Las Vegas Open 2018

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.

**Red Corsair**

Yea, while several people in that twitch chat enjoyed what Nick did to Tony, and while I do admit it was karmic, it ultimately just makes the whole thing even worse. You know, the whole two wrongs not making a right thing. Had he not done that he probably would have lost as well.

**HuskyWarhammer**

chimeara wrote:
ryzouken wrote:
They are said to be painted, but the colors are light and the lighting poor so the camera doesn't pick it up well.

More concerned about the sportsmanship on display

I see, thanks for the clarification.

Ironically, he said in an interview after the finals that he used 5 colors just so people wouldn't give him crap about painting to the bare minimum standard. I guess he should've chosen 5 more bold colors.

**Median Trace**

Red Corsair wrote:
Yea, while several people in that twitch chat enjoyed what Nick did to Tony, and while I do admit it was karmic, it ultimately just makes the whole thing even worse. You know, the whole two wrongs not making a right thing. Had he not done that he probably would have lost as well.

Tony lost because he made a mistake. His sportsmanship cost him the ability to get a pass. This doesn’t make it worse. The majority of people are happy he lost. He lost fair and square. He wasn’t cheated.

**perrin23860**

Whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap...

**Colour Of War**

I cant help but feel this is why I prefer tournaments with sportsmanship and painting scores as well.

Those last couple of games really go against the spirit of the hobby which is a shame.

**anticitizen013**

It's unfortunate that this happened. This Tony character is exactly the kind of person that gives tournaments a bad name. You're always going to encounter the odd gluebag here and there but at a broadcasted event that GW is supporting, it really doesn't do the hobby any justice. Especially because the guys at FLG try to do their best to promote the hobby and how fun it is, then this happens. Honestly I think the thing that bothers me most about this debacle is just that. There are so many people that are doing so much good for the hobby but when someone pulls a stunt like this, it's going to leave a lasting negative impression.

At a tournament, I expect people to bring WAAC lists (that's kinda the point), but you don't win any points for being a

, so why do it? Definitely not the kind of person I want to play against, especially if I'm spending money to go to an event.

**Galas**

anticitizen013 wrote:

At a tournament, I expect people to bring WAAC lists (that's kinda the point), but you don't win any points for being a , so why do it? Definitely not the kind of person I want to play against, especially if I'm spending money to go to an event.

That was exactly what the Riot Co-Founder said. Theres no problem with bringing the most powerfull and refined lists (Or even the most spammy ones like the death guard player). Is a tournament. But keep the maturity and respect your opponent.

**TinyLittleDragon**

HuskyWarhammer wrote:
chimeara wrote:
ryzouken wrote:
They are said to be painted, but the colors are light and the lighting poor so the camera doesn't pick it up well.

More concerned about the sportsmanship on display

I see, thanks for the clarification.

Ironically, he said in an interview after the finals that he used 5 colors just so people wouldn't give him crap about painting to the bare minimum standard. I guess he should've chosen 5 more bold colors.

5(0) shades of grey apparently. :p

**ryzouken**

TinyLittleDragon wrote:
HuskyWarhammer wrote:
chimeara wrote:
ryzouken wrote:
They are said to be painted, but the colors are light and the lighting poor so the camera doesn't pick it up well.

More concerned about the sportsmanship on display

I see, thanks for the clarification.

Ironically, he said in an interview after the finals that he used 5 colors just so people wouldn't give him crap about painting to the bare minimum standard. I guess he should've chosen 5 more bold colors.

5(0) shades of grey apparently. :p

That may well be. It may also be pastels or fine details that a wide angle shot from cameras in poor lighting might not pick up. It's not a determination I can make, as I wasn't there in person.

**WrentheFaceless**

#dontbeatony

What an embarasment for GW, FLG and the 40k community as a whole for those two games on stream

**Virules**

bananathug wrote:
Lol @ the eldar defenders.

Ynarri dark reapers. Yep they're a problem. Dark reapers in general seem to have shaped the meta by themselves which to me seems like the hallmark of an OP unit. And I told you guys that ynarri shining spears were damned good!

To me, what really makes a mess of the whole eldar thing is the strats and psychic powers are god tier good. Deepstriking, minus to hit, shoot move shoot, move after deployment are all really good strats, doom, guide, conceal all really good powers. Throw all that on top of some units that are borderline OP and you have a top 8 which 50% of is one faction in a 20 faction tournament.

Imperium soup has a new dance partner though and it isn't wearing smurf blue.

All the people screaming gulliman is OP, there are more eldar players in the top 8 than there are guilliman lists in the top 100. Let that sink in for a minute.

Obviously there is something going on with BA because if eldar are OP1 at this tourney then BA are OP2. I think captain smash-fer is probably under-costed but I'm not sure how you dial him back because most of his power comes from those other buffing characters. I think DC are good but not OP, very similar to berserkers but with a bit better delivery option and a little worse combat ability.

Dark angels did pretty well. A couple 4-2 lists, a few spots in the top 100 (3). Seem to work better as part of soup though.

Not sure why people are so down on Nids. Between them and GSC there are hella them in the top 100 (just not in the top 8). Maybe they don't like to be reduced to soup but everyone's doing it (eldar/ynarri, BA/IG, nids/guard, CSM/Demons).

Surprised with how many Tau and Orks are in the top 100. For all the crying that goes on around here about how they are not competitive they performed better than Codex SM...With no Soup!!

I'm not sure how to look at Sisters. It looks like they performed pretty well but then you dig into their lists and they are very soupy. They seem to be a really good soup addition but I think they are getting replaced by BA.

IG has fallen out of the top spot but they are still well represented in the top 100. Didn't think I'd see that many DKoK units at a major but I guess if you are spending 1k+ to attend the tourney whats another 1k on a couple units...

Chaos is really well represented in the top 100 but them missing from the top tables points out that the bash-brothers lists have been countered (classic gate keeper list) and that their other combos are good but not broken (I still think oblits are a problem but that doesn't seem borne out by these results)

GK still doing their soup thing. Not a terrible showing

Fire raptors obviously under-costed. Good job CA.

Poor necrons, AdMech, Knights, R&H

I agree with pretty much 100% of this post. I would add that the lack of Magnus or Mortarion near the top shows how silly it is that Magnus is about to be further nerfed with points increases and a big survivability drop. Though in an ideal world of prescient GW game balancing it's being done in anticipation of nerfing stuff that can kill big units very easily like dark Reapers.

As a fun note, I played Necrons for the first time ever this week and ended around top 125 with 4-2. Boy did it feel frustrating to play hard to win with Necrons at a serious event.

**Weidekuh**

Well you can really only judge units and armies according to the meta.

Dark Reapers are a logical result of the way to powerful -hit traits. -hit is extremely good and many armies use it to increase their survivability. Dark Reapers completely ignore that. Moreso, they can easely get -hit themselves. Up to -3 for a single unit and -1 for the rest of them. And because Dark Reapers are now so good in the meta, any other unit they are naturally good against suffers. Meaning any big model.

Make -hit rare and give it only to really sneaky units (scouts, rangers, ...) and you basicly have the Dark Reaper spam removed. They would still be a very good unit. But not overwhelmingly meta breaking like right now.

Remove -hit army traits alltogether or make it only outside of 18 or 24 inches. 12 is too powerful. Or "shooting with a heavy weapon removes all -hit modifiers against that unit until your next shooting phase".

**Orktavius**

Saying the game ended on turn 3 implies they made it there....game ended on turn 2 because Alex took 15 minutes to do his first turn and tony took between 60-90 minutes for his....then after he called Alex on the deepstrike, proceded to slow roll his 2nd turn as well. It was to the point that LVO for the finals had a judge stationed by the table and implemented a new rule that meant slow playing could have you auto lose.

Last two game showcased the absolute worst in the hobby...which is why you will never see the GW twitch stream broadcast top tables if they can help it.

**Sunny Side Up**

Weidekuh wrote:
Well you can really only judge units and armies according to the meta.

Dark Reapers are a logical result of the way to powerful -hit traits. -hit is extremely good and many armies use it to increase their survivability. Dark Reapers completely ignore that. Moreso, they can easely get -hit themselves. Up to -3 for a single unit and -1 for the rest of them. And because Dark Reapers are now so good in the meta, any other unit they are naturally good against suffers. Meaning any big model.

Make -hit rare and give it only to really sneaky units (scouts, rangers, ...) and you basicly have the Dark Reaper spam removed. They would still be a very good unit. But not overwhelmingly meta breaking like right now.

Remove -hit army traits alltogether or make it only outside of 18 or 24 inches. 12 is too powerful. Or "shooting with a heavy weapon removes all -hit modifiers against that unit until your next shooting phase".

Yeah, but you need some more shooty survivability somehow. If you remove the -1+ hit things from the game, you're back to being blown off the table by a shooty leafblower if you don't get first turn, be it Guard, AdMech, FW-Marines, Oblit-Spam, non-Dark Reaper Eldar-shooty lists, possibly Tau when they get a Dex, etc.., etc.., etc.. , which structurally goes back to a lot of core decisions of 8th Ed. to begin with (twin-linked becoming double shots, re-rolls being a thing, etc., etc..).

Gotta find the balance than that a super-shooty Guard lists or something along those lines couldn't Alpha Strike more than, say, 20% or 25% of any given list off the table on average rolls against a not super-tough, no -1 hit army on the other side before -1 modifies stop being a thing.

**tneva82**

Colour Of War wrote:
I cant help but feel this is why I prefer tournaments with sportsmanship and painting scores as well.

Those last couple of games really go against the spirit of the hobby which is a shame.

Problem with sportmanship scores is that it just adds another venue for WAAC's to exploit. 0's for each opponent.

**X078**

I might be missing something about Ynnari since i don't run them but is it an ITC specific thing that you can use specific craftworld stratagems in an Ynnari detachment?
Because my interpretation is that you need one "pure" detachment with the specific craftworld keyword <Saim Hann> to be able to use <Saim Hann> specific stratagems for <Ynnari> units marked as <Saim Hann>.
the <craftworld> keyword as i view it is meant be replaced by a craftworld name, and not be generic.

**rvd1ofakind**

LVO revealed/drilled it in, that we have 3 main problems, IMO:
1. Eldar - duh. Solution: nerf em. 3 identical lists being top 3 in a 500 people tournament is beyond stupid
2. Soups being a no-brainer. Solution: make them lose the free 3cp for battleforged. At least will make people think twice before souping it up.
3. Lone Big Guys are TERRIBLE. The only exceptions are Magnus and Mortarion. Solution: All big guys should be tuned to their level, at least. If you think that'd create a problem - remove the stupid 3 superheavy detachment or make it only give 1 CP

**An Actual Englishman**

X078 wrote:
I might be missing something about Ynnari since i don't run them but is it an ITC specific thing that you can use specific craftworld stratagems in an Ynnari detachment?
Because my interpretation is that you need one "pure" detachment with the specific craftworld keyword <Saim Hann> to be able to use <Saim Hann> specific stratagems for <Ynnari> units marked as <Saim Hann>.
the <craftworld> keyword as i view it is meant be replaced by a craftworld name, and not be generic.

This was also my belief.

Lol and vis a vis the awkward rules bs - what do you expect? Neckbeards gonna Neckbeard. The guys on these tables are some of the beardiest necks or neckliest beards around. There was bound to be some awkwardness. At least they aren't all obese, riddled with acne and have a severe lack of personal hygiene, as was the case with the "best" players in my youth.

**RogueApiary**

I'm just going to weigh in as someone that got stomped by one of those Alaitoc/Ynnari lists with Reapers, fliers, and Spears It was easily the worst game of 8th Ed I have ever played out of over 100 games. I basically just picked up models for three turns and vainly fished for 5's/6's with the few units I had left after the alpha. I literally killed zero units in a three turn game.

I don't care if Eldar are going to be dominating top tables, I just wish they did it with something I can actually pretend to play a game against.

**schadenfreude**

It's not front line gaming's job to write game balancing FAQ for games workshop, but GW does seem to listen to their input. How to balance the -1 to hit and reapers is tough. The only thing I can think of is if the nerf fire and fade with an FAQ that states units can not use any extra movements to embark if they disembarked in the same turn.

ITC missions can easily nerf soup. IMO the easy solution is at the end of the game turn if both players control an equal amount of objectives then whoever controls more objectives with obsec units wins the tie and controls more objectives. Any buffs to obsec will nerf soup.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I had a great time this weekend. LVO was an overdose of awesome and I'm exhausted.

**Sunny Side Up**

schadenfreude wrote:
It's not front line gaming's job to write game balancing FAQ for games workshop, but GW does seem to listen to their input. How to balance the -1 to hit and reapers is tough. The only thing I can think of is if the nerf fire and fade with an FAQ that states units can not use any extra movements to embark if they disembarked in the same turn.

ITC missions can easily nerf soup. IMO the easy solution is at the end of the game turn if both players control an equal amount of objectives then whoever controls more objectives with obsec units wins the tie and controls more objectives. Any buffs to obsec will nerf soup..

True, but a lot of ITC houserules nerf elite armies really hard. Things like all-Primaris or possibly future all Custodes armies for example do a lot better on Warhammer World tournaments for example, as they can play to the mission. Less Maelstrom or pseudo-Maelstrom for example, no first blood for the second guy to get it, still RAW auto-first turn for fewer drops on the BRB missions, etc..

Having (potentially) some missions where the army with fewer drops gets auto-first turn, can grab a non-counterable first blood from an army that filled out large detachments with cheap chaff and play the advantage to turn 5 because there isn't a Maelstrom and it's just Kill Points or the Relic or something is a balancing trade-off to armies that go for massive board control, maximizing CPs and such.

Houseruling the CA version of first turn for all games, being able to "take back" First Blood makes the No. of drops less relevant. Having lots of objectives and/or Maelstrom-style elements in nearly every game (not to mention things like Recon, etc..) buff large footprint armies even further (which also often comes with the added benefit of having more CP, since the trade-offs for large detachments with cheap filler are nerfed away by ITC).

In that sense, ITC balance IS a lot worse than vanilla-40K balance for a lot of non-soup armies, but you cannot expect GW to write FAQ to a popular houserule variant of their game, as opposed to their actual game.

If ITC/Frontline makes all those houserule changes to 40K for ITC tournaments, the balancing falls to them. If they wanna rely on GW FAQ for balance, they shouldn't use so many houserules and homebrew missions at tournaments.

**tneva82**

X078 wrote:
I might be missing something about Ynnari since i don't run them but is it an ITC specific thing that you can use specific craftworld stratagems in an Ynnari detachment?
Because my interpretation is that you need one "pure" detachment with the specific craftworld keyword <Saim Hann> to be able to use <Saim Hann> specific stratagems for <Ynnari> units marked as <Saim Hann>.
the <craftworld> keyword as i view it is meant be replaced by a craftworld name, and not be generic.

Depends on rules. IG doesn't require tallarn detachment to use tallarn strategem. You need IG detachment(whatever type) with tallarn UNITS.

So detachment consisting of units from IG codex only like this:

cadian commander
2 tallarn infantry squad
valhalla conscript
mordian heavy support

Can use cadian strategem for commander(albeit not useful here), tallarn strategem for infantry squads etc.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

schadenfreude wrote:
It's not front line gaming's job to write game balancing FAQ for games workshop, but GW does seem to listen to their input. How to balance the -1 to hit and reapers is tough. The only thing I can think of is if the nerf fire and fade with an FAQ that states units can not use any extra movements to embark if they disembarked in the same turn.

They could have made -1 to hit cost money but they screwed up as usual and made traits free. Which also resulted in index armies being screwed. Done properly -1 to hit would at least add hefty price and this way index armies wouldn't be as screwed. But GW cares not about balance but shifting what sells periodically.

**blackmage**

tneva82 wrote:
Colour Of War wrote:
I cant help but feel this is why I prefer tournaments with sportsmanship and painting scores as well.

Those last couple of games really go against the spirit of the hobby which is a shame.

Problem with sportmanship scores is that it just adds another venue for WAAC's to exploit. 0's for each opponent.

the problem is when in something called HOBBY you put monetary prizes, is awful, that makes some players waac. If it is a hobby cant get monetary prizes, or become a job, period.

**Ordana**

X078 wrote:
I might be missing something about Ynnari since i don't run them but is it an ITC specific thing that you can use specific craftworld stratagems in an Ynnari detachment?
Because my interpretation is that you need one "pure" detachment with the specific craftworld keyword <Saim Hann> to be able to use <Saim Hann> specific stratagems for <Ynnari> units marked as <Saim Hann>.
the <craftworld> keyword as i view it is meant be replaced by a craftworld name, and not be generic.

Its not ITC specific.

Having a Craftworld Detachment (A detachment with all models from Craftworlds (does not need to be the same) and no Ynnari unlocks all Craftworld Stategems.
If you have all units from the same Craftworld you get the trait (like the 2 pure Alaitoc detachments), But not the units in the Ynnari detachment.

Once you have unlocked the Craftworld stategems you can use them on units in the Ynnari detachment so long as they have the relevant <Craftworld> trait.

**Mchaagen**

Orktavius wrote:
Saying the game ended on turn 3 implies they made it there....game ended on turn 2 because Alex took 15 minutes to do his first turn and tony took between 60-90 minutes for his....then after he called Alex on the deepstrike, proceded to slow roll his 2nd turn as well. It was to the point that LVO for the finals had a judge stationed by the table and implemented a new rule that meant slow playing could have you auto lose.

Last two game showcased the absolute worst in the hobby...which is why you will never see the GW twitch stream broadcast top tables if they can help it.

Saying the game ended on turn 3 implies that's where I thought it ended. I made a mistake on the final turn partly because the game was going so slow I stopped paying attention to it. I edited my original post.

It's bad when a top table at a major tournament ended at turn 2, and nothing was done to stop it while it was happening. Timed rounds should have been in place for all games in the top 8.

**tneva82**

blackmage wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Colour Of War wrote:
I cant help but feel this is why I prefer tournaments with sportsmanship and painting scores as well.

Those last couple of games really go against the spirit of the hobby which is a shame.

Problem with sportmanship scores is that it just adds another venue for WAAC's to exploit. 0's for each opponent.

the problem is when in something called HOBBY you put monetary prizes, is awful, that makes some players waac. If it is a hobby cant get monetary prizes, or become a job, period.

Alas this kind of behaviour kicks in without even money prize or even one small enough it costs waaaaaay more to chase the win than you get.

**Fenris-77**

Bubbalicious wrote:
tneva82 wrote:

If GW cared about balance and didn\t have history of BUFFING obviously broken units I might agree. As it is since it's been shown already GW still doesn't care about balance and changes are £££ driven not so sure.

If GW cared about balance the only thing allowed in matched play would be one codex only armies. But that is not going to happen so dont take the game to seriously.

I don't get this comment at all. We put up with 5 editions that suffered from wild imbalance issues at tournaments precisely because they required one-codex only armies. Lots pf players went years with armies on the shelf because their codex wasn't competitive and GW didn't really do errata or in-edition balancing. One-codex armies aren't a panacea for what ails the edition, and the soup meta, given the generally much wider availability of unit X to army Y is probably way easier to 'balance' at the competitive level.

People might not like it, but the current Overpowered=$$$=6 month nerf cycle is still way better than your codex sucks, please wait 5 years for another.

**perrin23860**

I couldn't agree more. Having been the victim of slow play more times than I care to remember over the years, it is unfathomable that someone that is ranked so high can be that obtuse and inconsiderate to their opponent. It makes one realize rather well that that person is willing to do anything at all to win, damn the other guy.

2 turns. Let that sink in.............. from someone on team America, highly ranked, and obviously willing to pull other unseemly stunts to win

**njtrader**

Preposterous and shameful for these players. I don't give a gak who you are or what you do, but to slow play to this extent is a grievous issue and MUST be addressed -immediately.-

I don't care if Ynnari win it all. But at the end of the day, these "top players" slow playing like this is obscene and unacceptable.

FLG should have seen this coming and should have implemented timed turns. This has been an issue for GW games since the dawn of time.

I remember the dude playing at a Games Day Tournament years back. Empire player with a gun line. If he got first turn he would kill a unit or two and then scurry off to the bathroom until time was called.

"I like this unit because, errm, ehhhhm, uhhhm, etc" is the exact same thing.

It also doesn't seem to make any difference if money is on the line or not. People still slow play and it has to come to an end.

This is an unacceptable blemish on the hobby and every player that was in this top tournament that slow played is a horrible representation of our hobby and should be held to a much higher standard then they are.

ALSO - FLG - put in some goddamned sportsmanship and painting awards. This is shameful.

**Latro_**

omg when the other guy didnt let him use the strat because he was a d*** in the last game hahahahahahahaaaaaa....

When you have thousands of dollars as prize money i don't expect anything less.

I went to a 4 team doubles tournament at my friend's shop on saturday where i knew everyone and seems from what i'v watched of this 'event' like i had more fun than any of these guys combined.

but hey thats just my opinion, if you want to take 40k to a level where its fundamentally flawed and it does something for you... go for it.