MAY 40K Rogue Trader Tournament

[Rorschach]

Hi All,

Yep, we're finally going to have another one!

I'm thinking 1850pts. All things as allowed for GTs (through new DAs) are allowed. Special Characters = Yes.

Please let me know your weekend preference:
We're looking at either May 19th or 26th - I'll discuss with Rob tonight.

I'd like to get any scenario info from those who went to Adepticon (Ron, Rich? Got any copies?). I'm still unsure if people prefer the old RTT scenario format, or the new Adepticon one we've used once before.

Look for a formal post soon, but I thought y'all could use a heads-up!

-Dale

[Warlord]

I did bring back the scenarios I will make a copy for you and the store and drop them by next time I am in. Adepticon usually posts the missions prior to the tournament so people have no excuse on not being prepared for the missions, so that may be something to look at. I found the missions to be very challenging but a lot of fun!!

[Warmaster]

The one thing I didn't like about adepticon is that it doesn't seem like they did any comp scoring.

I've been talking with Rob O'Byrne up here in Denver and we've been trying to come up with some composition rules for Tacticon.

Here's what we have so far
Do you have equal to or less troop choices than you do in any one other cateogry (ie if you have 3 heavies then you have to have 4 troop's to not get dinged for this one)

Did you spend less than 30% of your points on troops

Do you have 3 or more identical org chart selections.

-2 points each round for each of the above.

Let me know what you think

[PURGATUS]

26th!!

[Blackraine]

Do you have equal or less troop choices than you do in any one other catagory?

Yes, I play Tau. Next question.

Did you spend less than 30% of your points on troops?

Yes, I play TAU, next question.

Do you have 3 or more identical org chart selections?

Wow, good thing I don't play Necrons... oh wait, I play Tau. Luckily, I didn't waste my points on 3 identical troop choices.

So wait, I get penalized points for playing Tau?! WTF!


See what I'm getting at here? Composition is great when you're playing Marines and Eldar and can either make whatever you want into Troops or do whatever you want with those troops... but when you're playing Tau or Necrons (probably a few other armies as well), your troops aren't exactly your strong point... they're your filler to keep you from getting blown off the table while the stuff that actually DOES hurt things does so.


By the way, my standard list:

1 HQ (Shas'o, of course)
2 Elites (Stealth suits and suicidal Crisis Suit)
2 Troops (mounted 10 man Fire Warrior squads)
2 Fast attack (one Pathfinder Squad, one Pirhana squadron)
2-3 Heavies (2-3 Hammerheads)

Y'see, unlike Space Marines and Eldar, my standard troops can't pop tanks unless they're rapid firing the rear armor. Saying that I should take 3 choices of them ANYWAY... is bullocks. Tau are designed specifically to follow a combined arms strategy. Being penalized at tournaments for following that combined arms strategy, the one that the game designers specifically tuned it after (as in, that's not just something the gamers made up, it's what the Designers themselves were actually going for), is not very palatable. If you can come up with Comp rules that don't penalize someone for playing a certain faction, then sure, go for it. As for me, I like theme rules better. Sure, they're more subjective, but when every foot model in my army is either mounted or has a jetpack, and every other model is a vehicle, you can tell I was going for a theme... a very Tau fluffy theme at that.

Personally, if there's any type of list that I feel needs to be "punished" into extinction, it's the Marine/Chaos player with 6 5 man las/plas squads, not the Tau player who only took two troop choices. And comp rules do almost nothing to stop that.

[Warmaster]

If you look at those composition rules they would get dinged for doing 6 5 man las plas squads.

The list you posted does not have 3 identical squads.
If you spent about 100-150 more points in troups you would be at the 30% mark (its' 555 points for 1850)
And if you added in that extra squad and only took the 2 heavy support you would completely satisfy these requirements

And when I say identical I mean eactly the same, so yes if said necron player used 3 10 man squads he would get dinged. But if he did two 10 man and one 11 he would not.

And I will add in as a side note I play them all. The only army I do NOT have at home is Dark Eldar. And I can bring a competative army using those rules with any army out there.

The idea is to promote a little diversity. Force someone to take a power weapon instead of a power fist every now and then. Have a 9 or 7 or x man squad instead of all 8 or 9. Force someone to bring something besides min sized las plas squads.

You said you want to see las-plas limited how would you go about it?

[Warlord]

Well the gladiator is of course all about not having comp. The team tournament is sort of balanced by the slots you take and their is a comp score given by the judges and points gained by the soft scores from your opponents. The problem with all of the big tournaments are how much comp is worth. Most big tournaments comp is only 3-5% of your overall score so you can lose the points and make them up by crushing your opponent. That is why you often hear about the powergamers being penalized on the sportsmanship side since you can't really hurt them on comp. I like a higher percentage of score on comp but GW is trying to steer away from comp and more towards "if it is in the book it is good". Jervis Johnson eluded to that being one of the reasons for greater structure in the Dark Angels codex to make it more difficult to min/max armies and it is how the future codexes will be. I usually try to build my armies to the old percentage system of 40%+ troops and 25% or less in any one of the other categories. The problem I see with the number of troops vs number of heavies is that it means everyone leans more towards the min. 5 man troops so they can hit the target 4 slots. Hell with eldar I can hit 4 troops for a total of 264pts which leaves a ton of points for the nasty stuff.

[Rorschach]

I've been looking at a "return" to the Comp Numbers too. I saw how it worked at Genghis, and that didn't seem to bad. Just to fill in the gaps where GW still hasn't acknowledged reality. And it'll bring us in line with the larger in-state events.



Do you have equal to or less troop choices than you do in any one other cateogry (ie if you have 3 heavies then you have to have 4 troop's to not get dinged for this one) Some armies have an easier time than others here. How would you handle this for Guard Platoons for instance? I always hated having 2 full platoons, and getting dinged for this in the past. It's still a sound principle though.


Did you spend less than 30% of your points on troops This isn't too bad, as I can't think of many armies this would HOSE, and it says, "Hey this is a good idea for anyone!"


Do you have 3 or more identical org chart selections.
I'll have to emphasize you mean COMPLETELY identical, to prevent min-max of troop squads. Some will merely see that as a 5 trooper surcharge on min-maxing, others will get the point.
This will mean no 3-Exorcists, which is a shame...

I'd add two more criteria locally:

-- Was your list legible, correct, and turned in on time?

-- Did your list feature extra effort, such as fiction, background, or other accompaniments?

If I decide on using these, I'll post formally soon.

-Dale

[Warmaster]

The problem I see with the number of troops vs number of heavies is that it means everyone leans more towards the min. 5 man troops so they can hit the target 4 slots. Hell with eldar I can hit 4 troops for a total of 264pts which leaves a ton of points for the nasty stuff.

Exactly why the 30% rule was put in :).

[Warlord]

The problem with comp right now is the codexes themselves. Most people in a tournament feel they need to take the nastiest stuff to be competitve instead of playing a better game with what they have. The thing with working the numbers in units is that it doesn't really fix the unit dynamics. I take one 5 man las/plas, one 6 man las/plas, and one 5 man las/plas tank hunter for my 3 different units but what have I changed to make the list more fun/balanced? but on the other side is 3 10 man necron troop slots is balanced/fluffy but now they score worse than the unit of min/max marines!? That is one of the difficulties is determing what is balanced and what is cheese. So many people I talk to is that if it is legal in the codex than it is balanced. I don't agree but how do you argue it? I have played under a ton of different comp rules and haven't really found one that is 100%. The last few left it up to your opponent but that is really subjective and often more of a contest of Charisma than anything. I find it just as bad to play against a poorly built list as to fight uber cheese as neither are fun to play against. The other thing is that some times players confuse skill with cheese. If someone that only plays against their friends in the basement runs up agianst someone that plays in the store or in tournaments all the time they often get hammered because of combos or ideas they haven't seen before and they think "cheese" because it is more powerful than anything they have seen in the small game group they play but is common with players that play in a larger environment. I know because that was how I and many others started!

[Edge]

3 or more identical troops choices are very common for CSM cult armies because of the Favored Number. Forcing someone to say take a plague sword instead of the power fist is hardly exploring "options".

I would suggest amending this a bit to having 3 or more of only 1 unit choice. Example 3 unit of 7 Plague Marines decked out exactly the same is a no-no, but having 3 units of 7 plague marines and 1 or more demon units would be acceptable.

There is where you get the variety, not the choice of a single weapon in a squad or the difference of a single person.

[Rorschach]

Good observations...
Plus I'd add that, as the Comp scores are Judge Administered, I can make the decision to gack the 3x10 Necron squads a little less than the standard 5x5 Lascannon squads. That's why there are 2pts per entry...if I think they're still within the Spirit of Comp, I can only dock 1pt, or even none in special circumstance!

The Codices are NOT balanced, anyone who says so is delusional.

Maybe I should add that general Judges check mark for, "IYHO, Is this a good balanced force"?

[Warlord]

5 man las/plas
5 man las/plas tankhunter
6 man las/plas
6 man las/plas tankhunter
5 man las/plas infiltrate
3 oblits
3 oblits
1 indirect basilisk
1 pred autocannon, HB DP
8 havoc 4 autocannon, tankhunter
1 defiler indirect
plus a few hundred points left over for a tooled up DP.
This would score great on your proposed comp but would be nasty to fight against and wouldn't be a fun game for most people and would crush most "balanced" armies. That is the thing that makes it hard to have a selection/math balanced comp score is that many armies or players can easily meet the requirements for a max comp but still bring the cheese. That is one of the things I found with a lot of the missions at adepticon was the power armies had a harder time getting all the points for the missions and the balanced armies may take a beating but often scored higher on the overall objectives.

[Warmaster]

Your incestuous relationship with the other people that worked at Lockheed is not something to talk about on this board Ron :).

In the example you gave if the necron player took 1 11 man squad he would be fine.

And with your chaos example you ended up using 29 points you wouldn't have before, not a huge difference but if you wanted to do lasplas on all 6 of your squads you would really have to work at it :).

I'm as guilty of doing this as everyone else. I like my 8 man Tau firewarrior squads in ginked up devilfish. So much that I take 4 of them. Would it really hurt me to bump 1 of them up to 12 guys and maybe drop one of them and put in some kroot or foot walking fire warriors with pulse carbines. Probably not and I think the list would end up being more fun to play against.

Probably the last one to add would be:
Did you build your army to take advantage of the comp rules and not fulfill the spirit.

[Rorschach]

The problem with not setting Numbers and Boundaries is that anything else is purely subjective. Like deciding what's okay to say on the radio or not ;D

I'd work towards a mixed system, about half raw #s, and about half subjective Judging maybe. Painting is almost all subjective, so this isn't too whacky an idea I think...

[Warmaster]

5 man las/plas
5 man las/plas tankhunter
6 man las/plas
6 man las/plas tankhunter
5 man las/plas infiltrate
3 oblits
3 oblits
1 indirect basilisk
1 pred autocannon, HB DP
8 havoc 4 autocannon, tankhunter
1 defiler indirect
plus a few hundred points left over for a tooled up DP.
This would score great on your proposed comp but would be nasty to fight against and wouldn't be a fun game for most people and would crush most "balanced" armies. That is the thing that makes it hard to have a selection/math balanced comp score is that many armies or players can easily meet the requirements for a max comp but still bring the cheese. That is one of the things I found with a lot of the missions at adepticon was the power armies had a harder time getting all the points for the missions and the balanced armies may take a beating but often scored higher on the overall objectives.

You aren't going to be able to come up with a way to completely negate a cheese list. It's not going to happen. But what I did stop with those rules is 6 las/plas squads and 9 obliterators.

I would normally agree about the power lists but again. Your abusive list up above would do just fine in taking objectives.

[ColGreeley]

Hmmmmm.....an RT you say? Should I? Dare I?

[Warlord]

I agree Rich and Dale that it works better to have someone with a good 40k background judge theme with the predetermined checklist. The other thing that is rarely addressed but sticks in my craw are the lists that get great soft scores because they have a list with nothing nasty in it. I hate fighting an army that has zero chance of even a draw because it is built soft to try to get the "theme" or "sportsman" award by being crushed so bad that you have to give them top marks to keep from feeling guilty. We are playing a competitve game and if someone doesn't bring a list to challenge their opponents than they should be docked for that side also.

[Rorschach]

I hate fighting an army that has zero chance of even a draw because it is built soft to try to get the "theme" or "sportsman" award by being crushed

I'll add "...while remaining competitive" to the subjective points. :)

[Warmaster]

Maybe instead of posting negative's we should turn these into bonus points. Don't penalize people for taking the cheese but award the people that build the balanced lists?

[Warlord]

That's a good idea Rich, as it will make the cheese mongers feel less picked on ( so I don't get my feelers hurt!) but reward those that play with a balanced army. :D

[Warmaster]

Actually I think in general the people at the haven build fairly balanced lists. This was more for the Tacticon and Ghengis tournaments where I think it's needed.

[Rorschach]

Maybe instead of posting negative's we should turn these into bonus points. Don't penalize people for taking the cheese but award the people that build the balanced lists?

A semantic difference only, but perhaps better in terms of perception. Kinda like how you're not required to get Player Votes, but if you don't you can still lose.

[Warmaster]

3 or more identical troops choices are very common for CSM cult armies because of the Favored Number. Forcing someone to say take a plague sword instead of the power fist is hardly exploring "options".

I would suggest amending this a bit to having 3 or more of only 1 unit choice. Example 3 unit of 7 Plague Marines decked out exactly the same is a no-no, but having 3 units of 7 plague marines and 1 or more demon units would be acceptable.

There is where you get the variety, not the choice of a single weapon in a squad or the difference of a single person.


That's not a bad idea. It would have to be done with someone that knows the lists because of the few armies that only have one troop type though.

[ColGreeley]

Wow, nothing. Oh well. And I don't build soft lists. I am just a soft player. :D

[Warmaster]

It is semantic but for some reason people are okay with not getting bonus points but get pissed off if you give them negative points.

That way it's more in line with the painting rules too. You don't get docked points for not painting eyeballs you just don't get the bonus points :)

[Edge]

Maybe instead of posting negative's we should turn these into bonus points. Don't penalize people for taking the cheese but award the people that build the balanced lists?

That is still a penalty system with one side getting points as opposed to the other losing. The math is still the same.

If you are going to go for bonus points, maybe a bonus for each different choice (not gear) someone takes.

2 units of plague marines = 1 point
1 unit plague marines + 1 unit of plaguebearers = 2 points

(or whatever point scale you want to use)

[USMC2USAF]

I'm in favor of holding the tourney on the 26th as I'lll be out of town to attend a Kotei in Kansas on the 19th.

Thanks.

Respectfully,
KEVIN

[Laplace]

How about banning anything from having 2+ or 3+ armor except for HQs (with no retinues allowed)?

That would make an interesting RTT.

Hmm, let's see. There's Guard, Tau, non-zilla Nids, Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar...

[umbraedominus]

while this is all intresting have you not seen that troy is looking for some attention..

to the point. punishing a player for choice in his list that is legal because someone else doesnt like it. that is not fair to the player.

my list does have 6 troop choices which are all the same and they comprise 960 points of my list. so well over 50% of the standard RTT size and if someone told me i would lose points or others would get more points cause they made all there units different i would not play in the event

just my opinion

also if troy is playin then i must to crush him again

[TikiBoy]

I agree with warmaster, people at the Haven play well made lists, so I don't think there should be any kind of super strict comp. scores. As for the date, as long as it's a saturday I'm cool with it.

[SgtBrowncoat]

At the last anniversery tourney (I think) there was a list of ten points for scoring comp that I liked quite a bit. Like nine points for certain percentages and such, and then a tenth for meeting the other nine.

Anyone else remember that? how did the rest of you feel about that?


Hmmmmm.....an RT you say? Should I? Dare I?
Yes, and Yes! If for no other reason than I still haven't gotten the chance to kick around some squats.


: )

[ColGreeley]

Yes, and Yes! If for no other reason than I still haven't gotten the chance to kick around some squats.


: )[/QUOTE]

[ColGreeley]

Yes, and Yes! If for no other reason than I still haven't gotten the chance to kick around some squats.


: )[/QUOTE]


Ok I am retarded, trying to do the POST A QUOTE THING.

So you think you can kick the squats around? Well techincally I guess anyone could as they are not very tall. :D

Sounds like a challenge I will have to consider.

[Warlord]

And you even have a nice new codex to build from Troy!! You just need to get a couple of squat bikes and a couple of cyclone missle launchers and you will be good to go! I think I even have some extra havoc launchers you could convert to cyclones!!

[ColGreeley]

Hmmmmm...you guys are making a great argument......

Finding the bikes is the tough part. I have one already....

[Warlord]

http://cgi.ebay.com/40K-SQUATS-MOTORCYCLE-SIDECAR-WARLORD-ANCESTOR_W0QQitemZ160104603079QQihZ006QQcategoryZ1 23867QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD2VQQcmdZViewItem

You could even convert this to be an assault bike and then add two regular bikes to what you have and BAMM.... good too go! :D

[ColGreeley]

Damn, can't see it, will have to wait til I get home. Thanks for the info though Ron. Of course you realize if I do participate in this RT, we will have to play each other. We have unfinished business......

[Rorschach]

Okay all, how does this sound?

Warhammer 40,000 COMPOSITION
Scoresheet for Colorado Tournaments
BONUS +2pts per Check Item, +1pt if partially met

____ 1) Does the list contain a number of Troop selections equal to or more than the number of selections in any one other category? (I.E. if there are 3 Heavy Selections then it must have 4 Troops to compensate.)

____ 2) Does the list spend at least 30% of total points on Troops

____ 3) Does the list have NO MORE THAN two (2) completely identical org chart selections. This includes wargear and weapon options. Platoons count “identical” for the entire platoon.
OR
Does the list have no more than three (3) identical Troop selections, as long as there are two different Unit Types amongst the Troop selections?

____ 4) In your opinion, does this list provide a flavorful Theme and maintain play balance, while still being very competitive?

____ 5) Was this list legible, correct, and turned in on-time? (Exceptions for Out-of-town players)

____ 6) Does the list feature extra effort, such as fiction, background, or other accompaniments?

[ColGreeley]

____ 4) In your opinion, does this list provide a flavorful Theme and maintain play balance, while still being very competitive?



____ 6) Does the list feature extra effort, such as fiction, background, or other accompaniments?[/QUOTE]


I wonder if my army fits these categories.......? :D

[Rorschach]

I wonder if my army fits these categories.......? :D

Notice I don't have one that says, "Does the list conform to GW Orthodoxy and Propaganda?"

:-)

[Warmaster]

Remember the first 3 were just my suggestions, there were a lot of people that didn't like the idea.

[ColGreeley]

Man Dale, why do you have to be a hater? :D

[Warmaster]

I thought all of the squats were eaten by tyranids? Isn't that what the squats became? Biovores? :)

[ColGreeley]

No, if the Squats were wiped out by someone, it was the Orks.

And I know where there is at least 1500 points worth of my boys....

[Rorschach]

Remember the first 3 were just my suggestions, there were a lot of people that didn't like the idea.

*I* liked them though. :-)

The alternatives are no comp, "Theme", or the old extensive % standards. I know some are fond of the latter, but I find they really stifle creativity and screw some armies (like Guard, who can't even take an Adeptus Mechanicus without busting the wargear %).

Do run them past Rob O'Byrne though, and let me know what he thinks. Since GW is 4 years late with a new RTT standard, if we can get a Colorado consensus, I think that'd be cool.

[ColGreeley]

Just a heads up, if you guys decide to do the RT on May 26th, that is Memorial Day weekend. Just wanted to make sure peole checked to see if they would be in town or had plans that weekend.

[umbraedominus]

dale,

it looks good my list would only lose one check mark so i can live with that..

my only concern is the exection for out of town.. we all have internet they can email the list to you or the other one running it.

i believe if we do this it needs to be whats good for one is good for all

just my thoughts

[PURGATUS]

First off... I like the 26th of May

@ Troy I'm 90% sure I have a spare termie cyclone guy

@ Dale, I like the rules n stuff, i like the dynamic RTT rules, it's never the same beatdown (i bruise easily)... just settle on them by early May, and everyone has time to adjust accordingly

finally, everyone knows 'nid is the new story for the death of the squats, where do you think those rippers with the beergut biomorph came from?

[Asandiril]

It was heavily hinted I should weigh in here, as one of the other Judges to run RTTs, sooo...


Maybe instead of posting negative's we should turn these into bonus points. Don't penalize people for taking the cheese but award the people that build the balanced lists?
Agreed. The codexes (and army books) are just templates, they allow a player to make a list based on the agreed points, only requiring a certain minimum of selections taken to be 'legal.' I play Eldar and Marines, and Eldar have more options as far as Troops by far. My chapter, the Imperial Lions (Ultramarines successors), is themed off the Gallo-Roman legions of the waning Western Roman Empire (circa 400+ A.D.), but they are also a Codex Chapter with a Significant Divergence; so I have 'Veteran' Assault squads, and all my Infantry units can take True Grit and Counter-attack, but I can't take more than one selection total of Bikes/Attack bikes/Land speeders and we don't use Drop Pods... So, already my army has limits I've voluntarily subjected myself to. I tend to balance my army "just because," so I don't min/max since I see the 'Lions as definitely 'Codex' in their organization, so no 5-man Marine Squads (besides the Command Squad... being hand-picked 'body guard' for my Commanders... very Gallic/Celtic). And I don't do the las/plas combo so apparently prevalent, but I do take missile launchers and either a plas/melta/flamer, sometimes having 2 identical squads. Should I get docked after all that 'theme'?

I whole-heartedly agree - rather than dock people, semantically change it to being BONUS points. Kind of like the venerable old 'Pub Quiz.' Players would strive more for extra points than chafe under extra requirements. And while it IS technically the same, math-wise, it's not really since if you just tossed comp scoring all together EVERYONE loses the points and the power gamers dominate because there isn't an expectation of theme or balance... just bring'n'brawl.

And as Rich points out, it's not a Haven issue (we pride ourselves on building balanced but competitive). Maybe after test-bedding it, we could present it to Rob and ... the other guy who uns them for the 'cons. This could work for WFB, too.


____ 5) Was this list legible, correct, and turned in on-time? (Exceptions for Out-of-town players)
:D
Sorry, but no. There's this thing called email, perhaps you've heard of it? It's tied in through this amazing proliferation called the Internet. Basically, data can be transferred instantly anywhere on the planet with the click of a button.
:rolleyes:

No exceptions if everyone is expected to be on the same playing field.


Remember the first 3 were just my suggestions, there were a lot of people that didn't like the idea.
But they are good suggestions, Rich, and they ARE balanced after a little tweaking. As Dale points out, they're not as stringant as the old comp percentages, so they'd be easier to adhere to and still have a competitive list.

[MyMyst8k]

Okay all, how does this sound?

Warhammer 40,000 COMPOSITION
Scoresheet for Colorado Tournaments
BONUS +2pts per Check Item, +1pt if partially met

____ 1) Does the list contain a number of Troop selections equal to or more than the number of selections in any one other category? (I.E. if there are 3 Heavy Selections then it must have 4 Troops to compensate.)

____ 2) Does the list spend at least 30% of total points on Troops

____ 3) Does the list have NO MORE THAN two (2) completely identical org chart selections. This includes wargear and weapon options. Platoons count “identical” for the entire platoon.
OR
Does the list have no more than three (3) identical Troop selections, as long as there are two different Unit Types amongst the Troop selections?

____ 4) In your opinion, does this list provide a flavorful Theme and maintain play balance, while still being very competitive?

____ 5) Was this list legible, correct, and turned in on-time? (Exceptions for Out-of-town players)

____ 6) Does the list feature extra effort, such as fiction, background, or other accompaniments?


As along time tournament player, I thought I'd throw in my humble 2 cents.

I don't like the "+1pt if partially met" because you don't define what 'partially met' means for each entry. What's partial of "at least 30% of total points on Troops"? 15%, 20%, 27.5%? Just make it +2 points and be done with it.

On turning in lists: Maybe amend it by adding (If turned in by email, 2 copies of exactly the same list were brought to the RTT). I know in times past the concern has been having to print out 20+ lists. So maybe if you make people responsible for bringing in their lists it will help with that. If they don't both email and bring in the lists, they don't get credit. One nice thing I liked about Adepticon is that they made it a rule you had to have a copy of your list for each of your opponents as well. This helped because it enlisted players in checking all the lists.

The one comp criteria I don't like is the 'identical entry' check mark. I think there's been plenty of evidence offered that this will not alleviate the problem of 6 man las/plas. You're wrong that this would eliminate 3 exorcists. I give one of them a 1 point spotlight and I'm good to go. Charles, worried about your EC getting docked? Give demonic visage to an aspiring champ for 2 points and frag grenades to the other champ for 1. 3 points, 3 different types of squads. Now the only problem is remembering what went where and who has what.

For me it seems this comp criteria hurts armies that are trying to be fluffy, and does not restrain the armies that don't care. Because of that, it fails in its objective, so we should find something else or just remove it. Personally, I think "In your opinion, does this list provide a flavorful Theme and maintain play balance, while still being very competitive?" covers this already.

:D

[ColGreeley]

The sign up sheet for the May 26th 40K RT is up here at the store. If you wish to play, please call the store at 531-9863 and give us your REAL name and we will sign you up or stop in and sign up.

Thanks,
Troy

[USMC2USAF]

Gentlemen (& the random lady or two...):

While I'm all for the establishment of some kind of comp criteria, I never quite understood the reasoning of penalizing "identical units".

As for me, I get the most fun, challenge and satisfaction in playing 4-6 maxed out troops selections, often with the same identical weapons options. Not only do I feel this is in keeping with the more accurate availability of troops over other unit types but, it certainly makes for much more interesting and enjoyable games in my own humble opinion.

I guess that is why I've never been accused as a power gamer.
(And probably why I've steered clear from Warmachine).

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the 40K RTT and pitting my Eldar against many different armies.

Respectfully,
KEVIN

[ColGreeley]

Here is who we have so far....

1) Mike Tester
2) Rich Johnson
3) Ron Santoni
4) Tim Baptist
5) Mike Haspil

There are a total of 18 slots , 5 are filled and we will probably have a slot or 2 for Alternates in case someone is unable to make it.

[ColGreeley]

Here is an update.....

1) Mike Tester
2) Rich Johnson
3) Ron Santoni
4) Tim Baptist
5) Mike Haspil
6) Chris Roberton
7) Kevin Kim
8) Taylor Klotz
9) Hank Padilla
10) Kenny

[Rorschach]

10 so far? Cool...

I'm still weighing and pondering on the comp stuff, so don't assume anything yet. Thanks to all who've posted their thoughts and ideas- keep it coming!

[ColGreeley]

I think we will probably fill all 18 spots.

[Warmaster]

Just a thought. It seems a lot of people don't like the identical thing for troops. Maybe changing it so that taking 3 or more of any one non-troop choice from the same force org selection. Ie if you take your fast attack, elites, heavy support, or hq from the same unit entry. 3 predators, 3 hammerheads, 3 obliterators, 3 basilisks, all of that won't get you the bonus points? Note this doesn't mean identical, it means taking 3 of that unit type.

[Rorschach]

Good idea...how's this sound?
"Does the list have no more than 2 of the same non-Troop units, from the same Force Organization category?"

Can anyone think of an army that hoses?

Can anyone think of a Troop selection that is TRULY abusive in large identical quantity?

-Dale

[WC_kenny]

it penalizes cult armies...if my sacred number is 7 then all my units are going to be 7 men strong.
i think its a little strange to place any kind of penalty on an army for identical units ....i think the 30%troops and equal number of anything to troops is enough...if your comp scoring is already promoting more troops than its kinda weird that it penalizes you for making them identical.....heres an interesting comp set up i just encountered at an rtt 3 days ago


Your Opponent...
__was reasonable in judging measurements/LOS, etc.
__was polite and friendly.
__was generous in questionable situations.
__came prepared. (rulebooks, dice, tape, templates, etc.)
__facilitated overcoming rules issues, or there were no rules issues.
__allowed you enjoy your game?
__gave you such a fun game you probably owe them a drink.

Your opponents army…
__ Was your opponents army fun to play against?
__Did they try to do something different/interesting?
__Could this army reasonably exist in the 40K universe?
__Were some unit choices made or excluded for theme reasons
rather than purely tabletop effectiveness?
__Was the army balanced and not a "one trick pony"?
__Was the army finished? This includes a readable army list.
__Were squads easily distinguished from each other?

Each check will be worth 1 point, giving a potential of 14 points in each game. A win is worth 15 points. The questions are meant to be blunt and honestly answered, and it'll be VERY difficult to get 100%, making picking a "best sportsman" much easier both for the players and judges.

this format was refreshing and promoted fun over domination of your opponant

but what do i know

[PURGATUS]

fun and best sportsman awards are for losers... that format was awesome though.

[Warmaster]

I really like those. Was that all opponent scored?

[PURGATUS]

there was also the usual win 15 tie 10 loss 8, tactical bonuses i.e. +1 for general alive (bonuses got more numerous as the rounds did) and there was the best painted, best player, usual three votes at the end too...

[Rorschach]

this format was refreshing and promoted fun over domination of your opponent

That's a cool list, Kenny. I'll ponder that too. Thanks!

[WC_kenny]

yes all opponant scored...its designed to break ties up and promotes honesty with those blunt ass questions

[ColGreeley]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the game suppose to be about having fun?

[Rorschach]

No no Troy...it's all about "...to crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear de lamentation of de wimmin!"

[WC_kenny]

FUN is primary.....read the rule book..it says the primary goal is to have fun....i saw dave playin against a guy who was totally forgeting this aspec and was being a jackass and pure power gaming...dave was still owning this guy but half way into the game he called the judge over....he puled out the main rule book and referenced the page were it states that the primary goal is fun and if your not the game is over.... he was like i win! this guy is violating the primary rule of this game and packed his stuff up and awaited the rounds end and played his nex opponant.

its like what donovan told me jervis jonson said in the seminar at adepticon....40k is coopertive competition....both players should be helping each other create a fun battle and then after that is acomplished try to win.

thats why i enjoyed the scoring criteria i posted from the rrt at gryphon games and comics

[Rorschach]

I'm suddenly thinking of the Monty Python bit, where someone exclaims "You're no fun anymore!" and the guy in the plate mail appears and hits the no-fun guy over the head with a rubber chicken.

Hmmm...where can I get plate mail and a rubber chicken before the 28th? :-)

[Blackraine]

I'd like to participate in this... but before I build my list, there's one question I can think of at the moment that I need answered before building my list:

Since the Rules Boys were of absolutely no help, what is the rule we'll be using for deep strikes? Are they placed at the beginning of the turn, or during regular movement? (I usually place them at the beginning of the turn, but I know others were arguing in favor of different rules, and the rulebook said nothing one way or the other).

[Rorschach]

For this and other issues not adequately resolved in the official FAQs, I will be turning to the Adepticon FAQ

http://www.adepticon.org/files/40KFAQ_1.1.0.pdf

Your questions is answerd on page 17, namely:

Roll for all Reserves, then bring them on table in any order you wish, BEFORE moving units already on the table.

I know this contradicts part of our previous discussions, months ago, but I want to go with the general consensus out there. Adepticon seems to represent that.

Does anyone who's gone to Adepticon know of something in their FAQ they heavily disagree with?

-Dale

[Blackraine]

Cool, that's the way I play it. That'll make me feel better about not buying two Ravenwing battle boxes in my last spending spree.

[Rorschach]

Okay, I'm really leaning towards liking and using the list Kenny posted. I've cleaned it up a bit. Please comment:

Please fill out the following after each match. Each check will be worth 1 point, giving a potential of 14 extra points in each game. The questions are meant to be blunt and honestly answered.

My Opponent...
____ was reasonable in judging measurements, LOS, terrain, etc.
____ was polite, courteous, and friendly.
____ was generous in questionable situations.
____ came prepared to play, with rulebooks, dice, tape, templates, etc.
____ facilitated overcoming rules issues, or there were no rules issues.
____ allowed me to enjoy the game.
____ gave me such a fun game that I probably owe them a drink.

My Opponent’s army…
____ was fun to play against.
____ tried to do something different and interesting.
____ could reasonably exist in the 40K universe.
____ had units chosen or excluded for Theme reasons.
____ was well-balanced, and not a mere "one trick pony".
____ had Units I could easily distinguish from one another.
____ was completely finished, including a readable Army List.


This will appear on new Match Sheets for every player. You'll also get voting sheets that ask you to choose from amongst your 3 opponents:

Favorite Opponent
Favorite Army Theme and Comp
Favorite Army Appearance

The Scenarios will be the Adepticon ones (which I still need to get a hold of). i might tweak them a bit.
There will be no Judged Comp. There will be a Judged Paint Score of up to 18pts.

I will request Lists in advance by email or hardcopy. However, this is as a favor to YOU in checking your lists. If a list is found to be in error during the event, by me or your opponents, I will decide on-the-spot how to make amends. There are no hard and fast rules for that, so "Corrections" may range from merely removing the offending mistake from your list, to outright disqualification.
All players are responsible for checking over their opponent's list.

If you somehow get through the whole event with a major and advantageous "mistake" in your list, there is also the possibility of future banning if it is ruled intentional and malicious.

I'll repost all of this formally on the weekend, if I can get everything together.

-Dale

[WC_kenny]

cool...any extra points for e-mailing lists?

[umbraedominus]

so fun and sportsmenship is for losers. well then i am glad to be a loser and not a power gamer then. if you cant play to have fun i dont know why you play the game.

Dale i like the player vote thing it looks really cool and i think it will work very well

[PURGATUS]

so fun and sportsmenship is for losers. well then i am glad to be a loser and not a power gamer then. if you cant play to have fun i dont know why you play the game.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Rorschach]

cool...any extra points for e-mailing lists?

Nope...you just cut back on the chance of a mistake.

-D

[WC_kenny]

aight....is my man servant ROn going?

[PURGATUS]

who needs fun and sportsmanship when you're winning? those are just awards for losers...

[Warlord]

What was the award you just won in Fort Collins!!!?? :D Irony..... Tim makes me laugh very big!!

[ColGreeley]

It is the only award I shoot for.....I have won every award in an RT except for Best Overall, but I will admit, winning Sportmanship is the most satisfying to me. It means people really enjoyed playing against me and that means alot to me.

[PURGATUS]

well i guess the jig is up... i was hoping more people would take my comments seriously! :D HEHEHHEAHAHAAA!

[Warmaster]

Take Tim seriously, hmm.................................hmmmmm
:-)

[WC_kenny]

i know i dont

[ColGreeley]

Well, it will be interesting to see the different armies represented at this one. I know some people have started new armies over the past couple of months.

[WC_kenny]

I'm finally gooing to have an opportunity to bring the new Nurgle Hotness to the Haven....

@Rorschach
those new scoring sheets are pimp...and i suggest emphesizing to all the players the importance of brutal honesty on these score cards

[ColGreeley]

Your Nurgle stuff has laways rocked Kenny! Looking forward to seeing this new stuff.

[WC_kenny]

you should post up the updated rtt sign in sheet....i wanna re poste it on the WC site....actually u should...but ur lazy ass hell

[ColGreeley]

I will try to post this weekend as we have more slots filled.

[Gruebot]

Attn. Troy! I don't think I'll be able to make this tourney, you can take my name (Hank) off the list :( . And I'll try to swing by the store as soon as I get a chance to pick up my goods. Thanks:) .

[ColGreeley]

Are you sure? If so, then I will fill your spot with the first alternate.

[WC_kenny]

we're already filled up ?

nice....

@Troy
is this event designed to eduacate the newer 40k gamers....i heard you talking about running a tourny for them

[ColGreeley]

This is a regular RT. The one I am running for the newer players will be sometime in the summer once school is out. THe list is full. I will try to post it later this afternoon.

[ColGreeley]

UPDATED RT List as of April 21st.

1) Mike Tester
2) Rich Johnson
3) Ron Santoni
4) Tim Baptist
5) Mike Haspil
6) Travis Meeker
7) Kevin Kim
8) Chris Roberton
9) Taylor Klotz
10) Kenny
11) Donovan Tracy
12) Jonathan Devega
13) Stuart Lowery
14) Mike Gatzke
15) Mike Theemling
16) Edward Klein
17) Charles Scholfield
18) Trevis Marlar

There will be 2 Alternate slots open in case someone cannot attend.

Hank, I took you off the list as per your post.

[WC_kenny]

does Stuart Lowery post on this forum?

i love playing that guy....but i kinda wanna play up against Mike Gatzke....i havent play him for a while and im anxious to see how his Night Lords perform

[PURGATUS]

i heard he got kicked in the nuts the other day.

no seriously, i heard a midget kicked him in da nuts... who wants to play a guy that lets a squat kick him in da nuts? not me...

[The Blue Buddha]

There were nuts.

There were kicks.

However, there were no midgets, only Eldar.

Meh, I'm still getting a grip on the list. I've spent more time getting them ready than actually playing with them. I'd love to get in some scrimage games against experienced opponents if I can. Y' know, to work out the kinks.

Gimme a PM if anyone wants to stomp on me before the tournament.

--Gat

[ZenosTortoise]

does Stuart Lowery post on this forum?

i love playing that guy....but i kinda wanna play up against Mike Gatzke....i havent play him for a while and im anxious to see how his Night Lords perform

Heh. Yeah, I think Kenny and I have played eachother in like every tourny I've been in here in Colorado. It's a little spooky. Great, fun, tough games, though.

[WC_kenny]

ahh...the pimp returns..... u bringing ur lames ass alpha legion again?

u read the new chaos rumors.....only vets will infiltrate....i almost feel bad...and by "almost" i meen "not at all"

[ZenosTortoise]

Dunno what I'm gonna bring at the moment. I've got a Marine army I've been slowly painting, but haven't played with em yet, so probably not gonna take em to an RTT. And my Tau are still languishing away in their box. We'll just see what strikes my fancy.
And as for the new Chaos 'dex taking Infiltrate away... meh. We'll see. I wouldn't be too shocked if it happened, but I don't see the revised codex popping out any time real soon here. Besides, from what I've heard, GW is more or less doing away with ALL the special rules for the Undivided chapters, so, if I can use the Infiltrating Vets, and have them summon demons... :)

[TikiBoy]

I wouldn't mind playing Ron Again,and If I do play him, hopefully my plague marines will move faster than 2 inches through DT this time. :rolleyes:

[Warlord]

It was a good game but you did get jacked on the dice. Every turn was 2" move. I guess the water was deeper than it looked!!! You would think with all the Nurgle bloating you would float! :D

[PURGATUS]

naaah too fat n heavy.. they prolly pulled a pirates of the caribbean and walked along the bottom all slow like :)

[SgtBrowncoat]

the FAQ didn't cover it, and it has been a while since I have heard much of a discussion about it, so was there ever a straight answer reached about Dark Eldar jebikes getting the Eldar jetbike free 6' assualt move? The codex says they are "Almost the same as an Eldar jetbike apart from an added turbo-booster." but last time I asked noone knew if that meant they got the move or not.

Also, A recent discussion enshrouded this one in vagueness too:
Wych weapons affect "All enemies with an unmodified strength below 6"

Does that mean that if the enemy model has modified strength at all, he is immune, or is it referring to thier base strength before modification?

In other words, if a wych with a wych weapon is fighting a Marine with a power fist, base Strength 4 modified to 8, will the wych weapons affect the marine?

[USMC2USAF]

Ed:

Does the Dark Eldar Jetbike codex entry actually list it as a "jetbike"?
If it does then it should follow the rules of all jetbikes including the free 6" move during the assault phase.

Respectfully,
KEVIN

[Rorschach]

was there ever a straight answer reached about Dark Eldar jebikes getting the Eldar jetbike free 6' assualt move?
Yes, they do.



Does that mean that if the enemy model has modified strength at all, he is immune, or is it referring to thier base strength before modification? Base Strength before modification.

[Warmaster]

Okay since we are posting rules questions in here. Mixed armor rules question. You take majority armor when suffering wounds. But what happens when all models have an invulnerable save, what happens if it is a cover save? I think the rules are fairly explicit with cover saves but I haven't seen anything on mixed armor saves if all of them have an invulnerable.

So here's my Example. With Templars I take the vow that gives me a 6+ invulnerable save. If I have an 8 man squad 5 initiates (3+/6+) and 3 neophites (4+/6+).

If I get hit by a bolter and have to make a save i take it off the majority save which is a 3+.

If I get hit by a lascannon everyone has the same save, so can I pull a neophite?

[Rorschach]

If I get hit by a lascannon everyone has the same save, so can I pull a neophite?

I don't see why not. You used the majority Save in that case, and so may pull any model from those with that Save.

-D

[Marshall Gulich]

Gotta question here. I dont have the money to dump into forge world drop pods so i use some coffee cans and creamer cans painted up as my drop pods. Do you guys let that fly at the tourny or do i need to fork over the money :(
JT

[ZenosTortoise]

I had a quick question. When we did the AF RTT with these same scenarios, we needed to bring the Comm array, ammo crate, and objective markers. Do we need to do that again for this RTT?

[Laplace]

Gotta question here. I dont have the money to dump into forge world drop pods so i use some coffee cans and creamer cans painted up as my drop pods. Do you guys let that fly at the tourny or do i need to fork over the money :(
JT

Wow Gulich, you just opened up a big can o worms there.

Can't speak for Dale himself, but he has said in the past he would allow conversions if "they were good". Meaning if you just show up with coffee/creamer cans without any painting, he'd probably say 'No'.

But painted? depends how well I guess. And if it looks like some honest effort was put into it.

[Rogue428]

Gotta question here. I dont have the money to dump into forge world drop pods so i use some coffee cans and creamer cans painted up as my drop pods. Do you guys let that fly at the tourny or do i need to fork over the money :(
JT


Just sent you a PM about some alternatives to FW pods.

Also, might be able to let you borrow some pods just for the tourney (I need 'em back for the Vegas GT) but I'm not playing my DP army at the Haven. They probably wouldn't match your paint scheme (they are Grey/Red/and Gold). But they could work in a pinch if you're set on playing a DP list.

Let me know.

[ColGreeley]

Hey John Teets,

I signed you up as the 3rd Alternate for the 40K RT. Bring an army following all the requirements and see if you get in. It happens as sometimes players are not able to make it.

Troy

[Rorschach]

I had a quick question. When we did the AF RTT with these same scenarios, we needed to bring the Comm array, ammo crate, and objective markers. Do we need to do that again for this RTT?

If you have any of those, please bring them!
Otherwise, you'll be forced to improvise.

Consider it a standard for ALL RTT type events that you have ready, just in case:
-- Objectives (up to 6, incl. Ammo and Comm Array)
-- About 3 Messenger/Traitor models

[Rorschach]

Can't speak for Dale himself, but he has said in the past he would allow conversions if "they were good". Meaning if you just show up with coffee/creamer cans without any painting, he'd probably say 'No'.

I only allow conversions and scratch builds because GW offer no Viable alternative for a Basic Transport.
However, I don't think Coffee Cans would fly no matter how well painted. Unless they're some weird design that has that dark ages sci-fi feel.
Another key is that the MUST match the footprint of the large template, and not try to have some ungainly add-ons to claim "extra" cover.

I'd also advise thinking about the scenarios closely before choosing an all-DP army.

-D

[barontuman]

Ok, so using my scoring sheet and not making space for me in the tournament is one thing, but not even mentioning that it's originally mine? tsk, tsk... :)

[Rorschach]

Ok, so using my scoring sheet and not making space for me in the tournament is one thing, but not even mentioning that it's originally mine? tsk, tsk... :)

Kenny presented it in a different thread, and didn't credit it to anyone specific. Now that I know, I will be sure to give all accolades to Tony Scott. :-)

I really do love the thing too...the kick in the pants RTTs have needed.


Now, if you want to play, I'm sure I could arrange an 'accident' for someone...

[barontuman]

Kenny presented it in a different thread, and didn't credit it to anyone specific. Now that I know, I will be sure to give all accolades to Tony Scott. :-)

hehe I was just joking, it was a way of starting on the subject BTW. Anything I can do to help the hobby is good enough for me.


I really do love the thing too...the kick in the pants RTTs have needed.

I'm glad you like it. The idea was the put into writing all the stuff we talk about AFTER the tournament and make it blunt. I tell people not to "be nice" when scoring, but be as honest about your feelings as possible. Otherwise people tend to (still!) just check all the way down without really reading it, leaving this huge tie for sportsmanship.


Now, if you want to play, I'm sure I could arrange an 'accident' for someone...
Well, that weekend has already been booked, but I'd be really honored if I could get a spot (and maybe some notice... :) for the next one? It's a drag to only see many of you guys twice a year at Ghengis and Tacticon, plus I love meeting new people with new armies too!

I keep talking about doing a weekend with the family around CSprings based around a tournament at the Haven.

[PURGATUS]

note to the alternates: be sure to keep eyes peeled. I'm supposed to be painting a friend o mine's army for this RTT, but the minis haven't been delivered to me yet. if i were a betting man, I'd say we might have at least one drop...