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.

In our group sometimes we use a timer, but only for the movement phase. There are too many variables with both players in other phases to be absolutely fair. Nobody is trying to play slowly, but people get distracted so a two and a half hour game can often turn in to a four hour game. The timer is more a tool to keep players focused, and it can even add to the challenge because you can't afford to micromanage every move. It forces players to plan their next movement phase a bit before it happens, thus shortening the game time.

Is it a slight advantage for smaller armies if given the same allotted time? Well sure, but if the larger army has enough time to move they are not penalized too greatly, and in reality larger forces are and should be harder for command and control anyway.

 Sim-Life wrote:
You pause the clock.
The fact that you would even ask that is astounding.

WTF, I didn't agree to let you stop the clock. Get it moving again or I'm calling the TO to have you disqualified for clock cheating.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
How do I ensure equality? 1: but not using Chess clocks which are designed to be used by two people with THE EXACT SAME ARMIES. 2: If you really want them, then give Horde armies more time, how much is debatable and 3: Just flat out Ban Horde armies and then watch as Most Ork players, nidz and IG armies stop showing up to events.

You ensure equality by being unequal? 1) Warmahordes uses chess clocks but don't have the exact same armies. In fact the armies can vary greatly in size between the 2 players. 2)That's not an answer it's an excuse and it doesn't answer the question of do 2 horde armies get more time for their round then when 2 "elite" armies are matched up against each other? 3)There are people in this very thread saying that they use horde armies and a clock without having problems. Why should we ban them?

Have you even tried using a chess clock?

Yes you ensure equality by being unequal, I know you are attempting to play a wonderful game of semantics but lets get to the point. It takes more time to play a larger army then it does a smaller army, Fact. 1: Warmahordes plays with what? less then 20 models on average? 40-50 at the absolute most? I honestly don't know ive never paid attention to that game. I highly doubt the difference between armies is 200+ models. 2: That is in fact an answer, its actually a reasonable answer but since it isn't your answer you don't like it. If two horde armies play against each other then they each get the same time since neither side needs more time then the other. common sense goes a long way. 3: anecdotal evidence is wonderful when it works in your favor right? If you want I can provide a metric ton of anecdotal evidence saying the opposite.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Why don't we wait until some major event tries the clock and see what the participants say about their experience?

Oh wait, this is the internet where practical experience doesn't mean much.

Practical experience doesn't mean much because it can't separate between "chess clocks worked because the system is good" and "chess clocks worked because no TFGs were present to exploit them". I don't disagree that the clocks can "work" in a TFG-free environment, but in that environment you aren't going to need them because nobody is trying to slow play their way to victory.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
it doesn't answer the question of do 2 horde armies get more time for their round then when 2 "elite" armies are matched up against each other?

Exactly. If hordes deserve extra time then what happens in a horde mirror match? By demanding more than 50% of the time you're implicitly saying that if you ever play another horde army the game can not finish.

 Peregrine wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
it doesn't answer the question of do 2 horde armies get more time for their round then when 2 "elite" armies are matched up against each other?

Exactly. If hordes deserve extra time then what happens in a horde mirror match? By demanding more than 50% of the time you're implicitly saying that if you ever play another horde army the game can not finish.

Or two horde armies would get the same time because they are equal in set up and if the game doesn't finish it doesn't finish....kind of like how it is right now.

SemperMortis wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
How do I ensure equality? 1: but not using Chess clocks which are designed to be used by two people with THE EXACT SAME ARMIES. 2: If you really want them, then give Horde armies more time, how much is debatable and 3: Just flat out Ban Horde armies and then watch as Most Ork players, nidz and IG armies stop showing up to events.

You ensure equality by being unequal? 1) Warmahordes uses chess clocks but don't have the exact same armies. In fact the armies can vary greatly in size between the 2 players. 2)That's not an answer it's an excuse and it doesn't answer the question of do 2 horde armies get more time for their round then when 2 "elite" armies are matched up against each other? 3)There are people in this very thread saying that they use horde armies and a clock without having problems. Why should we ban them?

Have you even tried using a chess clock?

Warmahordes plays with what? less then 20 models on average? 40-50 at the absolute most? I honestly don't know ive never paid attention to that game. I highly doubt the difference between armies is 200+ models.

The difference between Warmahordes and 40k seems be that the horde army players in WMH aren't whiney babies who demand special treatment. They know they're at a disadvantage by taking large armies but practice till they know their army inside and out in order to compete at the same level.

If you KNOW theres a time constraint at an event and you still choose to play a horde then have some accountability rather than whinging and demanding more time because you made a difficult choice.

Anyway, I play horde nids all the time an never have a problem with games lasting longer than usual.

Rule #1 my friend.

If this becomes a thing, I will pass the clock anytime my opponent touches even a single dice, book or army list page. This is a piss poor excuse of a solution, implemented by a group of TO's who can not or will not effectively judge/control their events. As others have said, it's amazing that people suddenly learn to play fast when a judge is watching. Start handing out meaningful penalties to habitual offenders and this stuff will stop itself.

It doesn't matter how many more models 40K has v Warmachine. That's a matter of how much time is given to each side. Each game is given a certain amount of time to play a round at an event. You deserve no more time than me regardless of who is playing what army. We each know how long the round is and how much time you are entitled to (both are the same as me). If you can't play your army to your satisfaction at your current ability then you can either modify your army or practice with it until you can use it to your satisfaction.

You seem to be ignoring the other posters who say that they run horde armies with no problem on a chess clock. If others can run their armies within the time limit then you should be able to do so as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Quickfuze- That is as childish a response as I can imagine. It's the equivalent to saying "I don't like that rule so I'm going to do everything that I can to sabatage it." Why not try playing the rule as it's supposed to be played and not be TFG about it?

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
It doesn't matter how many more models 40K has v Warmachine. That's a matter of how much time is given to each side. Each game is given a certain amount of time to play a round at an event. You deserve no more time than me regardless of who is playing what army. We each know how long the round is and how much time you are entitled to (both are the same as me). If you can't play your army to your satisfaction at your current ability then you can either modify your army or practice with it until you can use it to your satisfaction.

You seem to be ignoring the other posters who say that they run horde armies with no problem on a chess clock. If others can run their armies within the time limit then you should be able to do so as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Quickfuze- That is as childish a response as I can imagine. It's the equivalent to saying "I don't like that rule so I'm going to do everything that I can to sabatage it." Why not try playing the rule as it's supposed to be played and not be TFG about it?

No chess clocks is a childish response to an inability to accept responsibility for running a controlled fair event. However, just like every other rule in the game I will simply maximize it's benefit to me, within the limits of the rule. Next.

Let me ask you, how would you monitor an event that has say 8 tables to make sure that no one is using more time than necessary? Let's leave aside the question of how much time is fair for each player.

I would be interested in the wording of the rule that ITC is using on how clock operation is to be done. I've heard that the whole clock issue is optional for events in any case.

Found this from the ITC site: "It is each player’s right to pass the time to his opponent whenever they are making an action or spending time making a decision."

I would like to add that it is each players right to make as much of a donkey of themselves as they like as well. Most people are reasonable and play that way but there is always TFG floating around at some events.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Let me ask you, how would you monitor an event that has say 8 tables to make sure that no one is using more time than necessary? Let's leave aside the question of how much time is fair for each player.

I would be interested in the wording of the rule that ITC is using on how clock operation is to be done. I've heard that the whole clock issue is optional for events in any case.

Found this from the ITC site: "It is each player’s right to pass the time to his opponent whenever they are making an action or spending time making a decision."

I would like to add that it is each players right to make as much of a donkey of themselves as they like as well. Most people are reasonable and play that way but there is always TFG floating around at some events.

First, I would look to experts on how they control gaming and "cheating". I would look at Vegas and the Pitboss dynamic. Can you effectively have a TO for every table? No, but you if you pod your tables instead of the traditional convention line set up, a single TO can effectively monitor 4 to 6 tables. So who should he watch? Well again lets look at math, using a 3 hour round time limit (for sake of ease of the math) that breaks down to 1.5 hours per player, or 15 minutes per player turn. By the one hour mark, the game should be complete of two full player rounds. Is that hard cap, no because we know the later rounds will go faster, but within a reasonable window of that 1 hour mark/2nd turn complete objective. If you have a table is at the top of turn 2 still, well this is an indicator of the table the TO should be monitoring.

"Well what about horde?" What about it? You gain no additional benefit from bringing more models. Learn to play your army effectively to meet the requirement, or play a different army/list. When people stop bouncing around to the next powercreep army they will start to learn their army inside and out. I know plenty of Gaunt horde Nid players who have no issue in accomplishing a 6 turn game.

The main issue at smaller venues is the TO's are not dedicated to the event. Often it is a shop owner/employee who is also trying to run the store, or play in the event also. Or they just hover at the computer until called for, or talking with their favorite locals in the event. TO's need to run events; period.

Let's not bag on player groups here. That's still a Rule #1 violation.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
It doesn't matter how many more models 40K has v Warmachine. That's a matter of how much time is given to each side. Each game is given a certain amount of time to play a round at an event. You deserve no more time than me regardless of who is playing what army. We each know how long the round is and how much time you are entitled to (both are the same as me). If you can't play your army to your satisfaction at your current ability then you can either modify your army or practice with it until you can use it to your satisfaction.

You seem to be ignoring the other posters who say that they run horde armies with no problem on a chess clock. If others can run their armies within the time limit then you should be able to do so as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Quickfuze- That is as childish a response as I can imagine. It's the equivalent to saying "I don't like that rule so I'm going to do everything that I can to sabatage it." Why not try playing the rule as it's supposed to be played and not be TFG about it?

You seem to not understand the difference between a fact and anecdotal evidence. I can go find 20-30 Ork or Nid players who say the opposite, Mob rule (Pun intended) does not determine who is right and who is wrong. The actual facts here are that an army with several time as many models then the other army will take longer to play. To counter that nonsensical argument that "well they need to avoid net lists with lots of models then" well, GW designed the game and set it up so I need to take 3 infantry squads of Boyz or Grotz to even fill out a basic list, and guess what? 3 full squads by themselves are 30-90 models, Ohh they also incentivized me to take the maximum amount with leadership and attack bonuses. Same thing for Grotz. Those of us who compete in tournaments have found that even 90 isn't enough because of all the cheese being thrown around the game right now so go figure, we bring more models to try and win. But lets get away from just the fact that the Ork army has been built from the start of the game as a horde army and get back to the basics of what a chess clock is used for.

In a game of chess you have 2 opposing sides with the exact same models, the exact same moves and the only inherent benefit in the entire game is that white pieces get to go first. The time clock in this situation is inherently fair because nobody can use it as an advantage over the other beyond playing as fast as physically possible to wrong foot your opponent. In a game of 40k a chess clock is inherently unfair because as pointed out, some armies require significantly more models to play.

I mean I could keep on writing how this is inherently a nerf to horde armies brought about by gamers not wanting to have to change their Anti-vehicle/monster net lists to adjust to a different meta and as a way to force players with horde armies to rush and make more mistakes but I think it would honestly be a waste since you don't care about my opinion and merely want your Army to do better by nerfing others.

Stupid Idea. Not going to fix anything.

I understand the difference between facts and anecdotes quite well thank you. You keep saying that it is a fact that the clock is a disadvantage to horde type armies. I'm merely pointing out that this fact isn't always true. Using counter examples to show that a hypothesis is not true is a valid form of argument.
Just because you (not just you personally) say that you can not play the game at a certain tempo doesn't mean that the game should be changed to suit your play speed. You are choosing your army composition and, theoretically, you should be able to play it within a certain time limit. You do not have the right to more time than I do just because of your decision about army composition.
Should the event consider army size? Definitely but then you would still want a bigger share of the clock due to your hordes' status.
A clock may not be the solution but it is an attempt at a solution.

 quickfuze wrote:
If this becomes a thing, I will pass the clock anytime my opponent touches even a single dice, book or army list page. This is a piss poor excuse of a solution, implemented by a group of TO's who can not or will not effectively judge/control their events. As others have said, it's amazing that people suddenly learn to play fast when a judge is watching. Start handing out meaningful penalties to habitual offenders and this stuff will stop itself.

That's a great attitude. Actively sabotage it and be TFG instead of having an open mind about it. There are only so many judges.

It works for Chess because the two sides are identical. Thus any slowness in play is exclusively down to the player themselves. It doesn't take more time to move black pieces than it does to move white pieces.

It will absolutely take more time for my Ork army to move and attack than my opponent's Custodes army. I cannot get around that; if we both play equally quickly, I will always be at a time disadvantage.

I understand that this is a response to players intentionally playing slow but all this serves to do is penalise some armies and promote others.

 Glane wrote:
It works for Chess because the two sides are identical. Thus any slowness in play is exclusively down to the player themselves. It doesn't take more time to move black pieces than it does to move white pieces.

It will absolutely take more time for my Ork army to move and attack than my opponent's Custodes army. I cannot get around that; if we both play equally quickly, I will always be at a time disadvantage.

I understand that this is a response to players intentionally playing slow but all this serves to do is penalise some armies and promote others.

This I completely agree with. A very valid reason not to implement this nonsense. However, if it is used,there should be no additional time awarded to a horde army.

If it only works when 2 sides are identical then someone please explain how/why it works so well for the Warmahordes community.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
If it only works when 2 sides are identical then someone please explain how/why it works so well for the Warmahordes community.

Low model count smaller scale game with rules that work.

 Lance845 wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
If it only works when 2 sides are identical then someone please explain how/why it works so well for the Warmahordes community.

Low model count smaller scale game with rules that work.

You need to take into account that WMH clocks have less time to be played in (each player has an hour total) and the rules interactions and gameplay is far more complex and precise than 40k. You can spend a good 5 mins or so at the start of your turn just deciding how to allocate focus or planning your moves.

Off clock it takes about as much time to play a game of Warmahordes after deployment etc as it does to play a 2000pts 40k game because 40k requires less intensive thinking.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
If it only works when 2 sides are identical then someone please explain how/why it works so well for the Warmahordes community.

Low model count smaller scale game with rules that work.

You need to take into account ...

No i dont. Chess has way more tactical planning and intense thinking then 40k. Just because 40k is a tactical vacuum and wmh has actual tactical game play doesnt mean that competitive players on a clock cant plan their moves several turns in advance with contingencies for what their opponent may do.

The argument that a horde army player deserves more time than his opponent is such a silly one, I'm surprised it keeps cropping up.

Imagine going to a tournament that has a 2.5 hour time limit for games. You bring your horde army. You know that when YOU play your army it takes 1.75 hours to move and roll everything, rather than 1.25. ALAS! your first opponent is all infantry guard, and your second is all Orc boys, your third is a foot-slogging Necron list. Suddenly it seems as though YOU are the slow player causing every game to end on turn 3. Could it be that YOU are the reason we would want to have chess clocks? And would it shock us to learn that you don't like them?

IF there is a problem, it lies squarely with the total time allotted to play the game. And I agree that perhaps it should be more like 3 or 3.5 hours to allow armies with more models more time. But to claim that you DERSERVE more time than your opponent because of the army you voluntarily brought to the event is ridiculous. When an event advertises its format, you will know if you are capable of participating with your army. If not, you should choose a different one, or refrain from participating.

By far the easiest solution is to let every player have half the total time, and to enforce it. I'm open to any solution that does that. Chess clocks are fun and easy to learn and use. They don't work perfectly but they are still effective. I am entitled to be able to play as much of the game as you are. You don't deserve more time than me. Perhaps I play a list with less models precisely because i'm a slower player and like not to be so rushed? What right do you have to take the bulk of the time in our game? How is that equitable?

 Lance845 wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
If it only works when 2 sides are identical then someone please explain how/why it works so well for the Warmahordes community.

Low model count smaller scale game with rules that work.

You need to take into account ...

No i dont. Chess has way more tactical planning and intense thinking then 40k. Just because 40k is a tactical vacuum and wmh has actual tactical game play doesnt mean that competitive players on a clock cant plan their moves several turns in advance with contingencies for what their opponent may do.

Except thats not true. You don't know what the dice will do and its hard to think about your turn in advance while your opponent is constantly changing the shape of the game board.

Comparing chess to 40k (or any wargame really) is a false equivelence anyway. Maybe if white got to move all its pieces before black did you'd have a point of comparison. Or if pawns got could take models directly in front of them when within 2 squares if the king. Or if rooks could pick up pawns and push them two squares diectly away and the queen can make all the bishops move vertically and horizontally once per game.

Cryogenicman wrote:
The argument that a horde army player deserves more time than his opponent is such a silly one, I'm surprised it keeps cropping up.

Imagine going to a tournament that has a 2.5 hour time limit for games. You bring your horde army. You know that when YOU play your army it takes 1.75 hours to move and roll everything, rather than 1.25. ALAS! your first opponent is all infantry guard, and your second is all Orc boys, your third is a foot-slogging Necron list. Suddenly it seems as though YOU are the slow player causing every game to end on turn 3. Could it be that YOU are the reason we would want to have chess clocks? And would it shock us to learn that you don't like them?

IF there is a problem, it lies squarely with the total time allotted to play the game. And I agree that perhaps it should be more like 3 or 3.5 hours to allow armies with more models more time. But to claim that you DERSERVE more time than your opponent because of the army you voluntarily brought to the event is ridiculous. When an event advertises its format, you will know if you are capable of participating with your army. If not, you should choose a different one, or refrain from participating.

By far the easiest solution is to let every player have half the total time, and to enforce it. I'm open to any solution that does that. Chess clocks are fun and easy to learn and use. They don't work perfectly but they are still effective. I am entitled to be able to play as much of the game as you are. You don't deserve more time than me. Perhaps I play a list with less models precisely because i'm a slower player and like not to be so rushed? What right do you have to take the bulk of the time in our game? How is that equitable?

Right, great points, So what you are saying is that events with these clocks should just exclude Ork armies right now until our codex comes out because horde is literally the only way to play and have a chance at victory. Even the Gargantuan squiggoth list still had over 100 models.

So again, great idea in theory, crap in practice because some of us have to take ridiculous numbers in order to be competitive. NOW on the other hand, I'll be happy to sign up for Time clocks if you convince GW to unfeth the other 4/5ths of our index/codex so I can actually start playing with the rest of my army that has been collecting dust since 8th dropped.

You're comparing the wrong things.

You see what the enemy does. You react. A chess piece moves you react and try to predict how your move will make them act.

If they move all their pieces then you have more time to plan and narrow your plans as the new state of the board takes shape. Unless you are litterally staring at the floor during your opponents turn you should be planning your next moves.

I think people saying horde armies will be at a disadvantage with chess clocks are wrong. If you know your army and move along at a good pace there is no reason you will run out of time. Also it's the player's decision to play a horde army so splitting time equally isn't unfair to anyone. No player should be entitled to more time than another just because of their army choice.

I just looked something up and found an interesting fact. In international chess events each player gets 2 hours to make 40 moves and then an additional hour for their next 20 moves. So it can take up to 6 hours total for a single chess game.

So much for the argument that a low model count means you use less time.

If your argument is that the rules make 40K hard to play in a reasonable time then the problem won't be solved by any means until the rules get fixed. So to all you TOs just pack up your events and wait for GW to fix everything.

How about a little personal responsibility? Learn the rules for your army and the general rules for the game. If you're unsure about the resolution of a rule contact the TO in advance. If you move slowly then practice. After that most things should take care of themselves.

dkoz wrote:
I think people saying horde armies will be at a disadvantage with chess clocks are wrong. If you know your army and move along at a good pace there is no reason you will run out of time. Also it's the player's decision to play a horde army so splitting time equally isn't unfair to anyone. No player should be entitled to more time than another just because of their army choice.

Take two steps back and think about this logically. Does it take more time to move 20 models or 200 models. If you think its the same then I can't even have a discussion with you on this subject since we can't even agree on basic facts.