 7 nobs: 4 kombi-skorchas, 3 kombi-rokkits
Battlewagon: red paint job, deffrolla, 1 big shoota

Total 1850

I was wondering how you beat Alan (besides being his nemesis and in his head!). I was thinking that those Thudd Guns would tear Orks apart. You countered that by not setting a foot on the table.

WGC was fantastic. I had a great time meeting up with all my friends and playing some awesome games. Fantastic job running it guys!

I ran out my Forge World Necrons to try out my new toys and kick around the middle tables for some fun, close games.

HQ
Zahndrekh
Obyron
Destroyer Lord w/ sempiternal weave, mindshackle scarabs
Royal Court - 1 Harbinger of Eternity w/ chronometron, 1 Harbinger of the Storm w/ lightning field

Troops
10 gauss immortals
5 warriors in Scythe
5 tesla immortals

Fast
9 Acanthrites

Heavy
Nightshroud Bomber
Doom Scythe

So, more of a "taste the rainbow" type army meant to show off my toys and play shenanigans all weekend.

I had a great time, played 7 close games and went 5-2 for the weekend. Of course, close games don't get a lot of BPs so I kicked around the middle tables the whole time. Not having many Troops limited my possible score significantly.

There were a fair amount of things I didn't like about the format itself, though.

1) Terrain. WGC rolled out the player placed terrain, one of my least favorite "rules" in 6th. Placing terrain after determining sides doesn't lead to balanced terrain. Since my army is so mobile, all I need to do is put as much LOS blocking and area terrain in the middle to make the most of the Acanthrites' stealth. It led to a lot of samey games where the Canoptek Crawdads just sit in the middle killing stuff that gets too close before rolling through the enemy's scoring units. On top of that, it eats valuable time in an already slower edition. The actual variety and amount of terrain was solid, just didn't like the placement.

2) Missions. WGC had basically 2 missions from the BRB put together as a primary and secondary. I like the idea, keeping things as familiar as possible to keep play going at a brisk pace. However, the way things were combined didn't do it some times. There are 2 broad types of missions in 6th: Scorey (Crusade, Scouring, Big Guns) and Deathstary (Relic, Will, Purge). Things only went weird when 2 missions of the same type got combined. Crusade and Scouring with 10 objective markers was madness, basically encouraging players to sit in their sides and only fight over one or two objectives. Relic and Will was a clash of deathstars in the middle. Having 4 objectives and a relic or KPs and Scouring leads to more emphasis on balanced lists and more "tactical" play, I find.

3) Objective placement and Mysterious terrain/objectives. This is more of a problem I have with 6th than WGC. Placing objectives after determining sides is horrible. So are randumb rolls. Bad, bad, bad, stoopy, stoopy, dumb, dumb and it needs to go away.

4) BPs. It's a philosophy thing, but I don't like BP formats. The best games of 40k, to me, are close fought battles that come down to the last dice roll. Typically 1 or 2 VP games. BP formats seem to favor blowouts over close games, making a game already riddled with RPS-style play lean even more towards Matchuphammer. It also has more of a "play to win the tournament, not win games" deal where a smart play could be to tank a game just to draw an easier matchup for a big win to leapfrog other players. Just seems gamey to me.

5) Forge World. It's the elephant in the room, obviously, but FW inclusion did not make my experience better. Even using my own FW units, I felt they dominated the games and made them less fun for me and my opponents. Most of the folks I talked to expressed similar concerns.

That said, it was a great weekend and I look forward to next year. Keep up the good work, guys, and you may as well send me that 2014 X-Wing trophy now.

Spacecurves wrote:
As usual Wargamescon was a blast. Very well run event full of great players. I want to give a shout-out to Alan B. and Mike K. who I had awesome games with. I agree with many of the critiques of the scenarios that have been posted already. There were far to many objectives, and "keep what you kill" point systems have a lot of problems. I think the organizers recognize this and I doubt it will happen again.

As for forgeworld, in my opinion 99% of forgeworld units are absolutely fine, there are only a handful that are out of hand and should be limited/excluded. I'm very much against no holds barred forgeworld as was used this year, but with some thoughtful restrictions virtually all forgeworld units could be allowed without issue.

For those who are interested, here is the army I won with. No one expects the MegaNobs!!

Necron Destroyer Lord: warscythe, weave, mindshackle scarabs

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

5 Warriors
Night Scythe

Wraiths: 6 wraiths, 1 whip coils, 1 particle caster
Scarabs: 5 scarabs

Annihilation Barge
Annihilation Barge
Tomb Spyders: 1 gloom prism

Warboss: mega armor, cybork body, bosspole

Meganobs: 7 nobs: 4 kombi-skorchas, 3 kombi-rokkits
Battlewagon: red paint job, deffrolla, 1 big shoota

Total 1850

First off Congrats!

I looked at your list and first reaction was Mega Nobz WTF?

Then after thinking about it I think I can see what you were doing. So we're basically trying to keep the same kind of pressure that Wraithwing provides but on a platform more durable to infantry shooting than Wraiths. Did Tau figure into your list? What was the purpose of the Tomb Spyder? 1st turn charge shenanigans?

Thanks man. The army plays like an assault army but has a ton of shooting backup as well. Tomb Spyders are amazing! They are super tough monsterous creatures, and they slowly beef up the scarab units. Scarbs and spyders together have so many uses I would need a whole article to cover it, but suffice to say they are awesome.

I did think about Tau, and a 3 ion accel riptide opponent would have been super nasty for me. I never had to play against one since I didn't see any Tau on the top tables.

As for mega-nobs, oh man they are good. One of the best units in the game at the moment in my opinion. For one, they are scoring thanks to the warboss. They absolutely murder paladins, are mostly immune to small arms fire, and can kill lots of things that necrons usually have a problem with. I've never heard of anyone else using them recently, but they really made that army work.

2nd place Daemon list (this is just what I remember, I could be wrong).


Keeper of Secrets

2x Harolds of Khorn on Juggernaut (1 x Portal 1x Book)

4 x 10 units of Plaguebearers

2 x 20 man units of Fleshhounds

2x Soulgrinders




Overall, I enjoyed WGC. However, there were some things that I did not agree with.

1) Not all missions were created equal. Some missions max possible points was 32+ (someone even got a 37), while other missions maximum points was 25. I really do believe that all 7 games of a tournament should be weighted the same points wise.

2) Some missions had a total of 9 objectives that had to be held by scoring units. Making it impossible for elite armies to even be competitive in. Some people table their opponents and only be able to score a 15/30.

3) I'm still on the fence about forge world being included in tournaments. However, I do not agree with WGC allowing basic conversions and proxies in place of forge world models. About 15 players used razor back turret/ Aegis basis for Sabre platforms, which I really did not agree with. And in my opinion (yall can bash me if you want), Pajama pant's Vulture proxy ( I wouldn't even call it a conversion) should not have been allowed to be played.

4) However, the biggest thing in my opinion was that players got to place terrain every single match. Some tabled ended up having 10+ pieces of terrain, which gave an overwhelming advantage to some armies.

Just my 2 cents.

Thanks
tops 5 tables list have been updated

How to win Wargames Con 2013

http://southmsgamers.blogspot.com/2013/06/how-to-win-at-wargames-con-2013-top.html

Liquidice281 wrote:
2nd place Daemon list (this is just what I remember, I could be wrong).


Keeper of Secrets

2x Harolds of Khorn on Juggernaut (1 x Portal 1x Book)

4 x 10 units of Plaguebearers

2 x 20 man units of Fleshhounds

2x Soulgrinders

Def Lord of Change not Keeper.

Budzerker wrote:

Liquidice281 wrote:
2nd place Daemon list (this is just what I remember, I could be wrong).


Keeper of Secrets

2x Harolds of Khorn on Juggernaut (1 x Portal 1x Book)

4 x 10 units of Plaguebearers

2 x 20 man units of Fleshhounds

2x Soulgrinders

Def Lord of Change not Keeper.

Yes you are 100% correct, I always get the two names confused.

Great to see a Nid army up there, although it does rather prove the mono-build nature of the codex now for tournaments. 2 flyrants, 2-3 tervigons + termagants, Doom, sprinkle a few other units out of choice depending on whether 1,750 or 1,850. Nothing but praise for the player though, just a comment on the state of the codex.

I'd like to point out to everyone talking about battle points that WGC did not use traditional battle points (Minor Victory = x points, Major Victory = y points, etc).

Players' scores were equal to the number of Victory Points they scored in missions, per the BRB, plus paint scores.

Liquidice281 wrote:


3) I'm still on the fence about forge world being included in tournaments. However, I do not agree with WGC allowing basic conversions and proxies in place of forge world models. About 15 players used razor back turret/ Aegis basis for Sabre platforms, which I really did not agree with. And in my opinion (yall can bash me if you want), Pajama pant's Vulture proxy ( I wouldn't even call it a conversion) should not have been allowed to be played.

I will agree with you on this, having a 1/2 of a weapon system (cutting a model to make two) and counting as a twin linked weapon?????

Any pictures of it? It can't be as bad as that vendetta atrocity from adepticon that was argued about haha.

It was the osprey model from... max mini I think? With two gatling cannons, one under each wing.

Wow my google fu is weak. I found something from puppets war. Which wouldn't be too bad depending on the conversion.

The one with the two fan props like the orca from C&C 1.

It was pretty much just that model with the guns under the wings, if I remember correctly. I also only saw it for a few moments in passing so I could very well be wrong.

The real shame was the sabre platform proxies.

Chancetragedy wrote:
Any pictures of it? It can't be as bad as that vendetta atrocity from adepticon that was argued about haha.

I have photos of it posted on my Facebook . I will post a photo when I get home. I have it on Photobucket but I'm at work and cant remember the dang password.

Here is a link to my photo album until I can get home. You cant miss the flyer it's red and has fans in the wings like on Avaitar.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-19th-Legion/242469872462069?sk=photos#!/media/set/?set=a.546031438772576.1073741828.242469872462069&type=3

The Saber platforms he used were the actual saber platforms. The sawed off one gun type model that people are calling out were models for heavy weapon teams.

Thanks aardvark I think that works pretty well for a vulture. Obviously it's not the official model but I thought we were past caring about that since GW stopped supporting tournaments. that's just my opinion though hah but I'd play against t.

 Blackmoor wrote:

I was wondering how you beat Alan (besides being his nemesis and in his head!). I was thinking that those Thudd Guns would tear Orks apart. You countered that by not setting a foot on the table.

To be honest both games I had with Ben where close until I noticed the wrong plays I made. Ben is with out a doubt in my opinion the best 40k player I have ever had the privilege to play against. The moment you make a mistake you suffer.

The first game I think I had the advantage with the mission but due to poor placement on the DA librarian Ben capitalized on it and was able to kill him in combat when I failed the one look out sir I needed to make. If the librarian made that look out sir I think the game would have been mine from there regardless of what Ben would do because holding up my Guard unit led to me never killing the Warboss and he got 4 points with his wraiths assaulting and killing the thudd gun units. This was a huge turning point in our game because the libby could have killed the warboss and then screened off the rest of the army and posed a better threat to the wraiths.

Game 2: I made a huge blunder and I decided against rushing to the relic and it would have been a totally different game if I made the commitment.

The one thing I will say is that while my list was tough it was mitigated drastically by the terrain placement rules and the terrain we had. I mean there where these two buildings that where HUGE with no windows and a huge level. Thudd guns can't shoot under the level and the sabre cant see anything hiding behind. Ben was a MASTER at using the terrain against me and making most of my army useless by hiding under levels and staying out of 60" range with units. He used the terrain and distance control extremely proficient and he did not commit until late game when he knew he could get the points. The terrain in general was a huge advantage for him and he knew how to exploit it like a pro.

I am not sure I could have even pulled a win out of mission 2 because his list is so much better at the relic and he is better at protecting his objective then I am. But the first game was where I believe I could have walked away with the win.

Overall I had a great time and if I wasn't going to be the overall winner Best Sportsman would have been my second pick!

Thanks to all the judges and staff that ran the event I had a good time!

Wargames Con is a great event and I recommend everyone to attend it next year!

6th Street!!!!!!!
Alan Bajramovic

You know it really boils down to players having fun. That's why we put on WGC, for people to have fun. Battle points or Victory points, whichever you want to call it, keeps the players in the game and to not feel like your out of it because of one bad game. Are there some things we can tweak? Of course. I dislike pure win/loss because that one bad game leaves a sour taste in the mouth for the rest of the tourney and you pay a lot of money to go to these big tournaments.

Anyways, I'm glad most of you had fun! We will continue to work on our format and to make WGC a con you want to keep coming back to.

Caldera02 wrote:
You know it really boils down to players having fun. That's why we put on WGC, for people to have fun. Battle points or Victory points, whichever you want to call it, keeps the players in the game and to not feel like your out of it because of one bad game. Are there some things we can tweak? Of course. I dislike pure win/loss because that one bad game leaves a sour taste in the mouth for the rest of the tourney and you pay a lot of money to go to these big tournaments.

Anyways, I'm glad most of you had fun! We will continue to work on our format and to make WGC a con you want to keep coming back to.

I can respect the desire to not have all tournaments be pure win/loss. Which is why I went to, and had a great time at, the 2012 WGC. The only problem I saw with the missions this year, granted I didn't attend, was the huge emphasis on capturing up to 10 objectives in some games. I think a good spread of formats is a healthy thing for the tournament scene, where I find things most often go awry is with the mission design.