Leviathan Tournament Feedback Thread

[voodoo]

Dear infanty baby jesus, hardly a day old... remind me next time to avoid a 46 player tournament in an non-air conditioned basement. I understand Mike's incentive to get as many players as possible to be "inclusive" but... that was too much in my opinion. My army list was soggy by the time I left for lunch.

I know this is a contentious idea, but could Mike pair with the library around the block to have a large venue for cheap to almost free that also has AC for summer tournaments?

1. How did you find having all the missions for the day laid out on a one pager, rather than a full page each mission?
- Amazing, it was easy to read and made it super nice to know what was coming next.

2. Was the table layout conducive to playing or was it too congested?
- Too congested, in my opinion, Nexus just can't handle that many people.

3. Did it help having people bring tables worth of terrain to increase the density / variety?
- Terrain was nice across all of my tables, I can't say that I disliked anything.

4. How do you feel about Forgeworld / Legends going forward?
- I feel like this time it was fine, but once adjustments and indexes go away from codices coming in, it'll be tough to see all of the interactions going forward. After seeing some of them in action, I completely 100% want to say yes... but I'm just not sure how they'll scale/interact with codices. Much testing is needed before I could be sure one way or the other.

5. Did you like the functionality of BCP (for those who had it) to make matchups easier? (and potentially submitting scores too if we get that figured out?)
- I don't have the app, but sure... made it nice, things seemed to go really quick for the re-matchups.

6. Is there anything we should do differently for our next tourney to make things better?
- I'd say air conditioning, but that's not a thing Nexus has access to, so... an area that does have that, which is also close by; or, less people during summer months. All of the game related stuff went well enough. I'm going to say something, and it's going to be upsetting to some. I feel like a turn clock would help. Not a chess clock, but a hard limit on turn length, if you get everything done in that time, that's great, if not, then whatever is unfinished just doesn't happen. I understand that this was an introductory tournament, but for the more competetive events, only going to 2-3 turns would absolutely knock anyone out of the running for any kind of awards for best general and/or best overall.

I don't know how to make it fair for everyone, but it's been brought up before; and I feel liek we as a community can brainstorm some ideas to make it a fair shake for everyone involved.

[Jack Shrapnel]

I traditionally run ZERO tournaments in July/August for this exact reason but everyone got so excited for 10th I figured we'd give it a shot. Any other time of year it's no where near as bad.

I'm glad people had fun despite it all, but it was WAY too hot for me for sure.

So some things I would actually like feedback on, since that's the name of the thread:

1. How did you find having all the missions for the day laid out on a one pager, rather than a full page each mission?
2. Was the table layout conducive to playing or was it too congested?
3. Did it help having people bring tables worth of terrain to increase the density / variety?
4. How do you feel about Forgeworld / Legends going forward?
5. Did you like the functionality of BCP (for those who had it) to make matchups easier? (and potentially submitting scores too if we get that figured out?)
6. Is there anything we should do differently for our next tourney to make things better?

[Hippocampus Expert]

For question two, I loved, loved, loved the look of the tables but in gameplay they were kinda congested. I did do the foolhardy thing of playing a horde army when there were tight timeframes to play a turn... Between my own other units and terrain I was having some issues moving squads upfield. I'm also a newer player so maybe that's normal, but it seemed to be more of an issue than expected

My only question is that I'd like more information about the app that is being used for this and future events, for my own use.

General feed back from me is that it was delightful to play, bit too warm for comfort. I am very happy to have won the terrain piece in the raffle, it's going to do a lot for setting up an at home battlefield. Thank you for hosting it the tourney!

[Jack Shrapnel]

Jul 22, 2023 20:15:01 GMT -5 Hippocampus Expert said:

My only question is that I'd like more information about the app that is being used for this and future events, for my own use.

www.bestcoastpairings.com/

great app, and it's free for everyone except the tourney organizer!

[sean]

Thanks for running it Shannon! I had a great time, I really hope all my opponents had fun too. Poor Chris my round 2 opponent, that was the luckiest game of 40k I have ever played, so many 6's and he was a great sport about it.

1. The mission sheet was totally fine at one page
2. I thought the tables were pretty good, considering the terrain available. There were a few more forest themed ones, that were very open. I get having a big ruined industrial building in a field doesn't really make sense, but the game really require a place in every deployment zone where you can hide a couple rhinos.
3. Great having other people bring tables (I'll work on my own to bring next time)
4. I like including forge world, I'd probably not allow legends.
5. My understanding of BCP, is that it works better from an app, and the functionally just using a web browser is poor. Most tournaments I've been to using BCP the TO has run it on an iPad. The lack of Wif/reception probably makes that difficult.
6. I liked that the mission rules, were preselected, I don't like when they slow the game down. Round 2, required placing objectives, which was just another step to do before starting playing, so I personally would prefer not to do that one again.

[ItsBird]

Why are we putting scare quotes around inclusive??

1. Worked fantastic. I found some of the text on the deployment images difficult to read but that was easily solved by having the cards.
2. The physical table layout? I actually like the way it was set up with the alley down the middle. The terrain layout? Seemed good overall!
3. More terrain will always get my vote. Even when I have to trundle a spartan through it.
4. Very torn on this. There are definitely forgeworld/legends models (mostly lords of war) that have no place at a friendly tourney imo. Most of them are just fun or goofy though.
5. I think if we prepare and have folks pretegister and use the app we can save a whole lot of trouble and work.
6. DAEMON WORLD

[distractedcarnifex]

1. One-pager was brilliant - I printed my own the night before
2. Layout worked fine.
3. Terrain was actually good. Caused problems for both players in all three games - which is how it should be. We might need to House-rule a bit, but that is on GW!
4. I had a Legends of the Horus Heresy model - basically a Space Marines Shadowsword. Now that the FW rules are being written by the 40K team they are less wonky, but I would be fine if they were restricted. Still, if we can have Knights then why not HH super-heavies? If this was the Falchion’s last dance at least he went out with a bang!
5. BCP is good but the cell signal down in the bunker is not reliable. Maybe I am doing something wrong? So keep using BCP!
6. Agree - no player placed Objs. Really liked the cards though - Tactical all the way!

Thanks for running this and thanks to my three opponents for great games. I learned a ton about 10th!

[Casper]

1. I really liked having the missions available on a one-pager earlier than the tournament day. I also enjoyed being able to look at the missions between rounds. No complaints there!

2. Table layout was fine. Due to the nature of terrain it's hard unless you have a lot of the same type of terrain. I think the only difference I would have made is making some type of "universal tournament standard" of what constitutes what from the TO's perspective. As if something is a ruin with windows or LOS blocking can make a huge difference. Especially with how GW's tournament guide has suggested to make a lot of equalized cover accross the tableway to avoid open shooting lanes. I found that personally as a melee army there wasn't really anywhere to hide. This could EASILY be a skill issue but my first game against Knights was an total open field essentially for the midboard - which would have just allowed free shooting. I think this was difficult to the amount of terrain we had vs the amount of people there was. Less so a critique of the tournament and moreso a critique of terrain as a whole being so fundemental in 10th it seems.

3. As to my above point - more the merrier. I could have brought some but I didn't see a call to arms for it - but I could have missed it.

4. I'll play devil's advocate on this point. As a new player I'm already struggling to learn what the hell each datasheet does and normally that's just "assume everything is bad and can hit me hard". Adding forgeworld/legends makes it even harder to learn what's going on because I don't know what models are "legal" in regular play. Obviously, if the TO or both players say their allowed - they are allowed. But, I wouldn't necessarily think that they should be allowed. SM have 100+ datasheets already - do they need more? I know, I know - the casual part of me says its just a game and people spent time/money on these models... but there is a bit of un-fun being like "oh this tank is the equivilant to a knight". I promise I'm not calling anyone out here (*cough* falchion *cough*)* but reality is Warhammer is a complex game already and I don't know if it needs to add stuff that isn't going to be deemed for balancing concerns.*

5. BCP was awesome. Internet in Nexus not reaching the back not so much. That being said - that's a limitation of the playspace. I really enjoyed BCP and I think it would be cool to add in people's lists to the next tournaments as part of the day-of sign-in. The 40k App is free so it should be pretty easy to post a list. I think it would be cool to see what people are bringing - mostly cause I don't know what's going on in this game yet. The post-reflection of a tournament could be cool to go back in and see what units were played/what you lost too. I'll be honest - half the the SM models are named Space Marines Intercessor to me... so it would help. 

6. As much as I hate to say it - I think there was too many people. It was extremely loud which is going to be a problem for everyone anyways, but especially people with sensory issues. The amount of people contributed to the heat and it was just really hard to move around as is. That being said - given the circumstances it worked out fine. The last thing I'd say is maybe lower the available round time. It would encourage faster play and especially helps the downtime between rounds. Given the amount of space and heat - you couldn't really spectate or do anything when your game finished. If it was a quick game due to an unfortuante stomp - both players really just had to wait. I think my first game I had close to two and a half hours between game 1 & 2 which was both good and bad. I know this was a learning tournament so some leniancy was involved but that would be my only comments.

All-in-all - THANK YOU. This was my first tournament and the most Warhammer I've played in a single day ever. It was exhausting and the heat didn't help - but it was a fun time. I really, really appreciate everyone in the community that I've met for being so open to new players. My partner said after the day was over that they wanted to actually play the next one due to my feedback - so being open and welcoming really does work.

*I tease because I know you can take it in good sport OhGodSnakes 

[mrmanstory]

1. Having missions laid out how they were was awesome it actually let me and my round 2 opponent get our game started a bit earlier after lunch.

2. I found the physical table layout good I found enough room to usually move around during my games. If you mean terrain on the tables I was on it seemed good.

3. I liked people bringing their own terrain I think it was neat seeing what people brought and what they probably usually play with when they aren’t at tournaments.

4. I didn’t play against any forgeworld stuff I think some should still be allowed but some things I know were a bit problematic. My main question is was the problematic stuff worse than the stuff that’s already broken in the core game?

5. I like BCP makes everything feel more official honestly.

6. More fans lol

[question]

I had a great day. This was my return to 40K events after nearly 5 years away. To Shannon's questions:

1) I like the one page/one day format. It forces both brevity & conciseness on the writer. The fact that each round I was able to answer "No" to Shannon's canvas of the room for questions is very telling. We got off to faster starts in each round with this format.

2) The table layout was much too congested. Heat aside, we shouldn't have to be constantly apologizing to other tables for moving around during or between rounds. Realistically that space shouldn't be hosting more than 36 bodies. And that may be a little on the high side. And the noise was deafening. Communicating clearly with each opponent I had was difficult to say the least. And 2 of the three were not what I would describe as soft spoken.

3) Absolute thumbs up on the outside terrain being welcome. Variety always helps the experience, but more importantly provides different tactical challenges.

4) At this point I'm good with FW & Legends as we move forward. I think we will need to monitor it as we move in to codices. I would also consider a cap on their inclusion, eg. 25-30% of the total points but again, that's based on developments.

5) I don't have the app but then I don't have data on my phone. I know Wifi is an issue at Nexus. So long as we have an analog alternative for match ups & scoring I have no objections to BCP.

6) For me the biggest thing to do differently will be to cut down on the congestion. Even in winter we play in short sleeves because of the heat build up due to too many bodies. Not to mention the incredible amount of noise. I played Tim in the middle of the room and we had to stand beside each other to make ourselves heard without making the noise level worse. Also, to me the issue of time control comes down to the individual players. If you have knights as I did, moving 8 pieces is a lot faster than moving a horde. I'm not sure putting people under the gun to complete each and every turn in each game in a set amount of time is a reasonable expectation. But if anybody out there has a workable idea that is fair to all, I'm willing to listen.

[Typhus]

1. Fantastic. Saves a lot of time on pregame discussion, and gets people rolling dice faster. Easy with the new decks to just print up "Search and Destroy, Chilling Rain, Take and Hold" and expect people to know what it means.

2. I thought it was fine, honestly. I didn't really feel crowded - although I was certainly sweating - and there were even tables going unused.

3. Yes. Love that, please keep it up.

Definitely agree that jungle world needs a few things that count as Ruins to be playable - the piece with the arch on it works, and there are probably others too.

I played among the rocky arches on round two, and it was a struggle to hide much. There were ruins in the corners, but one more piece centrally would have been ideal.

4. I'm fine with both. Legends and Forgeworld are weaker than Codex options these days, and their inclusion makes a list less competitive.

I know Lukas got second place with a super-heavy, but like - it's Lukas, guys. The man is good at Warhammer. A fleet of Predators would have served him better.

5. Yes. A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one.

6. I'll join the echo chamber and say that I also don't like Chosen Battlefield. It's fun, but time-consuming.

[dapperswain]

1. How did you find having all the missions for the day laid out on a one pager, rather than a full page each mission?

        Great idea.  One suggestion might be to release this page the night before so that players can print this off for reference.  

2. Was the table layout conducive to playing or was it too congested?

        The congestion in the room was more based on the number of players.

3. Did it help having people bring tables worth of terrain to increase the density / variety?

        Yes, it did help.  I brought a relatively large number of vehicles, so having terrain in the way created a challenge for me.  

4. How do you feel about Forgeworld / Legends going forward?

        My emotional response on this is that I want to play balanced games, and I hope that the TO can provide an environment that allows that.  I personally believe my statement is useless.  I don't know enough about balance to know what's balanced and what's not.  We're already playing with more money = more power on retail kits, so I'd just suggest going with whatever makes the TO's life easier.  

5. Did you like the functionality of BCP (for those who had it) to make matchups easier? (and potentially submitting scores too if we get that figured out?)

        I haven't used it yet.  I installed the app, but I need to double check what permissions it's accessing.  If it makes the tournament organizers lives easier, go for it.  

6. Is there anything we should do differently for our next tourney to make things better?

        Have a hard time cutoff for each game - dice down, no more moves - with strict enforcement.  Schedule a specific amount of downtime at the end of each game for deciding on what happened if a round is cut off or "talking it out".  If you don't need the time for that, still gives a post-game chance for discussion and mutual admiration of each others armies.

        No player placed objective missions? If the missions are all the same on each table, get someone to place the objectives between matches so that the next round can start right away.

        Summon an ice elemental, paid in a tithe of sweat and surplus funko pops, to cling to the rafters and cool/dehumidify the play area. Failing that, have fewer players or find an airconditioned venue.

[Jack Shrapnel]

I'm honestly surprised at people not liking a mission with player placed objectives.... you have to figure out where to put the objectives anyways that game - how is this taking more time than trying to figure out all those measurements?

That mission rule will likely still come up in future tournaments. I'm trying to follow the GW recommendations for missions/rules for running tournaments, and that one is in there as a recommendation, so I'm still going to use it... especially for the two day tourneys where I only have so many options to mix it up.

[dapperswain]

Jul 22, 2023 19:07:52 GMT -5 voodoo said:

I'm going to say something, and it's going to be upsetting to some. I feel like a turn clock would help. Not a chess clock, but a hard limit on turn length, if you get everything done in that time, that's great, if not, then whatever is unfinished just doesn't happen. I understand that this was an introductory tournament, but for the more competitive events, only going to 2-3 turns would absolutely knock anyone out of the running for any kind of awards for best general and/or best overall.

I don't know how to make it fair for everyone, but it's been brought up before; and I feel like we as a community can brainstorm some ideas to make it a fair shake for everyone involved.

Based on your avatar and army list posts, I'm going to assume that you were my last opponent of the day.  If not, consider this an open letter on the topic you're addressing here.  

Hi!  I'm the guy who brought five dreadnoughts to a tournament and has only played four games of 40K.  Our game should have been the fastest for me, considering I've already read up on Thousand Sons and I had a plan.  My turns were slow due to my inexperience and I'm genuinely sorry that I couldn't give you a satisfying game in this tournament.  

On the subject of a clock: if a clock is going to be used - which I support and encourage - I would prefer it to be in the chess clock style.  I'll play my new player slow turns and time out somewhere in round two.  At the point where I'm out of time, I will state that all my units fail their combat saves and make no melee attack responses - no more dice rolls.  I'll display my unit index cards so my opponent can see my unit toughness stats and any wounds are assumed to go through, but roll no more dice. This is my honestly preferred solution.  When I'm out of time, my opponent can take all the actions they want and I will remove my pieces from the board.  I will stay engaged at the table with respect for my opponent and answer any questions they need while they finish their play.  

Also, I will probably skip any tournament that uses a clock.  I already steer clear of the competitive tournaments at Nexus out of respect for the other players.  When I can play a 2K game in two hours, I will join again.  




On a more direct response, I was so heatstroked by the end that I forgot that secondaries even existed.  My quick printed strategem pages were so moist with collective nerdsweat that the text was rubbing off and I was having trouble referencing them.

A big part of my plan for the tournament was that bringing only 28 units would make my play faster.  I didn't forsee the reality that dreadnoughts, with two to four gun profiles, would each be an army in themselves.  I had a basic plan, but no efficiency experience in what profiles can be rolled together.

I viewed the tournament as a challenge for myself - in painting and playing.  I wasn't even expecting to participate, only joining when the extra slots opened up.  I've read the 10th edition rules and my army rules, but that's not enough.

Again, I genuinely apologize for not providing a satisfying tournament game.  

[dapperswain]

Jul 24, 2023 9:03:31 GMT -5 Jack Shrapnel said:

I'm honestly surprised at people not liking a mission with player placed objectives.... you have to figure out where to put the objectives anyways that game - how is this taking more time than trying to figure out all those measurements?

That mission rule will likely still come up in future tournaments. I'm trying to follow the GW recommendations for missions/rules for running tournaments, and that one is in there as a recommendation, so I'm still going to use it... especially for the two day tourneys where I only have so many options to mix it up.

I'm new player, so I will probably fuck up the placement. It's one additional skill issue on top of skill issue.


I'm hoping for future tournaments that the objectives are placed between rounds by tournament helpers. I can do it, but it's taking up game time.