|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Aug 10, 2019 20:09:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by raceygaming on Aug 11, 2019 9:10:35 GMT -5
This was definitely a more fun way to run kill points focused tournament, letting you score some sizable point even if you lose rather than a 10/7/3 scoring.
It was also nice to see a lot of games go pretty close to time cause there was no point in giving up, since you could still score some points off small units even if you couldn't win.
Blood for the Blood God! translated to Ork is WAAAAAAAGH!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Aug 11, 2019 10:55:07 GMT -5
Justin made a good observation for next time (assuming people want to play this format again) - having mission three be the first mission to give everyone a good baseline points, then using the other two missions afterwards, this way there is more movement in the top spots for the last two games.
|
|
|
|
Post by LizardTau on Aug 11, 2019 11:34:09 GMT -5
It was a great tournament super fun.
My first game I did amazing.
Second game if was dominated strategically by Matt. It was such a good game.
Last game beat taken apart by knights but won in secondaries.
I agree with the last mission being first.
Also I don't know how hard it would be to do victory points as in point cost or power level rather then kill points. While I liked that the kill points were adjusted for titanic and lows. But should a leviathan be the same kill points as a troop squad?
Now I understand if that would be hard to do or whatever I was just wondering.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Aug 11, 2019 14:26:11 GMT -5
have tried victory points in the past... does slow things down considerably. If someone has battlescribe, it's some simple math... if they don't? slows the process down a LOT. Part of the reason this tourney finished on time and there was little downtime between rounds (and no errors on the score sheets!) was that it was very simple to calculate things.
Victory points works for win/loss style, but given this was cummulative primary, it would make yet another step in calculating how many points equal what KP total.
|
|
|
|
Post by LizardTau on Aug 11, 2019 14:41:38 GMT -5
That makes sence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Typhus on Aug 11, 2019 17:04:33 GMT -5
While a lot of fun, I think it might be better off with something a little more nuanced than "your score is the sum of your Kill Points".
It feels somewhat unfair to go up against, for instance, a Custodes army and be able to table them completely... but also basically be automatically out of the running because their army only provided like 8 KP.
Also felt kind of unfair that Armigers are arbitrarily worth more KP than a Leviathan or Telemon Dreadnought.
Like I said, had an absolute blast, but I think if we're going to try this again it could use slme refinement.
|
|
|
|
Post by distractedcarnifex on Aug 11, 2019 22:52:33 GMT -5
Fun day! Format made a refreshing change - no point in conceding - fight to the bitter end!
I agree that the third scenario might have served better as the first one. Another option could be half Kill Points for your own dead pool?
I also agree that cumulative Kill Points and the formula had some issues. Perhaps try a Power Level formula for the Kill Points? Add up the PL of your kills and then divide by 5 (or 3) for the cumulative score? This way a Leviathan or 350 point Hellblaster Squad or Custodes Jet Bike Squadron gives a return in Kill Points commensurate to its value without too much math? It also puts the Victory Points on a more even playing field since PL will be somewhat even despite a difference in Unit count?
On the other hand, the point was destruction so who cares in the end about the score? Khorne doesn't!
Thanks for running it!
Iain
|
|
|
|
Post by LizardTau on Aug 12, 2019 4:54:35 GMT -5
in the end the true winner of the tournament was khorne lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Aug 12, 2019 5:17:55 GMT -5
There's no way to efficiently balance things like forgeworld leviathans in this kind of format and have it go quickly... in fact I'd contend as a TO there's no real way to balance leviathans because they're not really balanced to begin with.
The quick and dirty solution, that forgeworld follows the LOW/Primarch/Titanic chart as well.
We go round and round on these issues every so often, and every tourney (even this one it was pointed out to me) how unfun it is to play against forgeworld for some people. Other people don't have a problem whatsoever. The winner used codex models, had a high kill count (WAY higher than those with Leviathans for example) and still managed to take the whole thing.
I prefer victory points to kill points in general, however this was a specific format that focused on a specific theme and was the one tourney which WASN'T just a straight 10/7/3 format... which some people (especially those not in the top few spots) seemed to give some positive feedback about.
Again, just testing the format to see if it's something we'd like to include from time to time. If the format were to be switched to a 10/7/3 or complicate the scoring though, not sure there's really any point to do it. Might as well just run a regular tourney at that point.
|
|
|
|
Post by raceygaming on Aug 12, 2019 7:40:14 GMT -5
There's no way to efficiently balance things like forgeworld leviathans in this kind of format and have it go quickly... in fact I'd contend as a TO there's no real way to balance leviathans because they're not really balanced to begin with. The quick and dirty solution, that forgeworld follows the LOW/Primarch/Titanic chart as well. We go round and round on these issues every so often, and every tourney (even this one it was pointed out to me) how unfun it is to play against forgeworld for some people. Other people don't have a problem whatsoever. The winner used codex models, had a high kill count (WAY higher than those with Leviathans for example) and still managed to take the whole thing. I prefer victory points to kill points in general, however this was a specific format that focused on a specific theme and was the one tourney which WASN'T just a straight 10/7/3 format... which some people (especially those not in the top few spots) seemed to give some positive feedback about. Again, just testing the format to see if it's something we'd like to include from time to time. If the format were to be switched to a 10/7/3 or complicate the scoring though, not sure there's really any point to do it. Might as well just run a regular tourney at that point. I know I didn't play vs any forge world models but I do think reasonable fix would just making FW count double, so all your FW units are now 2 KP and you just make the FW LOW immune as they are already penalized on their own LOW table. I can't think of anyone running FW that isn't using it for a big 10-18 W model, so counting it as 2 help there. Obviously an army by army allowance might be needed cause I'd love to see a Death core army if some one had it but no amount of 10 man FW guard squads are worth 2 KP. The other option that could be used if the problem is small non LOW army (8 or less KP), then have a tabling bonus? if you table the enemy force gain X points? (now any effort to encourage tabling can have its own disadvantages) Any way in the end I personally like the all out attack style as a change of pace, it's a very different game when trading 1v1 is almost always worth it. seems like a good tournament to keep in the back pocket to shake things up every now and then. |
|
|
|
Post by Typhus on Aug 12, 2019 10:28:46 GMT -5
Personally, I think Victory Points / 100, rounded up, would be the best solution. Everybody's list would give out 20 points at most if they were completely eliminated. You could even penalize Titanic/Primarchs/whatever by making them award an additional point, although with VP I'm not even sure you would need to.
As long as everyone brings a list with the points cost of all their units on it, that shouldn't cause too much of a delay.
|
|
