Long convo with GW today.

[Sam Butler]

Before we rewrite the rules to make 40k into a different game, shouldn't we try to have an event with everything laid out as is?

I'm a strong supporter of this.

Me too!

because most folks may not have that many points of stuff?

[robpro]

Before we rewrite the rules to make 40k into a different game, shouldn't we try to have an event with everything laid out as is?

I'm a strong supporter of this.

Me too!

because most folks may not have that many points of stuff?

First off, I think that's not true. And secondly, what motivation is there to get a solid 3k army with a lord of war and cool buildings if you never get a chance to use them? I feel like we should give it a whirl and see if it's fun before we go through a lot of work to make BG 40K.

[Cryptognomicon]

Before we rewrite the rules to make 40k into a different game, shouldn't we try to have an event with everything laid out as is?

I'm a strong supporter of this.

Me too!

because most folks may not have that many points of stuff?

I admit I've been playing for a while so I have plenty of stuff but I'm always finding that I can't play what I want to play because I run out of points and would love to try a larger point game.

But there is no reason we can't do 2000 or 1850 with the rules as written with all the added stuff. But I think this topic has been debated back and forth for a few months now so I don't want to open that whole can of worms again.

I know Chase has said that in 2014 there is going to be a mix of events. Some with more narrowed down restrictions and possibly comp(maybe) and others where we can all go crazy using any and all resources, and other events somewhere in the middle. I'm looking forward to it all.

[Erich]

Before we rewrite the rules to make 40k into a different game, shouldn't we try to have an event with everything laid out as is?

I'm a strong supporter of this.

Me too!

because most folks may not have that many points of stuff?

First off, I think that's not true. And secondly, what motivation is there to get a solid 3k army with a lord of war and cool buildings if you never get a chance to use them? I feel like we should give it a whirl and see if it's fun before we go through a lot of work to make BG 40K.

This event should have an "all painted requirement".

[Sir_Prometheus]

I don't like comp because it hurts of hinders building certain kinds of armies.  You can't go all mech, you can't take more than 1 blah or blah. 

I agree. And I feel like in a lot of cases the comp is rather arbitrary based on the TO's personal preference.

Fortunately for you, Chase has never played and Keith doesn't anymore!  I can't think of anyone less biased. 

Before we rewrite the rules to make 40k into a different game, shouldn't we try to have an event with everything laid out as is?

I'm a strong supporter of this.

But you are, this weekend!

[Chase]

We can also do something like a $10.00 entrance fee so that people play for fun and not a crazy prize.

You know, 40k for 40k's sake.

[keithb]

I don't like comp because it hurts of hinders building certain kinds of armies.  You can't go all mech, you can't take more than 1 blah or blah.  I don't feel like this addresses the real problem.  Why is taking more than 1 of unit "Blah" a problem and let's address that.  Is it not priced enough, should it be AP3 instead of AP1, should it be nerfed and allow for a paid upgrade to make it how it is. I feel like the comp as these are listed are just a band aid. That's my two cents of course, but if I had to guess that might be why some people don't like it. 

The one that drives me bonkers is "No Named Characters"  I got into this game because of the story and the characters and Dark Angels were the chapter that got me into the game...trying playing that book with no characters and tell me how fun it is!

Many times it is a lot easier to do restrictions because everyone still knows what everything does.  Saying you can only have 2 riptides is a lot easier to do, because everyone knows what they are.  Saying that suddenly bolters are AP2 for some tournament but then the next they are AP3 makes it a lot more confusing.

Swede comp for fantasy restricts nothing, but adds a soft score to affect the battle to balance things.

Being upset because you can't take your "themed" 4 riptide list doesn't mean shit.   One would hope you appreciate that there are entire codexs that cannot hope to defeat that list.

the game is always better when both sides have a reasonable chance.

[andalucien]

Iknowiknowiknow...

We write a port of the 40k models to Warmachine rules!!!!
It would actually probably work really well, except for vehicles.  Warmachine has no concept of transports.  But then, neither does 40k 6th edition (Bam!).

[keithb]

Before we rewrite the rules to make 40k into a different game, shouldn't we try to have an event with everything laid out as is? Why not try a 3k tournament with everything allowed, (everything defined as codices, supplements, dataslates, escalation, and stronghold assault) as long as you have the rules and the models?

Sure, I don't have a problem with this.  It is just that when EVERY event is "as it is", many books have no chance.

I find it laughable that you are suggesting this, almost EVERY BG event is 40k AS IS.  What you want is to try the newest stuff.

40k as is, and as it has been, is poorly balanced, and it is just getting worse.

[Erich]

Iknowiknowiknow...

We write a port of the 40k models to Warmachine rules!!!!
It would actually probably work really well, except for vehicles.  Warmachine has no concept of transports.  But then, neither does 40k 6th edition (Bam!).

But then the game would just be matching combos and trying to pull them off.

[keithb]

I don't like comp because it hurts of hinders building certain kinds of armies.  You can't go all mech, you can't take more than 1 blah or blah. 

I agree. And I feel like in a lot of cases the comp is rather arbitrary based on the TO's personal preference.

Fortunately for you, Chase has never played and Keith doesn't anymore!  I can't think of anyone less biased. 

The other issue is that typically, comp get better as time goes on.  The first draft is rarely great, but as you get input from other sources it improves.  It is a self correcting system.

If you never contribute, your opinions will not be noted. 

Implementing comp can be difficult at first.  But unless you just want to see taudar and demons ruling the tables for the next 2 years, it is a good idea to start somewhere.

[keithb]

Iknowiknowiknow...

We write a port of the 40k models to Warmachine rules!!!!
It would actually probably work really well, except for vehicles.  Warmachine has no concept of transports.  But then, neither does 40k 6th edition (Bam!).

But then the game would just be matching combos and trying to pull them off.

Better than just picking the right codex.

[andalucien]

Iknowiknowiknow...

We write a port of the 40k models to Warmachine rules!!!!
It would actually probably work really well, except for vehicles.  Warmachine has no concept of transports.  But then, neither does 40k 6th edition (Bam!).

But then the game would just be matching combos and trying to pull them off.

Well, when we do the translation we could remove the existing combo's that give you a 2++ rerollable save in 40k, or the ones that give you a 1200pt unit that shoots 10 different targets and teleports every turn.

[Erich]

Iknowiknowiknow...

We write a port of the 40k models to Warmachine rules!!!!
It would actually probably work really well, except for vehicles.  Warmachine has no concept of transports.  But then, neither does 40k 6th edition (Bam!).

But then the game would just be matching combos and trying to pull them off.

Better than just picking the right codex.

True. I agree with that...I would rather pick the right combo of figures rather than be screwed because of the book I chose (poor Dark Angels players  ) That being said, WarmaHordes has a meta just like 40K...it is less about player skill than people assume it is and more about picking the proper units for your gimmick.

That being said, it is a game I've wanted to get into...sadly there is not one army that interests me a great deal due to the quality and look of the models.

[robpro]

Before we rewrite the rules to make 40k into a different game, shouldn't we try to have an event with everything laid out as is? Why not try a 3k tournament with everything allowed, (everything defined as codices, supplements, dataslates, escalation, and stronghold assault) as long as you have the rules and the models?

Sure, I don't have a problem with this.  It is just that when EVERY event is "as it is", many books have no chance.

I find it laughable that you are suggesting this, almost EVERY BG event is 40k AS IS.  What you want is to try the newest stuff.

40k as is, and as it has been, is poorly balanced, and it is just getting worse.

I say we try it as is and adjust the points/missions accordingly because general consensus seems to be to ban certain books/units/slates/etc before viewing their actual impact. How many of you have even played with or against a Phantom or a Reaver?

And Matt, the very fact (which you pointed out in that thread) we are not using the building rules from Stronghold Assault means we're not playing with everything in. Though I think changing Strength D to s10 ap1 has a bigger impact on the tournament not really showing what happens when you've got the big boys on the table. That said, hopefully I'll have one of mine built and ready for some goofy action on Saturday.

I don't know that every tournament should have all these things at all times, but it would be nice to use these. Models in events 3-6 times a year instead of once. I like that BG does primer events for GTs and I don't see why they'd stop doing that.