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.

It appears time seems to be a consistent issue in this board, and we've had all sorts of ideas and topics, ranging from chess clocks to various penalties to sillyness like this "no first turn shooting" thing that would drastically screw some armies and auto-win for others.

But the simplest option, playing fewer points, doesn't even seem to be on the table most of the time

I enjoy 1850/2k games, they're my preferred play level, but if I'd much rather play 1500pts than deal with chess clocks or ridiculousness like not getting to shoot turn 1.

 Vaktathi wrote:
sillyness like this "no first turn shooting" thing that would drastically screw some armies and auto-win for others.

...or ridiculousness like not getting to shoot turn 1.

Yes, because there isn't any precedent for drastic rules changes like this. I'm sure WWP Dark Eldar armies adjusted just fine to the 'no assaulting out of reserve' rules change

 Oaka wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
sillyness like this "no first turn shooting" thing that would drastically screw some armies and auto-win for others.

...or ridiculousness like not getting to shoot turn 1.

Yes, because there isn't any precedent for drastic rules changes like this. I'm sure WWP Dark Eldar armies adjusted just fine to the 'no assaulting out of reserve' rules change

Sure did. No one uses WWP armies anymore!

I'm with Vaktathi, I'd prefer smaller points values for tourney games, which require hard decisions in terms of lists (and yes, I understand that it shifts the meta, makes some armies better or worse, etc., which is no different than now, just different armies do better). I also understand people like to play with all their toys and bring all the new stuff, which the higher points levels allow.

 Oaka wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
sillyness like this "no first turn shooting" thing that would drastically screw some armies and auto-win for others.

...or ridiculousness like not getting to shoot turn 1.

Yes, because there isn't any precedent for drastic rules changes like this. I'm sure WWP Dark Eldar armies adjusted just fine to the 'no assaulting out of reserve' rules change

That's a specific piece of wargear, not disallowing an entire phase from occurring for all armies. They're not the same thing. Yes it sucks for DE builds based around that, but no, it's not the same thing and DE have alternative strategies they can pursue.

No, not allowing first turn shooting is just that, ridiculous, and would make entire armies largely unplayable as opposed to certain builds, and/r make others very powerful indeed (lol I podded in with everything into your deployment zone, I don't face the blistering return fire I should have, I overrun and destroy half your army the next turn )

I wouldn't attend such an event and I doubt you'd find many people playing anything but highly aggressive assault based armies that would care to try it.


If you're only getting to turn 3 or 4, make events 1500pts instead of 1850 or 2000, don't break core game mechanics to hamfist larger armies in.

How did we get to 1850 or 2000 points being the standard, anyway? I remember 1500 point tournaments being the norm in 3rd edition. That's probably the root of the problem, as a lot of one-day, three-game tournaments that worked well with 1500 point armies are trying to do more in the same amount of time. It would make sense if GW was still running Rogue Traders, as they would want higher points values so that people would have to buy more stuff. But they don't do tournaments anymore.

I haven't played a ton of 6th edition games so far,10 games, and only a handful of 5th edition games (I mostly played 2nd and 3rd edition), but it does seem that the player who goes first has a distinct advantage these days with the sheer amount of awesome firepower available to most armies now--9 out of the 10 games I played, the player to go first won (which usually wasn't me, so there could be another explanation...)

There have always been armies designed to take advantage of going first (BA Rhino Rush), but is it more out of control now? I really don't know. It seems like this rules proposal is born out of that sentiment, but is it legitimate? What have your experiences been dakka? Does Player 1 have an unfair advantage?

From what I've seen. If the terrain isn't juuuust right the player that gets first turn can have a significant advantage. It definitely hurts to go second this edition but if your ready for it it's alright.

If the average game in an event is not being finished then there is a big problem with the time allotted for the event.

I just read a battle report elsewhere where the first day the guy only got to turn 3 on each of his three games at astronomicon.. He was playing DE and went against wolves, and two tau armies. Interestingly, it was a 1500 point limit.

Sure tau have a lot of shooting, but not getting past turn 3 is really bad -- the DE vs SW game ended after turn 2 due to time. Several armies do well in turns 1 and 2, while others do better late game 4+. Without turn 4, I'd say the "games" werea waste of time.

So either the TO's need to allow more time or they need to drop the point limits. Quite frankly I'm surprised more events haven't either lowered points or increased time. GW has been pushing down the point cost of individual models for awhile now and adding weird random stuff so what used to take 90 minutes to play is now closer to 2 hours.

I think my last two 1500 point games almost hit the 2 hour mark, and almost all of my army are in transports. Both of my opponents knew the rules and werent slow playing.

A tongue in cheek answer to the original question on no 1st turn shooting: if you are going to do that just skip the first turn entirely and start at turn 2; that would save loads of time.

I know that if I believed my tournament games were going to consistently end on turn 3, my strategy would be radically different. I'd do everything I could to go second. Nothing would be in reserves, and I wouldn't take flyers. I'd sit as far back as possible on T1, play keep away T2 and land everything I had in my opponents face T3. At which point it would just be like playing yahtzee instead of a strategy game.

So wouldn't the obvious solution be to just bring back assaulting out of infiltrate? For the select few units that were capable of doing so it fit their fluff very well, and it's still balanced because of Overwatch.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:
I'm going to just say this. Up until about a year ago, laying Shooty armies meant you were going to lose.

Well, except for the fact that the most powerful armies of 5th edition were all shooting armies.

show me in the rules where you are not allowed to charge on 1st turn.

that's all bull gak its just almost impossible to charge turn 1 but it doesn't say you cant.

LeagueOfLegends wrote:
show me in the rules where you are not allowed to charge on 1st turn.

that's all bull gak its just almost impossible to charge turn 1 but it doesn't say you cant.

Infiltrate and scout both prevent first turn charges. The other prevention is the distance between deployment zones.

 pretre wrote:
Infiltrate and scout both prevent first turn charges. The other prevention is the distance between deployment zones.

And there are units that can charge 25", so even if you go first it's possible to charge on the first player turn, just very difficult. And of course if you go second and your opponent moves forward (or uses infiltrate/scout moves to get closer) even basic infantry units can do it.

 Peregrine wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Infiltrate and scout both prevent first turn charges. The other prevention is the distance between deployment zones.

And there are units that can charge 25", so even if you go first it's possible to charge on the first player turn, just very difficult. And of course if you go second and your opponent moves forward (or uses infiltrate/scout moves to get closer) even basic infantry units can do it.

Plus Scarabs w/Tomb Spyder support. They have a theoretical reach of a bit over 27".

 Janthkin wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Infiltrate and scout both prevent first turn charges. The other prevention is the distance between deployment zones.

And there are units that can charge 25", so even if you go first it's possible to charge on the first player turn, just very difficult. And of course if you go second and your opponent moves forward (or uses infiltrate/scout moves to get closer) even basic infantry units can do it.

Plus Scarabs w/Tomb Spyder support. They have a theoretical reach of a bit over 27".

Stormboyz can get a 30" charge on turn 1, although it takes some seriously luck.

So really the tournament organizers could just do "seasons." Have a stretch where most games are around 1500 points. That comes with it's own meta and list-building decisions. Have another stretch of time where the standard is 1750-1850, and another still at 2k.

Sort of how Magic: the Gathering goes through different tournament seasons (Legacy, Commander, Standard, Draft, etc.), this would eliminate a stale and repetitive format.

The smaller points games could have one round length, the larger ones another. Limit the number of entrants if total tournament time is an issue at larger points levels, or make more 2-day events.

Some people would hate a points value rotation, because it means they have to rethink their list every few months (and a surprising number of table top gamers HATE ever having to change their list - the same people will then cry for a new codex, and subsequently cry again when something changed in their codex). Regardless of the whiny few, it may also encourage sales of units not suited to larger games but work in smaller ones, and vice versa.