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.

There is some definite rock-paper-scissors aspects to 40K. That is great, and it requires some compromises, which is great. But is can also mean that some match ups are all but lost before they start. Army A destroys B, B destroys C, C destroys A. 

Anyway, I had an idea to allow for some flexibility in your army list.

Okay, I got this idea from Magic tournaments, please don't hold that against me.

In a magic tournament, you show up with your deck, and a 15 card 'sideboard'. Between any game, you may substitute cards on a 1-1 basis between your deck and your sideboard. Usually you only swap out 3-4 cards, if any. Your deck stays just about the same, but you can tweak it a bit against certain opponents.

What if a tournament was 1500 pts. And you were allowed a 300pts 'sideboard'. (the numbers can be changed). When you discover the army you will be facing, you can swap out any models on a point for point basis. (Or after you see their army list...maybe)
This does not let you totally change your army, but will allow small adjustments.

I would say that the total cost of the model the 'trade' value, not just the differences. IOW, you swap models, not wargear, upgrades, etc.

Comments? I think this could add another level of strategy to the game; but I have little tournament experience.

I've played in a couple of tournaments like this. I think it's interesting, but I usually wind up using the same list for all my games anyway.

I think that this idea undermines one of the most fun aspects of the tournament process - Building a true "take all comers" list.  Having the ability to modify your army list from game to game would make it much easier to cheat and also would be the source of many new conflicts in my opinion.  You are right that certain army configurations don't stand up well to others, but just about any army can build a deadly list that can take on any other army.  List composition is a huge part of the game, and having a sideboard would be an easy fix, that would cause problems later.

It is an interesting idea but leads to certain armies (the ones with the most options) getting an advantage over the others.

Think about a drop pod list. How much can they really swap arround?
How about an IW list? Which wins out.

It would be a really nice idea, but you would see armies gearing up for the anit anit all the time. 300 - 400 points could really turn the tide in a army. I have face the falcon simi heavy list and it died. Now had he had a side board, I would be seeing about two units of reapers looking at my foot sloggin marines. Post before nailed it thou being how much can one army really change out. Idea is to catch your enemy off guard with your list and if he did not plan for it, oh well because you now have a crushing victory.

I don't like the idea either. For one thing, it leads to an endless stream of swaps (Player 1: Removes Land Raider. P2: Removes Dev Squad. P1: Puts Land Raider back in. P2: Puts Dev Squad back in. P1: Removes Land Raider).

I'd rather just see the rules for Drop Pods, Lysander Wing, Falcons of Doom, and Nidzilla adjusted so that a well-crafted take all-comers list stands a fair shot against them.

I was thinking how much Paintball could benefit from the turn based system from Chutes and Ladders

Seriously, why are people trying to compare games that have nothing to do with each other like magic and 40k

No one is comparing the two games. Something in one, sparked an idea for another. Happens in life all the time.

There would be no swapping, you find out who your opponent is, you make your selection, he makes his selection, you play.

I have heard it lets people change too much, and that it won't change anything.... not sure what that means.

Yes, 300 points is a lot, until you actually try and use it. Try it for your current army of choice. If you knew you were facing a Tau army, what changes would you make. If you knew you were facing Nids, what changes. Orks, what changes, Chaos what changes.
Now, remember that *all* of these changes have to be less than 300pts total


But is that really the idea? to win because he didn't think of your gimmick? It isnt' like they can totally change their army, it is just a matter of making small tweaks.

Posted By IntoTheRain on 04/19/2007 9:45 PM
I was thinking how much Paintball could benefit from the turn based system from Chutes and Ladders

 

That made laugh.

Even better, you could combine paintball and 40k!  Team A goes first, can move 6 feet and take one shot.  If they're within 6 feet of the enemy they can then move to point blank range and punch him in the nose!

They did somehting similar to this in the US GT's I want to say 5 or 6 years ago. They had an 250pts as an addition to your standard army that got used in a couple of games. It gave me a chance to throw in some Blood Claw bikers for no other reason then the hell of it.

It sounds like an interesting idea, as long as you have it listed what your additional points are already. As opposed to just taking any units from the codex on a game by game basis.

Posted By Mnemoch on 04/20/2007 12:08 AM

Posted By IntoTheRain on 04/19/2007 9:45 PM
I was thinking how much Paintball could benefit from the turn based system from Chutes and Ladders

 

That made laugh.

Even better, you could combine paintball and 40k!  Team A goes first, can move 6 feet and take one shot.  If they're within 6 feet of the enemy they can then move to point blank range and punch him in the nose!

But only up to 24 ft.  Or they could shoot two times up to 12 feet.  I think you would see a huge drop in the sale of paintballs. 

Oh yeah, of course. You have your (lets say) 1500 pt army, and your 300pt sideboard. That is it. You can switch between games if you want, but only from those models.

At the first GT I attended (Baltimore 2001), you had a 1200pt ?core? list, and two 500pt additions. Each 1700pt and the full 2200pt list together had to fit into a legal force org chart. The full 2200pts was judged for painting and composition. In each game you chose which 1700pt list you would field. In the 4th game you got the other 500pts as Reserves. In the 6th game you got one unit coming onto the table each turn after the first- either a unit from your other 500pts, or a unit which had already been killed from those on the table.

There was another GT after that that allowed 1550 point base army and two 300 point "sideboards".  All games were 1850 points, so you had to choose which 300 point add-on you would use, and the last game you played all 2150 points. 

It is not easy to find the units that add up to 300 points that are diametrically opposed.  In my marine list, if I remember correctly, my 2 300 point blocks were:

2 pred annihilators w/ lascannon sponsons, ea @ 300 points

2x3 attack bike squadrons @ 300 points

Actually, the hardest part of 40k paintball would be having to stand perfectly still waiving your weapons above your head and shouting while your opponents take their turns!

Jesus, some people are only too willing to gak on a new idea they are unfamiliar idea. It looks like a good idea in theory. But I would agree with some that it could be abused in theory. 300 pts is a lot for a guard, ork, tau, nid and eldar player. It might be more balanced it it was 150 or 200 pts. 300 just seems like too large a percentage that could definatively alter the result of a game. And props to you mate (I've never played magic) for looking for alternative ideas to balance the game and make it more reasonable. I'll not that I've never played a tournie myself, largely for the reasons above. Not a fan of tourning my enjoyabel hobby into a cut throat enterprise which is why I stay the hell out of the kitchen.

I don't know.  It seems to me a lot of tourney's have this kind of a sideboard built in.  Before I took a break from 40k,1500 points was a standard game.  If you wanted smaller,you played 1000,bigger 2000.   Now,you see 1700,1750,and 1850 games,ie:a 1500 game with a few points added to cover up weaknesses in your 1500 list.

If I was going to make a change in the 40k tourney format based on a card game,I would actually have 40k tourney's take on more of the form of Raw Deal tourneys.  Raw Deal has a "diversity rule."  After the prelims,when doing the cuts to see who makes it to the elimination rounds,there's a rule that states that you can't have two decks of the same type make the elimination bracket.  Also,no two decks of the same type can play each other in the prelims,either.  This rule encourages people to play less powerful/cheesey/popular deck types,as only one of those decks is going to make it to the finals.  Conversely,if you're going to play a popular tourney option,take Tyranids in 40k,you'd better make sure your 'nid list is better than everybody else's 'nid list or you're going to be going home early.