PDA

View Full Version : Warhammer Fantasy Campaign/League rules 2012 season



IcedCrow
18-04-2012, 11:50
I finished what should be the final draft of my group's 2012 season rules for our campaign/league. (It is a hybrid competitive league with campaign elements)

For those interested in such endeavors, please check out the document.

http://warhammer.chrisnye.net/Files/2012_Season.pdf

MOMUS
18-04-2012, 12:21
Very nice icedcrow. :yes:


Regarding the unit cap dilemma, why not a point cap on units? I see it used alot here in the UK.

I like that the onus is on the players to make their lists 'un-silly', it would be reflected in the sportsmanships scores. So if you were placed more importance on sports scores it could help sway peoples list building.

In a tourney im playing in at the moment, sportsman scores (total) decide draws.

IcedCrow
18-04-2012, 12:37
Point caps on units are still not really useful I think.... mainly because again let's just say units are capped at 400 points (number out of the air). For goblins or skaven, that's fine. Because you can still go overboard, but for ogres, that would be felt more.

I don't want to have to go through each army book and comp their unit points either, so to address unit size being stupid AND to bring back the importance of flanks and see some semblence of cavalry again, we do the disruption breaks steadfast. Combined with units giving half their points again, the stupid large units are disappearing because of that, which is what was intended.

The end result is I don't have to try to cap unit size, which I think is an exercise in futility for me because it's almost impossible to get to work without a lot of hard feelings from people.

Sportsmanship scores are also very arbitrary, which is why we don't use them. People ding others on these scores for an advantage often, and after years of running tournaments, while I recognize and appreciate those scores, I find that measuring them is not honestly done a lot of the time. Also I have had many armies called "cheesy and broken" because I beat the player, and if I post the list on here it gets laughed at for being weak, so we have the syndrome of "if it beats me it must be cheesy" that I don't want introduced into scoring.

We do have a best sportsmanship award at the end though, voted on by all players =)

Thank you for the comments!

Godswildcard
18-04-2012, 12:41
I picked up the rules packet last night at a local store! Really looking forward to playing in this one!

IcedCrow
18-04-2012, 12:49
I hope it was the right version =) She had a couple versions (she hadn't thrown the older one out). Make sure you check the one online for the latest. Looking forward to some games~ \m/

Akkaryn
18-04-2012, 14:13
I quite like the rules. But the watch tower rules amazed me. 10 MI will obliterate any 20 man sized unit of 20/25 man unit.

Gradek
18-04-2012, 14:34
Question on the frowned upon builds (where you gave Khalida/Archers as an example). Since that one is relatively weak when compared to some others, shouldn't you spell them out so that no one is caught off guard. Do these builds include Chosenstars with FoTG, dual hydra DE lists (which can be brutal at 2000 points), Siren Song Demon lists, etc.

IcedCrow
18-04-2012, 14:42
I have no desire to go through and make a comp packet. I'm leaving it up to the players to know what's considered dirty and what's not. Usually a dirty list is one gleaned off of the internet somewhere. If a player shows up with a dirty list, they will be talked to offlist about toning things down. "A" grade lists are acceptable, this is partially a competition after all. "A++" net lists that you'd see at an Ard Boyz are not because those go beyond competition and into breaking the math of the game.

The Khalida list may not be the dirtiest of the dirty, but it is a style of list that we don't want to see because it makes the game very one dimensional. Teclis will be present as it is... so I've already got my hands full keeping an eye on him (the players voted to keep the special characters and not ban anything, and therefore it will be done)

Right now the roster of guys and gals playing understand and are all for self-policing and not showing up with lists that are designed to exploit loop holes or bad balance. As we gain new players who may be inclined to do that, we will deal with it on a case by case basis.

Making a comp packet is draining, frustrating, and brings about bad feelings. Going through and naming all of the builds is also draining, and it saps the fun out of things for me.

As to the watch tower rules... people hate the watch tower because people can be gits and lock a unit inside there that is almost mathematically impossible to break out. There are never going to be perfect rules. Capping the unit out at 20 infantry or 10 monsters in the watch tower is also not perfect, but solves the majority of issues that I have seen with it. As such, I like them.

I go into these not wanting to make a ton of changes, and also realizing that for any rule one creates to shore up a weakness, a tricky player can find two loop holes anyway. If a player sneaks in and shows up with A++ netlists regardless of being asked not to, it will be dealt with on a case by case basis. It is my sincere hope that this does not happen and I'm not going to be cynical about it and expect someone to be dirty, rather I'm going to hope that positive reinforcement keeps things running smoothly.

Akkaryn
18-04-2012, 14:46
I would personally use the rulebook precidented rule where MI count as 3 so it would be 20 and 6.

IcedCrow
18-04-2012, 14:49
I'd also like to see if other groups would like to collaborate and run side by side with us and have an overall standing for fun =)

IcedCrow
18-04-2012, 14:50
I would personally use the rulebook precidented rule where MI count as 3 so it would be 20 and 6.

So 6 monstrous Infantry in the tower? Hmmmm. That's not a bad idea. We currently have no ogre players but I was not clear on the rulebook handling it and I like that much more. Thank you for that input Akkaryn.

Akkaryn
18-04-2012, 15:38
If you're looking for the details its in the section of the rulebook about the attacking party when assaulting a building.

IcedCrow
18-04-2012, 15:42
Got it. I'll be sure and work that in. Thanks again for that.

Snowflake
18-04-2012, 15:47
snip

Sportsmanship scores are also very arbitrary, which is why we don't use them. People ding others on these scores for an advantage often, and after years of running tournaments, while I recognize and appreciate those scores, I find that measuring them is not honestly done a lot of the time. Also I have had many armies called "cheesy and broken" because I beat the player, and if I post the list on here it gets laughed at for being weak, so we have the syndrome of "if it beats me it must be cheesy" that I don't want introduced into scoring.

We do have a best sportsmanship award at the end though, voted on by all players =)

Thank you for the comments!

So true. Sports scores are a great concept that falls apart in reality (like many great concepts, really). In practice, there are lots and lots of players who will knock their opponent's sports score for no reason at all, just so they gain an advantage. There are even more who knock the score when they lose, convincing themselves that they lost to a cheesy list.

Making people write down the reasons why they give the sports score they give does help, but not really enough.