Polling the Next Warhams Tournament

[Benjamin]

I thought this would be a good opportunity to collect in one thread the community's preferences regarding the next official BG Warhammer tournament. The Megabattle takes a slot, then the Feast of Blades event.

I want to know where people are leaning, because as you have lots to digest learning a new system, there's even more effort in creating fun and challenging missions that don't rely on narrative ass-hattery or random rolls.

We have lots of new options to consider, and many degrees by which they could be applied. New missions, Warlord traits, Fortresses and of course, Allies.  I want to hear it all, so spitball away!

[Chase]

I'd like to see something generic (like 1750 or 1850) with whatever rules seem "good" or something wacky like 500 points v6.0

[Benjamin]

I would want the 500 Point tournament to be soon, within the next two Singles events. I just don't know if players would prefer the first tournament to be that or a bigger, balls-to-the-wall tournament.

[Chase]

I sort of think people will want to experiment with allies and other 6e shenanigans at first, but we'll see...

500 points, while obviously awesome, doesn't allow for much room to mess with different lists / allies / units.

The people have not yet spoken, however... 

[Sir_Prometheus]

I want at least one tournament with all the nonsense. Allies, flyers, two FOCs, fortifications, everything. If the feast of blades scratches that itch, then fine.

[PhoenixFire]

I've been wanting a 2k tournament all year, but now with all the new 6E rules (especially the double force org chart at the 2k+ level) i'd rather do something in the 1500-1750 range.

Like Chase said a 500pt tournament doesn't give enough room to try out allies, flyers or much of anything really

[Ian Mulligan]

1750-2000 no restrictions, plz.

[Achillius]

1750-2000 no restrictions, plz.

+1

[Benjamin]

There's a significant difference between 1750 and 2000 points, with the FOC doubling at 2000.

So you have to pick one or the other. People saying whole hog, that to me says 2000.

[the_trooper]

1750-2000 no restrictions, plz.

You mean, like play the rules according to the rules?

EDIT:

I'm not being a smart ass but isn't 6th edition come with all these rules and ignoring allies and flyers a lot like saying "ignore the rules for dangerous terrain because I don't like it"?

Allies, flyers and everything else contained in that book is how 6th edition is meant to be played.  Removing those rules will definitely have impacts on the newer codicies that were built with 6th in mind as well as 6th edition codecies coming up.

So why make house rules when we already have a pretty clear, clean set of rules?

[Sir_Prometheus]

I would like to point out the 2nd FOC almost exclusively helps the older, less powerful codexes.  The new codexes mostly have good selections in every slot, and very good troops.  Tyranids, Tau, and Eldar tend to have good picks stuffed in a heavy and elite selections, so a second FOC helps them all out.

So just remember, when you cry about the 2nd FOC, you're stomping on a nid player, again.  A Gk player doesn't care much. 

[andalucien]

In 5th edition we all DID just "ignore the rules for buildings because we don't like it".  Everybody just collectively decided that buildings were a pain in the butt and to treat them as impassible terrain - blatantly against the rulebook.  Also, tournaments did change to migrate away from the missions in the book, I haven't seen too many "capture and control" in tournaments in the past year or so.

So, I don't think there's a problem with a tournament tweaking the rules so that they work better.

However, I agree that we shouldn't knock things like allies, flyers, etc until we've tried them.  They're very different from the old rules so it's hard to really tell whether they balance against each other and whether they're fun.  Too early to start messing with what we have in the rulebook.

[andalucien]

Anyway, as for my vote, I am concerned that if we try to play 2k games with a new (and apparently slower) ruleset, without changing the time limits, we will have a LOT of games ending on turn 3. 

I'd vote for 1500, but with flyers and fortifications and allies.   Then move the point level up once people get used to the new rules, and IF it looks like the game will be as fast as the old game.

[keithb]

Having the FOC double generally helps people who have been playing longer as they have more stuff.  It also helps more point efficient codex's, which are usually not the older or xenos codexs.

I can't even come close to filling out my FOC for tyranids at 2000 points unless I deliberately make a bad list to do only that. 

[Sir_Prometheus]

I thought every nid player wanted some mix of 18 hive guard and zoanthropes?

Oh, btw, for the love of god, do not do any "mysterious" terrain or objectives.