[Plainville MA] Feast of Blades Qualifier - 2000pt 40k 6th Edition Tourn - 8/4

[Benjamin]

There are some things I like... but...

Why are 2 of the 3 missions set up with Vanguard Deployment? I love the diagonal deployment, but I love variety more.

Why are there so many misspellings? I'm by no means a perfectionist, but that packet was brutal.

[Sir_Prometheus]

The 6th ed missions have the virtue that the "dead zone" is always 24".  But can you see doing the short table edge deployment in a tournament, with every table end to end?  Everyone will have to be crossing each other around the end of the lane just to deploy!  I'm too lazy for this business.

To be clear, non-scoring units can still hold table quarters and zones, right?  They keep on saying "scoring points value" but seems to just be a a new way to say victory points, that no longer exist. 

I like warlord traits because they're good for big beefy HQs, which is what I got, but like everything else, I hate random tables, so it's probably good they're gone. 

[Benjamin]

The 6th ed missions have the virtue that the "dead zone" is always 24".  But can you see doing the short table edge deployment in a tournament, with every table end to end?  Everyone will have to be crossing each other around the end of the lane just to deploy!  I'm too lazy for this business.

I agree the short edge is definitely a bad deployment for tournaments. But what about the old Spearhead or Pitched Battle deployments? They're still viable.

[Sir_Prometheus]

Breaks the 24" rule.  I value that consistency.  Besides, I remember some people complaining about fitting all their hordes in spearhead. 

The "stormbreaker" bonus condition needs clarification. 

[Benjamin]

Breaks the 24" rule.

What 24" rule?

[Sir_Prometheus]

the 24" deadzone?

[Benjamin]

the 24" deadzone?

Yes. Where is that rule?

[Sir_Prometheus]

I suppose, technically, I should have said "principle".  All the new missions have a nice, even, consistent 24" deadzone, and it's a "principle" I would like to maintain, including for generic BG tournaments.

You said "why no spearhead" and that's why.  IMHO.  It's not like I wrote the missions. 

[andalucien]

Ohh, I didn't see they added a comment that they were removing warlord traits.  I just saw that it wasn't mentioned in the main post and assumed they'd edited the post.  My bad!  warlord traits are still out...

Sigh.  I kind of like the warlord traits. 

[andalucien]

I'm kind of disappointed that everyone seems to have shot down the short edge deployment before even trying it.  It seemed like a way to add some freshness into the deployment.   Now that there's no more old Dawn of War, there's just not much difference in the other deployments.

What's the big deal about putting models on the other side of the table?  It happens all the time during a game anyway.  I mean, there are frequently missions where the primary objective is to have units in the other guy's deployment zones.  And, full reserve armies used to completely ignore deployment zones anyway.   I just don't see the pain points here...

[PhoenixFire]

I'm kind of disappointed that everyone seems to have shot down the short edge deployment before even trying it.  It seemed like a way to add some freshness into the deployment.   Now that there's no more old Dawn of War, there's just not much difference in the other deployments.

What's the big deal about putting models on the other side of the table?  It happens all the time during a game anyway.  I mean, there are frequently missions where the primary objective is to have units in the other guy's deployment zones.  And, full reserve armies used to completely ignore deployment zones anyway.   I just don't see the pain points here...

Personally i look forward to trying the short edge deployment, it will be a boost to shooting armys and make vehicles more uusefull in 6th edition by prolonging the enevitable assualt at least another turn.

As far as dawn of war it does tend to hurt my shooting armies at least the randomness of it gives me a chance to have it take effect later instead of turn 1 where shooting is most usefull

[Benjamin]

I'm kind of disappointed that everyone seems to have shot down the short edge deployment before even trying it.

You've been to a tournament at BG before, yes? The tables are put short-end to short-end. It is completely unfeasible. The deployment itself is fine, but it will not currently work at a BG tournament.

[Sir_Prometheus]

I think like 90% of tournaments have the table ends pressed together.

I concur.  Like the deployment, think it's fine, but it's inclusion is a sign that GW doesn't give a flying F about tournaments.

Buy our models, paint them.  Buy our dooks, read them.  We're done. 

[PhoenixFire]

I'm kind of disappointed that everyone seems to have shot down the short edge deployment before even trying it.

You've been to a tournament at BG before, yes? The tables are put short-end to short-end. It is completely unfeasible. The deployment itself is fine, but it will not currently work at a BG tournament.

It really is a shame Ben,

As i've said before i really think it would make for interesting games and would level the playing field for vehicles and shooting armies in a 6th edition that is assault heavy.

That being said your point is a valid one Ben, it will likely never work because 4 people will be shoulder to shoulder on the same edge and shows once again that people at GW don't actually play games or visit stores and tournaments.

and in my opinion is another aspect of the game that while MEANT to balance the game (my aforementioned arguement of it being balancing for vehicles/shooting) it is HARD to implement just like fortifications at tournaments, being forced to use and by extension BUY flyers, etc

the 6th edition book is like a shopping cart with wobbly wheels, you take away one aspect (wheel) and the whole thing swings out of balance...

take away short deployment = better for assault armies
take away double force org = some armies lose out
take away fortifications = people lose out on anti-air capability

feast of blades taking out warlord traits, mysterious forests and random relic effects... well that doesn't really swing the whole shebang out of whack because it effects everyone

[Benjamin]

As i've said before i really think it would make for interesting games and would level the playing field for vehicles and shooting armies in a 6th edition that is assault heavy.

Sam and I have an idea we need to test out, about how side-deployment can make a BG tournament appearance, but it definitely needs to be tested. It'll either be a grand success or a really amusing failure. All in due time.