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.

First of all, it's a combined 700 point drop. Remember, both players are going down in points, and the combined total is a fairly significant difference.

Secondly, and someting that seems to be frequently overlooked, not all points are the same. Most armies have at the very least some sort of HQ and a unit to put him in. In 1850 as well as 1500 point armies. Take the battle company as an example; there are, at minimum, two 90 point guys, as well as usually two 140 point Devastator squads. Now you're 460 points along the way, regardless of what point level you're playing at, with units that, on a relative level, don't take a lot of time during your turns. The difference between 1850 and 1500 is that you have comparatively much less leeway to squeeze in tons of MSU/psykers/hordes/complex deathstars etc, which are the things that really take time.

Or, to use Imperial Knights in a different perspective; a single Knight (which is, according to serious, peer-reviewed research, approximately five million times more common than a pure IK army) leaves you with a lot less room for time-intensive units at 1500 points compared to 1850 points.

X078 wrote:

Target wrote:

...To provide the opposite end of the spectrum "350 points means my guard army loses an entire platoon! I lose a pcs, 2 infantry squads, 50 conscripts, and a wyvern! (30/100/150/65 = 345). 75 Models and 4 blasts from a multiple barrage unit, that saves a ton of time!...

Still thats one platoon/unit/group/etc of many and true you will probably save time with horde armies. But my point is you might already be taking an overly long time by using a horde army so even by dropping 350p i am not sure the time saved is adequate enough to justify it. Maybe we need to drop 500p to be able to handle a game in 2h45m , who knows, and that's the problem.

Your point was that you felt lowering points wouldn't change anything - that is not true as shown above and acknowledged by you. Your new point is that "horde armies don't count because they take too long and shouldn't be played anyways". Again, the meta needs diversity and so does the game to be healthy and to not turn away players. We both chose opposite ends of the spectrum, which is why this example feels silly.

More pertinent example, in Alex's LVO winning list - 350 points is 3x6 warp spiders. Cutting out 18 warp spiders will save a significant amount of time as they move three times per turn and have to be deepstruck, shot, shot at, rolled for, etc. The thing is, experienced, very focused players can generally get a fully completed game (one that isn't just a one-sided tabling, or doesnt involve two very low-count/fast armies) done in 2h45m.

But:

1) Is 2h45m an enjoyable or tenable game state for us to be in? 5 Years ago tournaments ran and completed more games with 1h45m/2h rounds in the US. We havent changed the point values since then, we've just slowly crept round times higher and higher.
2) Currently at 2h45m many, many games aren't finish even among focused players (ending on 5 without rgl) or even earlier. Is this enjoyable?

Lowering points is not a magical cure all, but it *will* decrease game length by a measurable amount for the majority of games. This will mean more games finish, round times don't need to get extended, etc. All good things.

blaktoof wrote:


IMO having players roll psychic powers before the tournament and they keep powers for the duration of the tournament is a good time saver. I have seen demon armies waste 45min-1hr of game time each game of a tournament determining and noting psychic powers and setting up. If a game is 2h:30min more than 25% of the game was done before it started from one player.

This is a total nerf to the psychic phase. I doubt the majority of tourney players would buy into this one.

I worry that lower points will just exacerbate the points issues in the game, pushing us even closer to an all-Eldar meta.

That book already has shockingly under-costed units, and the smaller the game, the more their "bang for the buck" will be exaggerated.

At 1500pts, a WraithKnight is still affordable, only the other armies answers may not always be, etc...

That's a really good point. As I said I think lower points is more appealing to casual gamers but that is not the purpose of a competition.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
I worry that lower points will just exacerbate the points issues in the game, pushing us even closer to an all-Eldar meta.

That book already has shockingly under-costed units, and the smaller the game, the more their "bang for the buck" will be exaggerated.

At 1500pts, a WraithKnight is still affordable, only the other armies answers may not always be, etc...

Counter-point...

All the new codices have shockingly under-costed units. Moreso, formations provide most armies with shockingly FREE rules or free units, consider for a moment the 4 major formations that get free things (Gladius, War Convo, Firestream, SW Free Pod formation) none of them will be hurt by a move to 1500. Gladius fits comfortably within that limit and has roughly 400 pts to spend on upgrades for weapons or extra units, War Convo fits in nicely and still ends up with around ~400 pts of free upgrades. Firestreams run less than 400 pts most of the time so can easily fit into 1500 lists. Theres also daemon summoning providing free units.

If anything, I'd argue that Eldar will be weakened by the points drop as armies that benefit from free units/rules will still be getting almost the same amount of free stuff at 1500 that they do at 1850.

Under-costedness/points efficiency is all over the place in the newer codices. As long as you don't ban formations, the Eldar issue will remain mostly moot (I agree they are a slight step above other codices, but not to an absurd extent).

 Dozer Blades wrote:
That's a really good point. As I said I think lower points is more appealing to casual gamers but that is not the purpose of a competition.

Lower points values actually make the game *more* competitive as now more army options are available and it becomes a game where you have some time to think about decisions and more plans can be made with a larger variety of armies. Many excellent and viable counters to current powerhouse lists simply cannot be taken due to time constraints, that is the antithesis of competitive.

Skill at the game is not measured in clicks or actions per second, but at 4 seconds per model per phase at relatively low model counts, that sure seems like what a small amount of people think it may all be about it would seem.

It in no way decreases the competitiveness, and it makes list building less of a "take all the things" situation for some armies with multiple excellent formations.

This is speaking as a competitive player myself.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
That's a really good point. As I said I think lower points is more appealing to casual gamers but that is not the purpose of a competition.

You keep repeating this mantra but have yet to provide any solid evidence that this may in fact be the case.

Plus the repeated veiled insults toward casual gamers and the "us vs. them" mentality of the posts are grating.

 Dozer Blades wrote:

blaktoof wrote:


IMO having players roll psychic powers before the tournament and they keep powers for the duration of the tournament is a good time saver. I have seen demon armies waste 45min-1hr of game time each game of a tournament determining and noting psychic powers and setting up. If a game is 2h:30min more than 25% of the game was done before it started from one player.

This is a total nerf to the psychic phase. I doubt the majority of tourney players would buy into this one.

I'm just spitballing here ya'll.

Yes, that would be a nerf.

Can we at least acknowledge that in a tournament setting, eating away ~25% of the round time with pre-game rolls for random powers isn't a *good* thing?

I've been playing a lot lately, and I can't recall ever completing the 4th game turn against a psyker heavy list within 2.5 hours that includes the pre-deployment activity.

Yes, it's a large part of the game now, but we're talking about ITC rules, that's optimized for better/fun tournament play... maybe we ought to look at addressing these pre-game rolls before each game?

Maybe cap the total psyker levels? Shoot, at this point, I'd be curious what the ITC voters would say that if we cap it at "x" total levels, then the trade off would be that you can choose the powers before the tournament, and that's what you'd play throughout the tourny.

 whembly wrote:

 Dozer Blades wrote:

blaktoof wrote:


IMO having players roll psychic powers before the tournament and they keep powers for the duration of the tournament is a good time saver. I have seen demon armies waste 45min-1hr of game time each game of a tournament determining and noting psychic powers and setting up. If a game is 2h:30min more than 25% of the game was done before it started from one player.

This is a total nerf to the psychic phase. I doubt the majority of tourney players would buy into this one.

I'm just spitballing here ya'll.

Yes, that would be a nerf.

Can we at least acknowledge that in a tournament setting, eating away ~25% of the round time with pre-game rolls for random powers isn't a *good* thing?

I've been playing a lot lately, and I can't recall ever completing the 4th game turn against a psyker heavy list within 2.5 hours that includes the pre-deployment activity.

Yes, it's a large part of the game now, but we're talking about ITC rules, that's optimized for better/fun tournament play... maybe we ought to look at addressing these pre-game rolls before each game?

Maybe cap the total psyker levels? Shoot, at this point, I'd be curious what the ITC voters would say that if we cap it at "x" total levels, then the trade off would be that you can choose the powers before the tournament, and that's what you'd play throughout the tourny.

As someone who routinely plays with Tigurius and/or a Librarius Conclave I would be in favor of something like this. Speeding up the psychic pre-game non sense would be nice. As a former Daemon player, with lots of rewards and powers to roll for, I would again be in favor of this.

Does dropping points really do anything?

What's to prevent TOs from shortening the game time after dropping the points? We're back to square 1 with the same problem...too many points per unit time allotted.

Why can't we just use 10 minute egg timers, where each player has 10 minutes to move, psych, and shoot, and if the time runs out they don't get as much shooting. Assault would not be timed.

Egg timers are way cheaper than chess clocks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:
IMO having players roll psychic powers before the tournament and they keep powers for the duration of the tournament is a good time saver. I have seen demon armies waste 45min-1hr of game time each game of a tournament determining and noting psychic powers and setting up. If a game is 2h:30min more than 25% of the game was done before it started from one player.

It also prevents people from being able to list tailor psychic powers versus certain opponents, which is balanced as players don't have the option to swap out heavy/special weapons versus certain opponents keeping similar points costs and all.

Really? If I rolled bad powers, I should be able to cancel my tournament fee and get a full refund on the hotel room, etc. Why would I want to play a tournament with a crippled army?

 JimOnMars wrote:
Does dropping points really do anything?

What's to prevent TOs from shortening the game time after dropping the points? We're back to square 1 with the same problem...too many points per unit time allotted.

Why can't we just use 10 minute egg timers, where each player has 10 minutes to move, psych, and shoot, and if the time runs out they don't get as much shooting. Assault would not be timed.

Egg timers are way cheaper than chess clocks.

Doesn't work straight out like that. Do you stop the time for your opponent doing Interceptor, counter deploy (Deathmarks intercepting Deep Strikers), Deny the Witch, Saves, Overwatch, Flicker Jump, Reanimations, Counter Charges (new SW), or anything else that might come up?

Chess timers sorta work because you can pass to your opponent as soon as it's time for them to do their stuff in your turn, but even then it's not a perfect system. Assault becomes really confusing (going at different Initiatives, then saves, then special rules, etc), so the rules for using the chess clock might be confusing enough to just add time on top of the problem.

I hate it when people use things like this to bias the game in their favor. This should be as unbiased as possible to derive the best results for everyone possible.

I think in addition to a drop to 1500, a few Army Comp issues need to be addressed.
1) Battle Company (Gladius). They have problems finishing games because they have too many units, and they do better when games fail to finish so they don't have an incentive to try to finish them. This formation has got to be adjusted or limited in some way for the good of competitive play.
2) The Psychic phase. It takes forever for some armies, and it also disrupts the flow of events. A simple limit on the maximum number of warp chargers per psychic phase would help out here a lot.
3) Overly Complicated War Gear (Like War Convocation). Can slow the game down. A limit on that formations like that might make sense.
4) In the ITC, Void Shield Generators are too good. They slow games down by reducing casualties significantly. Changing it so that Models under the void shield are protected rather than units would help a lot.
5) Formations that bring back and/or duplicate models (Endless Swarm, Drone Farm, Renegades) slow the game down, and could be limited in some way.
6) The ITC missions are geared towards MSU / Reserve oriented armies. Lowering the points levels will help with that, but also tweaking the missions might help.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The main point is the majority is not in favor of 1500 points and desire alternatives.

Your Math isn't right. I voted for 2 of the options including 1500 points. If everyone voted for 2 options, then not only does 1500 points not only has a majority, it is favored by 88% of voters.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
That's a really good point. As I said I think lower points is more appealing to casual gamers but that is not the purpose of a competition.

What are you talking about? Have you ever met a casual gamer? The type of gamers I know that frown on competitive play all play huge games. It is only the competitive crowd that plays smaller games. Furthermore, the current system isn't effectively as competitive because games aren't finishing. If you want a more competitive system, you've got to get the games done. Beyond that, the idea that tournaments should intentionally try to alienate casual gamers is hugely problematic. That is a bad thing, not a good thing. A drop to 1500 will almost certainly drive away a few casual gamers, and that is the biggest argument against it from my point of view. Competitive gamers will do just fine. Better in fact, because event where more games finish will be more effectively competitive events.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I hate it when people use things like this to bias the game in their favor. This should be as unbiased as possible to derive the best results for everyone possible.

I actually agree with you here. The Goal of the points decrease is to create a more competitive tournament environment, that is more enjoyable for those who attend.

There are a some gamers that like really big games, and feel like our games are already too small, or too restrictive, so i really think we should have separate formats for different types of gamers.
A Big format with:
2,500 Points.
Unlimited Detachments
No Ban List
3+ Hour rounds.

A Small Format with:
1500 points.
Restrictions on Detachments, and formations.
A Ban list and restrictions on SHV / GC
2:30-2:45 hour rounds

That way, people can vote with their feet, and play in a format that better suites their interests. I kinda think this is inevitable, and now is as good a time as any.

tag8833 wrote:
I think in addition to a drop to 1500, a few Army Comp issues need to be addressed.
1) Battle Company (Gladius). They have problems finishing games because they have too many units, and they do better when games fail to finish so they don't have an incentive to try to finish them. This formation has got to be adjusted or limited in some way for the good of competitive play.
2) The Psychic phase. It takes forever for some armies, and it also disrupts the flow of events. A simple limit on the maximum number of warp chargers per psychic phase would help out here a lot.
3) Overly Complicated War Gear (Like War Convocation). Can slow the game down. A limit on that formations like that might make sense.
4) In the ITC, Void Shield Generators are too good. They slow games down by reducing casualties significantly. Changing it so that Models under the void shield are protected rather than units would help a lot.
5) Formations that bring back and/or duplicate models (Endless Swarm, Drone Farm, Renegades) slow the game down, and could be limited in some way.
6) The ITC missions are geared towards MSU / Reserve oriented armies. Lowering the points levels will help with that, but also tweaking the missions might help.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
The main point is the majority is not in favor of 1500 points and desire alternatives.

Your Math isn't right. I voted for 2 of the options including 1500 points. If everyone voted for 2 options, then not only does 1500 points not only has a majority, it is favored by 88% of voters.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
That's a really good point. As I said I think lower points is more appealing to casual gamers but that is not the purpose of a competition.

What are you talking about? Have you ever met a casual gamer? The type of gamers I know that frown on competitive play all play huge games. It is only the competitive crowd that plays smaller games. Furthermore, the current system isn't effectively as competitive because games aren't finishing. If you want a more competitive system, you've got to get the games done. Beyond that, the idea that tournaments should intentionally try to alienate casual gamers is hugely problematic. That is a bad thing, not a good thing. A drop to 1500 will almost certainly drive away a few casual gamers, and that is the biggest argument against it from my point of view. Competitive gamers will do just fine. Better in fact, because event where more games finish will be more effectively competitive events.

If Battle Company is too good, then why did only 1 make the top 8 at LVO? I keep hearing folks complain about BC and War Convo, neither did overwhelmingly well. ITC has 2 missions that are damn near impossible for BC to win depending upon matchup (KP and Relic and really they are unlikely to ever win KP). Add KP to too many missions and I promise you it will be bad for the game. I know, I for one, would switch right back to playing a deathstar army. More than one KP mission would effectively render the BC unplayable at a GT.

Punishing MSU will be bad for the game as all you will do is push people towards deathstar/sh/gmc 40k.

Also, if you nerf BC/War Convocation you will remove those armies completely and totally from competitive play. Prior to new codex, marines were fielded for bikes, centurions and deathstars. I'd rather play against BC every day of the week. And if you are going to remove the free units formations, youll have to do the same for the free rules formations. Necron Decurion has the same effect as free transports and they can run MSU very well if they'd like, with that MSU being nigh unkillable for most armies. You'll also have to further punish Tau formations that give them free special rules that are quite powerful. See the slippery slope here? Units, just like abilities have value in the game.

I'd argue that top armies (Eldar, Necrons, SM, Tau, Daemons and War Convo) are all relatively well-balanced vs one another and need no modification as is.

Requizen wrote:


Doesn't work straight out like that. Do you stop the time for your opponent doing Interceptor, counter deploy (Deathmarks intercepting Deep Strikers), Deny the Witch, Saves, Overwatch, Flicker Jump, Reanimations, Counter Charges (new SW), or anything else that might come up?

Chess timers sorta work because you can pass to your opponent as soon as it's time for them to do their stuff in your turn, but even then it's not a perfect system. Assault becomes really confusing (going at different Initiatives, then saves, then special rules, etc), so the rules for using the chess clock might be confusing enough to just add time on top of the problem.

This is the main problem. Chess Clocks work great in Warmachine because there is very little player interaction. If you trust your opponent, you can leave the table and they can finish their turn without you being there (unless you have Tough or Counter-charge). In 40k, both players are active in psychic, shooting, and assault, and depending on army, are active in each movement phase too.

Is it fair that a Necron army has to double-dip for time where he/she must spend time in their own turn moving, shooting, etc, and then have to burn time making saves and reanimates? What about a green tide with a Painboy for FnP saves? What about Tau for interceptor? White Scars for Hit and Run?

40k has far more player interaction at different steps. If you watch high level warmachine, flipping the clock between players is a big part of the game when time is low, and it would become obtrusive to the game to have in 40k when the clock is being slapped back and forth, which will be constant. It also heavily penalizes some armies for no other reason than that they get to have saves or do things out of sequence, which should be their strengths.

Enforcing a blanket ruling of penalizing games that do not finish just encourages those players that would maliciously slow-play to continue slow-playing if they thought they were going to lose. It also has the negative impact of penalizing newer players who are just a bit slow, especially if they are also playing a newer player. While winning tournaments is the focus of the most competitive, I'd wager a good chunk of tournament goers are looking to play and do not realistically think they have a chance at the top spot. The best players rise to the top, and so while they may get the awards, it is the rest of the players that make up the attendance of the event, and penalizing some of them for not being "pro" is likely to hurt the overall health of an event.

A simple stopwatch could help in identifying intentional slow-play. If each player times their turns, then there is some evidence to suggest who is purposely taking the lion's share of the time. I'd be hesitant to have any blanket ruling here as it is likely that most slow-play is not intentional and shouldn't necessarily be punished; however, it is also each player's obligation to alert a judge if they feel that they are not getting adequate time to play the game.

All in all, cutting points shifts the meta, and it forces plenty of folk to redo a lot of hard work tuning lists, but it is the least disruptive option, assuming that the rounds are also not shortened. It could also be paired with other changes, but the impact of these changes have to be carefully considered.

 LValx wrote:
If Battle Company is too good, then why did only 1 make the top 8 at LVO?

Its not too good. It is too slow to play. I don't think the issue is game balance. The issue is completing games in the allowed timeframe.

tag8833 wrote:

 LValx wrote:
If Battle Company is too good, then why did only 1 make the top 8 at LVO?

Its not too good. It is too slow to play. I don't think the issue is game balance. The issue is completing games in the allowed timeframe.

Its only too slow to play for a player that is slow playing. If the game is taken down to 1500 itd be plenty easy for good players to complete games using BC.

By your logic you may as well ban AM, Orks and any other horde army.

It is like a said - 1500 points limit is a throwback to old hammer since it keeps a lot of newer aspects out of the game. I have been to plenty of GTs with 1850 points where time was not an issue - I really don't think it is the points limit why some games did not make it to RGL or were rushed to complete. Going to 1500 points is a simple solution which may not even actually fix the real problems.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
It is like a said - 1500 points limit is a throwback to old hammer since it keeps a lot of newer aspects out of the game. I have been to plenty of GTs with 1850 points where time was not an issue - I really don't think it is the points limit why some games did not make it to RGL or were rushed to complete. Going to 1500 points is a simple solution which may not even actually fix the real problems.

Agreed that it might not work, but we cant know if we don't try. and it doesn't hurt for one event to try this out.

No to me it's a really big deal - the difference between attending and not.

DCannon4Life wrote:
With regard to considering a point reduction vs. implementing incentives (and dis-incentives) for timely play, perhaps it is time to introduce the concept of the 'Reserve' section of a tournament. Since we've already looked at chess clocks, let's look at how chess tournaments are organized. A chess tournament of any decent size has two sections: Open and Reserve. Reserve players are grouped with other players in their rating range where players in the Open are in the mix with everyone (Grandmasters and U1400 alike). Yes, the Reserve is divided into even smaller subsections, but let's ignore that aspect as it doesn't translate to 40K.

The winner of the Open is the tournament champion. The winner of the Reserve section is the reserve section champion.... Prize support is awarded accordingly. When you sign up, you choose which section you want to play in. Perhaps the Open is 1850 with strict incentives/dis-incentives (and clocks/timers) while the Reserves is 1500 points. Games are scheduled for the same amount of time, whether in the Open or in the Reserves. If you choose to play in the Open section, you are accepting a higher standard of play (efficiency-wise, etc.). If you are a newer or more casually minded player, you are encouraged to play in the Reserve section.

Reposting from the LVO thread.

I fall under the 'other solution' heading.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
No to me it's a really big deal - the difference between attending and not.

There's nothing quite like the "my way or the highway" attitude. It's always nice to see someone use the old Appeal to Force fallacy though.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
No to me it's a really big deal - the difference between attending and not.

the community will live and move on without you.

really don't see how dropping 350 pts would make someone not want to play at an event, but hey, that's just me!

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I hate it when people use things like this to bias the game in their favor. This should be as unbiased as possible to derive the best results for everyone possible.

Higher points has the bias... Im not sure why you are so opposed to allowing more usable armies... there is literally no army invalidated by a pts reduction, and plenty that are invalid at that pts level (hordes)

Yes it requires a "change" to larger armies to scale them down, but you can in fact, scale them down. There is nothing new that is cut out by reducing pts, please cite a specific "new" thing that cannot be played at 1500.

Conversely, you simply cannot scale lots of armies up to 1850 without them becoming unplayable, and 1850 favours small model count armies with cookie cutter lists. After all wWho has time to explain how an esoteric list works, let alone move more then 100+ models when only 50 models per side means less then 4 seconds per model per phase. 1850 greatly favours lists that are fast to play and penalizes horde armies, 1500 still lets elite armies do their thing but also allows for hordes to affect the meta.

My IK do fine at 1850, as well as at 1500, my SW the same, my orks are fethed at 1850 and unplayable for most builds, same with my IG.

Try it out for a year, you will still see the same names in the top 20 of ITC, but the average gamer will likely have a lot more fun with games that are not uber focused on actions per second as opposed to a relaxed game that almost always plays to completion and even has time for talking, ogling models, ect

 JimOnMars wrote:
Does dropping points really do anything?

What's to prevent TOs from shortening the game time after dropping the points? We're back to square 1 with the same problem...too many points per unit time allotted.

That's not square one, then we have enough time to fit in another round!

DCannon4Life wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:
With regard to considering a point reduction vs. implementing incentives (and dis-incentives) for timely play, perhaps it is time to introduce the concept of the 'Reserve' section of a tournament. Since we've already looked at chess clocks, let's look at how chess tournaments are organized. A chess tournament of any decent size has two sections: Open and Reserve. Reserve players are grouped with other players in their rating range where players in the Open are in the mix with everyone (Grandmasters and U1400 alike). Yes, the Reserve is divided into even smaller subsections, but let's ignore that aspect as it doesn't translate to 40K.

The winner of the Open is the tournament champion. The winner of the Reserve section is the reserve section champion.... Prize support is awarded accordingly. When you sign up, you choose which section you want to play in. Perhaps the Open is 1850 with strict incentives/dis-incentives (and clocks/timers) while the Reserves is 1500 points. Games are scheduled for the same amount of time, whether in the Open or in the Reserves. If you choose to play in the Open section, you are accepting a higher standard of play (efficiency-wise, etc.). If you are a newer or more casually minded player, you are encouraged to play in the Reserve section.

Reposting from the LVO thread.

I fall under the 'other solution' heading.

I think this is a great idea !

 Dozer Blades wrote:

blaktoof wrote:


IMO having players roll psychic powers before the tournament and they keep powers for the duration of the tournament is a good time saver. I have seen demon armies waste 45min-1hr of game time each game of a tournament determining and noting psychic powers and setting up. If a game is 2h:30min more than 25% of the game was done before it started from one player.

This is a total nerf to the psychic phase. I doubt the majority of tourney players would buy into this one.

I completely disagree.

This is no more than a nerf than requiring people to select wargear/units/formations with the knowledge they cannot switch it out between battles.

The chance of rolling good powers with few dice is low, so rolling bad powers is the norm. The chance of rolling the powers you want with lots of mastery levels is high, so you are very unlikely to roll bad powers.

The basic rules for 40k are not built for taking a single army list through consecutive play, and just as you make one army list to play a game, you roll psychic powers for said army list. If the army list has to play multiple games, then so should the rolled psychic powers.

It's no more an issue than opting to take a lot of heavy bolters on razorbacks over assault cannons or lascannons because you are betting that most of the attendees wont run heavy armor. Then being stuck with your "tactical" decision.

Or rather, allowing players to roll new psychic powers (which is essentially part of army creation) not only wastes time but gives unfair advantages to some armies. Yes the powers are random, but being able to pick between different masteries to suit your needs for a specific opponent/table is an unfair advantage- and having multiple rolls often guarantees getting most of the powers you want.

I also advocate all pre-game army rolls done 1 time at the begining of the tournament. Warlord trait, chaos boons, whatever.

It is not selecting - it is totally random. What you should be saying is let them pick the powers they want, right ? Or are you wanting to nerf the psychic phase ?

lemurking23 wrote:

Requizen wrote:


Doesn't work straight out like that. Do you stop the time for your opponent doing Interceptor, counter deploy (Deathmarks intercepting Deep Strikers), Deny the Witch, Saves, Overwatch, Flicker Jump, Reanimations, Counter Charges (new SW), or anything else that might come up?

Chess timers sorta work because you can pass to your opponent as soon as it's time for them to do their stuff in your turn, but even then it's not a perfect system. Assault becomes really confusing (going at different Initiatives, then saves, then special rules, etc), so the rules for using the chess clock might be confusing enough to just add time on top of the problem.

This is the main problem. Chess Clocks work great in Warmachine because there is very little player interaction. If you trust your opponent, you can leave the table and they can finish their turn without you being there (unless you have Tough or Counter-charge). In 40k, both players are active in psychic, shooting, and assault, and depending on army, are active in each movement phase too.

Is it fair that a Necron army has to double-dip for time where he/she must spend time in their own turn moving, shooting, etc, and then have to burn time making saves and reanimates? What about a green tide with a Painboy for FnP saves? What about Tau for interceptor? White Scars for Hit and Run?

Yes actually that is what makes chess clocks completely fair. You spend your time doing the actions that you choose. Rule 1 from http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/679969.page is the most important of all.

1.The player is responsible for their own time. It is the players right but not their obligation to make sure that their time is being handled properly. A player can always pass a phase, action or even a turn.

What this means in practice is that an opposing player cannot waste your time because you have the right but not the obligation to pass the clock to them.