[Plainville MA] Battleground 40k Doubles Event - April 9th

[Dissimulation]

I'm pretty sure if you look through some of the codices you will encounter a few special characters of which the only consolation is that "At least there can only be 1 per army."

With a legion of 40kers out there it probably won't be too hard to sniff them out. However, Rules are rules. Besides everyone probably has their lists turned in already right?

[Bill]

I don't think it will be an issue and TBH I really do not care what people bring. I just want Chase to understand that there is a possibility to make some brutal combos which i think the spirit of the tourney wanted to avoid.

[Chase]

It should (will) probably be changed in the future to keep the Doubles events in line with what we want.  This time around, what's done is done.

Hopefully it's not too bad.

[GossWeapon]

I think it's even more broken with a wolf/wolf pairing because that's 4 HQs. Imagine 2 Logan Grimnars and 2 Ragnar Blackmanes. That's just a complete punch in the face.

not really.

[Grimwulfe]

Bill is correct in my line of thinking.  Do I agree with the consensus that it has the potential to create some really broken lists.  Yes I do.  My main reason for bringing it up is so that it can be addressed in future tournies. 

I have no plans whats so ever to run the same special character in my team but I had thought of it and realized it could be abused. 

Alley,

I would love to see the 4 of them on the table like Bill said thats alot of points and thats means less to shoot me with.

[Benjamin]

I think it would be nice (and solve some problems) by asking each team member to use a different codex. Something about that idea really spurs in me the idea of partnership, while disallowing two identical 1250 lists, which I do not believe is in the spirit of the event.

[Rurouni Benshin]

I think it would be nice (and solve some problems) by asking each team member to use a different codex. Something about that idea really spurs in me the idea of partnership, while disallowing two identical 1250 lists, which I do not believe is in the spirit of the event.

While there is a lot of merit in this suggestion, I think as long as a team doesn't abuse their codices, they should be allowed to play them together in this tournament.  Of course, how to go about policing them is another situation in of itself.  Derek and Chase put a lot of faith in their players not to abuse them, so maybe working on this on a case by case basis could bring further light to the subject.  However, I see the point in trying to prevent something like this from happening in the first place rather waiting for it to happen before doing anything.  Maybe Ben's right in requiring members to use different codices, and then if a team has a "worthy" idea of using the same codex, that it be brought to the "powers that be" for their approval first?

[Grimwulfe]

This is not the way to resolve the issue here.  Limiting a team to different codices is not the best option.  Defining well set guidelines is the best way. 

The overall goal is to have fun in a competitive way.  More and More BG tournies are starting to pull in people from farther and farther. This is good for the store as well as the tourny circuit.

To limit this by putting in TEAM combination limitations will hinder both of those. Working through it and finding these loop holes and addressing them as they arise is the best way.  A simple blurb saying that no 2 armies can have the same IC solves this issue very easily without limiting who or what I can play with.

[Benjamin]

"The overall goal is to have fun in a competitive way."

The overall goal is to have fun.

Singles tournaments should be most certainly competitive.

Doubles should be less formal. There's a pronounced emphasis on creativity. People show up in costume and have backstories.

There are 15 codices currently in use. Asking a team to pick two is placing a limit only on inflexibility.

[Ian Mulligan]

Its a tournament. It is competitive by its very definition.

[Ed]

Its a tournament. It is competitive by its very definition.

Haha, simple answers are the best.

[Benjamin]

Its a tournament. It is competitive by its very definition.

Yes, but the ultimate goal is to have fun, and there are different ways people do that.

Some people have fun by competing, some have fun just throwing dice and meeting people, and some have fun tagging along with a friend and learning how to play. All of those types of people are showing up. So you could be geared for competition and end up clubbing baby seals.

Saying the 40k Doubles tournament is competitive while taking place on the same day as the Colonial GT, I kind of go LOLWHUT?

Anyway, this all came up because I suggested partners play different codices. So how horrible of a person am I? Currently, there are 225 combinations of codices allowed. My suggestion leaves 210 combinations.

[Ian Mulligan]

Its a tournament: The purpose is to have fun, the goal is to win. I don't understand what you're saying.


If you don't think the BG doubles is a competitive event, you should look at the army lists that have taken the top 3 stops each time. I think a lot of people missed your memo.

[GossWeapon]

Why so serious about a doubles tournament? If you have ever done it before, you kind of realize how your team will perform ahead of time. If you lost and had a lot of fun then stay that way, if you went out for blood and placed then it worked for you keep it up. There's really little mystery to the game in this sense.

This is still just a game and you should pLay it however you typically do and just enjoy yourself.  Be that WAAC or beer and pretzels.  Expect some of both and a little of every flavor of army combinations.     

[Benjamin]

Goss, at the risk of you trolling  , I agree 100%.