Tournament Organizers - New Objective and Scoring method - Success!

[Defenestratus]

I'm all for changing the rules up a bit especially if it shakes up the stiffs in the tournament scene. My only concern would be that the method of gaining VP's favors tough, resilient armies more than quick fragile ones who rely on focused application of force and cunning maneuvering to win the day at the end.

I say this as a player of the much-maligned pointy ears.

[Maelstorm]

I'm all for changing the rules up a bit especially if it shakes up the stiffs in the tournament scene. My only concern would be that the method of gaining VP's favors tough, resilient armies more than quick fragile ones who rely on focused application of force and cunning maneuvering to win the day at the end.

I say this as a player of the much-maligned pointy ears.

Actually pointy ears of both flavors have a slight advantage! There are 3 to 5 Objectives evenly scattered around the table - faster, more fragile armies can get to the objectives and begin scoring multiple Victory Points on turn 2, way before their more resilient counterparts can arrive at the same objectives! It balanced codex armies out very well - you get to play to your strengths.

I appreciate everyone's comments and questions.

[Maelstorm]

Please pass this along to your local Tournament Organizers.

If anyone has the proper connections - please pass it along to the National Tournament organizers (Adepticon, Las Vegas Open, Feast of Blades, etc...).

Thanks!

[Auticus]

I will try this in an upcoming event. There has already been complaining about it though

[Maelstorm]

I will try this in an upcoming event. There has already been complaining about it though

We're already planning our next tournament using the same scoring method - The players requested it.

It's a challenge when players have to think about the mission the whole game. More troops = less OP toys = a more level playing field.

Please post back and let us know how it goes.

[Auticus]

Oh I agree. I think its a fun system personally.

[Veteran Sergeant]

How does it penalise players that table their opponent? They then have [x] number of turns that they can grab every single objective and harvest VP without needing to worry about tactics beyond which units are fastest and which objectives are closest. That seems like an excellent incentive.

Yeah, but if your army has been tabled, you have automatically lost. You don't have any guys left.

I like the idea of a progressive scoring. It prevents certain kinds of exploitative tactics that are not available to every army. But at the same time, if you can be wiped out and still win an objective-based game, you've created a new set of exploits that are available to a different set of armies, using a different kind of non-viable tactic.

Basically, for example, we know that Eldar armies can swoop in using jetbikes which ignore terrain to contest and snag objectives on the final turn. This is exploitative because it's using a game mechanic (limited game duration) to achieve a victory that is not tenable in the "real world".

However, this opens up a host of entirely different untenable tactics. The horde army could, in theory, swamp the objectives early in the game, and simply endure the casualties for long enough to win the game through attrition. This also exploits the game mechanic of limited duration battles by insinuating that they can win, despite being completely wiped out, simply by existing on a spot for a fixed amount of time.

A tabled army controls no less justified of a position than the aforementioned jetbikes do.

Now, I'm not automatically saying the whole system is a bad thing. It may change the local tournament meta away from ridiculous death stars and/or net lists, which is never a bad thing. But a scoring system where an tabled opponent can still win the game is, in general, fairly bizarre unless the scenario specifically is designed around that as a narrative function (Attacker must sit on Objective X to set the bomb!).

[Maelstorm]

The Mission statement dictates the Objective scoring

"Your forces are gathering data from ancient alien devices (3 or 5 objectives) spaced evenly on the battlefield. The alien data ports will become active on Turn 2 and burn out at the end of Turn 5 - never to be used again."

Yes, tabling your opponent can be amusing for some but if your opponent played the mission and scored more points in the end they will win - they collected the required data.

We had a Tau-Dar player table his opponent on turn 2 and proceed to score points in turn 3, 4,and 5 - he won his game by a sizable margin. We had a player bring 115 Chaos Zombies with FNP; He did well in 1 mission, broke even on the second mission, and struggled in the 3rd. Our resident WAAAGH! general brought out 100+ Orcs, he scored somewhere in the middle of the pack.

We posted the missions and scoring method up 2 weeks in advance so everyone had an opportunity to play multiple test games and optimize their lists. The Missions were selected, tested and re-written to make sure they didn't favor one play style over another.

The single person who mumbled about the scoring method - The uber-net-list push-button Tau-Dar player.

I appreciate your questions and comments.