Would you play in this environment?

[Charon]

Not intentionally shooting holes, but just pointing out home made rulings can create contradictions that don't exist in the normal rules....

Because not all superheavies come from escalation.
Knights and Stompers do exist.

[Caitsidhe]

I agree that it is better to just ban Super Heavies rather than Escalation. Banning the other super heavies while leaving Imperial Knights is inconsistent.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

Or how about you just play the game with the rules they have....I mean I know that's shocking, but maybe just maybe the game will be more interesting more diverse and will allow you to use and grow your collection.... I've already used and played against superheavies and formations their not bad.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Or how about you just play the game with the rules they have....I mean I know that's shocking, but maybe just maybe the game will be more interesting more diverse and will allow you to use and grow your collection.... I've already used and played against superheavies and formations their not bad.

Because Superheavies are designed to have the game revolve around them. Thus any tournament that allows them ends up having its meta revolve around them.

[Mr Mystery]

Dude they're making suggestions is all.

If you want Superheavies, let the points system bring the restriction. If you don't, then it's a flat no to all.

To do otherwise is indeed inconsistent, as a TO likely to just generate whining from those who feel hard done by.

[Wolfshade]

I remember a little while ago, there was a Tournament that allowed superheavies, it hink this was back in erm 5th?

And because of the issue of balance, it meant that the winner was the guy/gal who could get the most super heavy for their points. I think it was won by someone with an eldar flyer IIRC.

More generally, I expect some house rules / "clarifications" in Tournies.

It is best to see them first and decide whether or not to play then to find them out as you go along.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

all their accomplishing is to shift the winners and the losers. by cherry picking who and what is deemed okay and what is deemed evil. heck i dont even play eldar or tau but i do not see a reason o just add restriction after restriction and think that is okay. As soon as To's start to pick winner's and loser's what does that really accomplish? FAQ's are not meant to pick winners and looser's their meant to clarify a rule. if you want the game fixed fix it through missions it's not that hard to do. but instead they simply ban this or ban that and fail to see it has far reaching effects. so they don't do lords or war either.. what do you do with gaz? or how about logan? their moving towards the trend of making special characters lords of war and under their rules their no longer usable. or things like knights and stompas... their in legal codocies yet now your telling me what i can and cannot run out of a core book?

[silashand]

To do otherwise is indeed inconsistent, as a TO likely to just generate whining from those who feel hard done by.

I doubt that. As long as the rules are stated up front who cares? Don't like it, don't attend. Anyone who attends an event knowing they won't like it has issues IMO...

Frankly, let the people who want to run such an event do it if they like. If they get enough players and the attendees enjoy themselves then that's the point of playing. If they don't get enough players then, and only then, should they need to modify their event to attract people.

To those saying it just shifts the winners and losers, oh well. Maybe people are just sick and tired of the same d-baggery all the time and if this forces people to not bring screamerstar, jetseer, etc. then so be it. I am all in favor of that. Contrary to some people's belief, allowing everything does not necessarily make for a more fun environment. Given the comments I have heard from many, many players over the years I would say it actually detracts from the fun for everyone except the players who want to field such d-bag lists. Comp is coming to 40K and I for one am happy about it.

[Caitsidhe]

The issue is simple. You either allow all super heavies or you allow none of them. Allowing Knights while disallowing other super heavies is inconsistent and unfair. For example, a Chaos player only has access to super heavies through Escalation unless he/she takes "comes the apocalypse allies" which isn't as good as the people who don't have to do that. Good Tournament Organizers aren't trying to redistribute wins. They are trying to make the event as fair for everyone as possible. Games Workshop can't be bothered with balance; that leaves it up to local organizers to adjust.

For example, one of the ways I deal with super heavies (not having easy access to Drop Pods full of Sternguard w/Melta or the Command Squads that simulate this) is to use Be'Lakor and juice him with another DP using the Book of the True Names. Since he has a STR-7 and Armourbane, he has a reasonable shot within two rounds of combat of taking a Knight down. The 2+ Invulnerable save gives him a fighting chance against the many, many wounds he is likely to receive from stomps. The changes above (which I would play under) cut back on my most effective counter to Super Heavies.

Good Tournament/Event organizers spend the time required to consider unintended consequences and balance. If Knights are in then the other Super Heavies need to be in. All in or all out.

[Lordofchaos]

If they are going to restrict 2+ re-rollable then why restrict the grimiore. Why the higher fee for unpainted/half-painted armies, are they going to be able to participate in the full prize support? Too many restrictions and some against specific armies is not the way to go, makes those who travel to play want to stay home.