South Island Wargaming, New Zealand.

South Island Wargaming, New Zealand.

 
It is currently Fri Oct 19, 2018 3:49 am

All times are UTC + 12 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Sun Nov 02, 2014 9:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:07 pm
Posts: 952
Location: South of the Border, West of the Sun
I'm interested in your thoughts on a couple of things:

- The dual mission format (Primary - Eternal War Mission, Secondary - Maelstrom Mission). Did you like it, hate it, think it was irrelevant? why?

- Superheavies. Do you want to see them in tourneys? How did you feel about ones you had to face? Should we ban the Transcendent C'Tan?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Sun Nov 02, 2014 9:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 1:46 pm
Posts: 3
The missions were good, I really enjoyed the way you could pull out a draw after losing the primary mission quite easily.

I'll be the first to say Ban the C'tan. Though maybe wait until after the new Necron codex to make the call. They may fix it (Fingers crossed so I can use my cool model again in the future!)

I found myself able to charge headlong into things with little thought with the C'tan. It didn't really matter what was on the table, he could deal to it in a round or two, (barring invisi-wolves or the other C'tan :p). What hurt me was having so may points tied up in a single model. I had a hard time capturing objectives in a lot of my games as the rest of my army phased out and let the little big guy mop up.

The other option is to limit the weapons It can take. The 6D6 BS 6 strength 8 AP3 shots is ridiculous at 48" range. The D strength helstorm is also pretty bad. But there are some other non optimal choices available too.

I found the allowance of superheavies got me into an escalating (See what I did there?) mindset where the simple possibility of a big nasty made me want to take my own big nasty just in case. no-one likes to take the list that has no answer to the enemy's biggest threat. Some armies just don't have an obvious option outside of their own superheavies do they?

All this aside. I thoroughly enjoyed the tournament and probably still would have if I'd lost every game. Cheers to all for being such a good bunch and not complaining at all to my face. :p


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Sun Nov 02, 2014 10:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 40
Location: Pretending to be doing something useful
Dual mission format was great fun, as was the event- if you were shafted for the primary, you could try and gear towards getting the secondary and vice versa. I will be buying some cards ASAP though, rolling duplicates 6 times over is not a good time.

As for superheavies- it probably depends on which ones. The Knight I faced wasn't too difficult to ignore, and I've been able to ignore Baneblades/Variants of without too much hassle in the past. I do have to ignore them- I just do not have the tools to reliably kill them outright, but I consider it a fair trade for the loss in points the "normal" portion of the army has to deal with. If they happen to rip my list a new one, but blokes a, b, and c were able to cope with it in other rounds, then that's too bad for me.

I didn't play vs a C'Tan, but from what I heard and saw they were both quite hard to kill and couldn't be ignored without huge losses. Odds on there are similarly disgusting units in various books, which will surface as/if we keep using superheavies. I know making a "Yes/No" list can incur immense aggravation, but that strikes me as the only "equitable" way to go.

If I had to choose between no superheavies at all or watching C'Tan do their thing from another table, hoping the software doesn't lump us together, I'm going to choose the former any time. Wardollies and Beer drinking is less fun if you turn up to remove only your own models...

"Ban the C'Tan" almost sounds like a slogan. :D

_________________
In the grim darkness of the 41st Millennium, there are no indicators.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 3:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:57 am
Posts: 203
Results have been posted in the rankings. Thanks Wes.

_________________
Fields of Blood - Warhammer Fantasy & 40k News and Opinion - Check out http://thefieldsofblood.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:27 pm
Posts: 677
Location: Zharr Naggrund
Thanks for a great tournament Wes.

Being the first real singles event I've entered, I enjoyed the primary and secondary mission setup. Using tactical objectives added a lot to the environment and I think the secret ones improved the game play. You never really knew what your opponent was gpoing to do.

I would think mixing it up a little and using the tactical objectives for the primary would be a good move. I also found the 1 point split between primary and secondary mission points a bit bland. I would have thought a larger split would put more emphasis on the primary.

As far as superheavies went, at least from the perspective of fielding one, it added a lot to my game in 3 of the 5 rounds. The other two it was a liability. It only died once, however I think that was more to do with some opponents not even trying, as most opponents brought enough of the right tools to deal with one. I only fought against one LoW, a Cuntann shard. My opinion will be skewered as I put 22 wounds on it and Daryl saved all but 1... It should have died twice over, but then again I did make sure I had enough firepower to deal with one.

Would be interesting to hear from my opponents to see if they felt the same way.

_________________
My new Blog! http://plastickrak.blogspot.co.nz/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 6:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:29 pm
Posts: 2253
I enjoyed the secondary missions immensely; it gave me something else to focus on when I realised there was little chance of me achieving the primary objective. I found the missions a little confusing in how they were worded due to the amalgamation of Maelstrom and main rulebook missions and not having it clearly written which parts from which mission were to be used and which weren't. Had it down pat by the end of the event but the first two games were pretty confusing for a rookie like me. To overcome that my first inclination would be to transpose the aspects you wanted from each mission onto a new page so that it is effectively it's own mission and no rulebook referencing is required...hope that makes sense.

In terms of the big boys I can't speak much from experience as the only one I faced was the Harridan (sp?). I definitely love the idea of bringing the big toys to play at an event and I think it absolutely needs to be kept on the calendar somewhere, just not sure if Conquest is the place for it. If it is kept I think imposing some kind of restrictions such as points or whatever would certainly help reduce some of the problems I've heard about but really I see this as a big can of worms. No real solution here sorry.

_________________
I be bloggin'...Spanner in the Works


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 6:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 12:35 am
Posts: 9
As always a great event. Really liked the mission combination too. As for the super heavies, I think if they are allowed again then the points limit should be reduced, such that the investment is a larger proportion of the total, thus restricting the flexibility of the army, which should in turn balance things a little more. I also did not face the Catan but also heard some horror stories....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 7:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:28 pm
Posts: 132
Location: ChCh soon
I really enjoyed the 5 games I played. Woolston 40k is in a fairly sad state at the moment, so the best part was mixing it up with different players.
This was the second tournament that my son has attended. He said that the games were fun to play. He struggled with the power of certain lists against his small bugs but was delighted that he earned enough points to avoid the wooden spoon. He learned about perseverance and adapted to find points elsewhere on the tabletop. I am really proud of how he handled himself amongst the adults and want to say thank you to the others who played so sportingly against him.
I felt it hard to focus on what I had to do to stay in the game because of the abundance of choice. This is a good problem to have. Last year 1 poor turn could cost me a game. Here I could chase a random result for secondary points, go straight for the primary, fight a superheavy or conserve strength for later.
I like 1850 as a points limit, but the only game that went 7 turns for me was against James's armoured company. I found it hard to get beyond turn 4, but I put that down to me being slower than most to get started and move.

With talk of the C'tan ban, Jin and I have discussed an outlet for the competitive power-list gamers. Would they have more fun playing 40K-Xtreme amongst themselves at those top tables? Medium level players and relative newcomers could then compete in seperate leagues. Maybe at point of entry to the tournament players could select their preferred difficulty level. Then, like in those rugby 7s tournaments, there could be a winner of the cup/plate/bowl comps? Just a thought.
Last point is prizes. $80 for entering myself and Jin. Had 2 great days of well organised gaming fun, left with a smile and 2 drink bottles. Could Comics give us a voucher instead?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 7:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:07 pm
Posts: 952
Location: South of the Border, West of the Sun
I spoke with Tim about the entry "gift" for next year, and we're looking at doing a set of 6 objectives, numbered (1-6) and marked with "Conquest 2015".

I understand that when buying for two, the event is expensive, but there were heaps of round prizes on offer (i gave away $40~60 each round, and no one got more than one prize from me) and while i'm sorry you got missed, but since most prizes were for injuring your own army, i suppose you were just not unlucky enough :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 7:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:28 pm
Posts: 132
Location: ChCh soon
Yep, objectives would be grand! Thanks also for clarifying the expense of the round prizes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 12:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:45 am
Posts: 3
Location: Christchurch
I'm the one who fielded the Harridan. The instructions I saw said that super heavies were allowed but to make a fun list that other people would enjoy playing. So I made a themed list that I thought would be fun. I was surprised by how competitive most of the lists were.

I think the easiest solution is not to allow super heavies. Restricting the points cost allowed doesn't fix the problem. I'd struggle just as much against a Baneblade as I would against a Harridan or a C'Tan, despite the difference in points. They're just in a different league.

Edit: A good starting point might be making any list with a superheavy unbound?


Last edited by Volen on Thu Nov 06, 2014 3:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 8:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:15 pm
Posts: 281
Hi Guys

Just a quick one in regard to the entry fee. For most of the players the entry was free due to a purchases they have made in store. We purposely make it this way as Conquest is us rewarding our customers first and foremost. As many of you know there are a lot of buying options out there that come and go and its a tough business to be a brick and mortar store in and this is our way of thanking those who do buy of us. This is not a reflection on those who do pay the entry fee as there are many reasons why they do not buy from us but more about how we can give back to our customers. if you go to other events around the country as big the $40 is in line with them and not unreasonable.

This year we gave $400 worth of vouchers to 40K alone to be handed out plus prizes for best painted and sports (all up around $550 worth) so about every second person got a prize voucher.

I don't want to open a full blown discussion about this and I am normally loath to use this forum to talk about the shops operation as can be a negative experience, but just wanted to clarify how and why we do what we do.

Cheers

Tim


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 8:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:07 pm
Posts: 952
Location: South of the Border, West of the Sun
Thanks for the clarifications, Tim


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 1:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:07 pm
Posts: 952
Location: South of the Border, West of the Sun
So, while we're hoping to see new rules for the Transcendent C'Tan in the next codex, i'm still likely to limit it in some way (perhaps restrict which powers it can choose) simply because it really did wreck whole armies by itself. Karn's suggestion of reducing the overall pts value of the event isn't a bad one.

I'm keen to allow as much army construction flexibility as possible. I'm keen to see more formations and unusual detachments (of the 3 Grey Knights players, i don't think one took any of the special ones from their book; none of the Space Wolf players took any of their either, though Andy at least took a Knight in a separate detachment) as well as the Imperium being treated as one big army with bits and pieces from multiple codexes coming together.

Nice to hear the missions were well received in general. The reason for keeping the scoring for them so similar is to encourage army flexibility, and be able to perform well in both styles of mission. I will work on pairing up the missions a bit better for next time and certainly will look into providing a bit more detail as to what bits of which mission i'm interested in using (though i did mention a few specific bits on a couple of pages and people come to ask about exactly what i'd written. I'm used to that, being a teacher, but i'm also not sure more writing will solve all the issues :wink: )

Lastly, Tim Adams/Ginga and i have been talking to Comics about running a separate competition for the under 18s. After some thought, i realised that i could use software to only allow pairings of certain groups, allowing us to run an infinite number of events concurrently. With that in mind:

Would there be interest in having separate Superheavy/No Superheavy events? (There were ~10 superheavies at Conquest, and ~10 under 18s, so we'd have had enough people to do it this year)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 40k Feeback
PostPosted: Wed Nov 05, 2014 10:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 40
Location: Pretending to be doing something useful
Wes wrote:
Would there be interest in having separate Superheavy/No Superheavy events? (There were ~10 superheavies at Conquest, and ~10 under 18s, so we'd have had enough people to do it this year)


I feel an under-18 event would be good. I haven't got in touch with Aiden from the high school club I run yet, but I imagine his rag-tag band of space marines would have been knocked every which way by the rest of us who have managed to (somehow) find the money for a more coherent army. There would have to be some relatively strong force org restrictions to try and keep the playing field level, but it'd be good for the new blood to compete with the new blood, rather than being mercilessly crushed by us "veterans".:lol: I assume the option to compete in the "Big Boys Only" event would still be available (my younger brother's Tau are looking worryingly close to dangerous).

As for superheavies- I'm still of the opinion that if we remove anything that's absolutely abhorrent, then they add an interesting element of opportunity cost to list-building. You have a big killy thing yes, but that does tend to bite you in the arse when you're trying to cap 4 objectives and everything except your Baneblade is falling apart because it's spread too thin. I'm enjoying the challenge of facing them, and would like them to stay in the "Big Boys Only" Event. My 2 cents only though, I'll cheerfully play in the appropriate division if we split the field up next year.

_________________
In the grim darkness of the 41st Millennium, there are no indicators.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC + 12 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Template made by TBF Photoshop Forum