PDA

View Full Version : Standardized tournament format idea



bossfearless
17-07-2012, 17:59
After reading another post on here talking about how ultra-competitive players tend to do poorly without their net lists and crutch units, I had a thought. This might be hard to implement, but if you had a few people with big collections it could work.


Standardized armies! The tournament format would focus on a small sized game (1000pts) in which everyone was given (or brought) the exact same army. That means that everything, down to the individual units' wargear and upgrades, is identical throughout the tournament and all the armies follow a pre-approved and tested list designed for balanced gameplay.

I know what some of you are thinking, that this would "take the fun out of the game." But it doesn't, it just takes out the Meta, which for many is what ruins the game.


The game format would be a mix of objectives and kill points, with fixed or no Warlord Traits (to minimize the "you only won because you have the XXX trait" arguments) and roughly symmetrical tables. With a mix of objective types, and no difference in table or army compositions, the game would be about nothing but the game itself and how well you play it. This means that your generalship and dice rolls would be the only thing determining how "good" of a player you are. The low points level would serve the dual purpose of making the format doable (since you'd need a couple well stocked guys to supply a bunch of armies for people who dont play that faction), and keeping the game small enough that tactics and movement become more central to gameplay (effective use of cover, no sacrificial units, no spam, no uber characters, smart deployment).

Obviously the players who are supplying the armies are going to be antsy about letting other people play with their minis. To that end, after every round each player will be responsible for turning in their loaned army to be counted and will not be allowed to leave on break until everything is accounted for. Each individual player will be held responsible for lost or stolen models, which will lead to everyone being really careful with their figures.


Does anyone else think that this idea, a tournament of pure skill, sounds like fun?

IcedCrow
17-07-2012, 18:04
A few years ago I held a "C" list event. It was specifically designed to test players' ability to play without any kind of netlisting or abusive combos. It was also a blast and most armies consisted of nothing but core elements from their list. There were a couple guys that scoffed at it for promoting "bad playing habits" but ... whatever. A lot of the local powergamers played in it and they had a good time as it was something different and challenged them. To them the big thing was that if everyone was at the same power level then it was ok.

The jist of that tournament was that you could only take one HQ and had to spend 50% of your points on core and you could not spam a non core unit at all barring basic transports. Lists had to be submitted before hand. We had like 18 players and a good mix of armies.

I was going to try for a "B" list event but around that time I got out of the hobby for a few years. "B" lists are a step up from the C lists above, with more spam allowed and more elites but not "A" difficulty.

"A" list events are what I do now which are a step underneath anything goes lists.

kendaop
17-07-2012, 18:11
I had thought about trying to organize something like this, but I was thinking about taking it one step further and randomly determining which players got which armies.

Lord Damocles
17-07-2012, 18:14
Does anyone else think that this idea, a tournament of pure skill, sounds like fun?
It's hardly 'pure skill'. You've removed the list-building element (some would argue that that's a skill in itself), but the players are still at the mercy of the dice; and to an extent the models - you can have two army lists which are exactly the same, but one of those armies can still be more effective than the other through modelling.


I think playing against the exact same army multiple times, on the exact same table, with the exact same mission would get pretty boring pretty quickly.

IcedCrow
17-07-2012, 18:15
It's hardly 'pure skill'. You've removed the list-building element (some would argue that that's a skill in itself), but the players are still at the mercy of the dice; and to an extent the models - you can have two army lists which are exactly the same, but one of those armies can still be more effective than the other through modelling.


I think playing against the exact same army multiple times, on the exact same table, with the exact same mission would get pretty boring pretty quickly.

THis is exactly why I dislike netlists ;)

owen matthew
17-07-2012, 20:10
Just play chess!