|
Post by onlurker on Jul 28, 2013 23:37:14 GMT -5
I really like the European Team Championships, thought I'd share for those that don't know what it is. ETC is a mongering of all different nations (including non-European) in a WHFB, 40K & FoW week long singles + team championships, every year. 2013 is in Serbia, and the lists are released- they play next week. The lists are SO interesting!! I'd like to hear people thoughts, about which list will do best for your favorite army. (to search the page, hit CTRL + F & type it in) It's cool to see what's competitive, but remember it's ETC rules, so it's not unlimited, but comp'd (i.e. Wood Elves get 2700 pts, not 2400- and still only got picked once). Ogres got neutered pretty good, but people do what they can (organized mainly through a forum), and it gets better organized each year. ______________________________________________________ ETC Forum (trash talk link is pretty funny) ETC Website (kinda boring) The best coverage I could find of the event doesn't really touch on Batreps- more just interviews: Joey Berry
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 29, 2013 5:54:53 GMT -5
Slaugther Master/Iron Blaster 0-1/Standard of Discipline/Crown of Command, max 2 in total.
so if I bring a slaughtermaster and the standard of discipline (so I'm not stuck with a L8 general) I cannot bring an iron blaster (and only ever one!) or the crown of command so my 1k point unit doesn't go running off the board...
but skaven can bring a hellpit, warp lightning cannon and screaming bell under the same restrictions?
ummm yeah... okay....
I've never, ever been a fan of ETC comp myself... it seems terribly random and punishes some armies far more than others...
|
|
|
Post by stonecutter on Jul 29, 2013 6:38:41 GMT -5
The ETC is quite interesting but the rules for ETC are a relatively new development that has evolved over the last several years. Previously, many US & European tournaments made use of the Warhammer Players' Society (WPS) system to address the issue of comp. The main aim of any comp "system" was to level the playing field between different armies. In theory, WPS was fairly simple since any tournie organiser could select a WPS points threshold (e.g. 3000+) and players would build an army to meet that requirement. Essentially, sub-optimal units awarded points while uber units (hellpit, sallies, ironblaster, etc.) would subtract points. Thus, a tourney could vary anywhere from "soft" to "hard boyz" or a larger tournament could simply tier all the players into an appropriate group (some big tournies in Europe/US had 100+ players!!!). Unfortunately, the WPS was fairly complicated as the attached example illustrates by its 21 pages of rules! Attachment Deleted With WPS becoming unwieldy, the ETC rules were created and it is easy to see the evolution between the two systems. The ETC rules are a comparatively simple method of bringing greater parity to army lists and forcing players to employ tactics and cunning rather than brute force to win games. In many senses, the ETC rules are a backlash against power gaming. Perhaps most importantly however, ETC is a player driven initiative that is created, maintained and changed by players based on a strong, community consensus. There is an entire website dedicated to the ETC with team captains from each country contributing to the ETC rules. Having played at numerous tournies both with and without comp, I must confess that I do prefer the former since I find comp restrictions do tend to force one to plan and think more rather than using such a refined tactic as "heh diddle, diddle, straight up the middle!". As an example, when Kbear and I went to Rochester last year for Da Boyz GT, the organizer wanted to create an environment for fun and enjoyable gaming that reduced key criticisms of veteran players with 8th edition - namely, excessive use of uber units, terrain having no impact and magic being too powerful. To achieve this, special/rare choices were reduced to 2/1 maximum, terrain that blocked LOS was provided and magic restrictions were in place (max 12 dice in a phase & spells like dwellers were limited to doing a single wound, maximum of 5 dice on any casting attempt). Also, since woodelves had not been seen on the tourney circuit in the US in a couple years, he provided some WE specific rules to make it more attractive to bring them. The end result was a fantastic tourney that was a lot of fun IMHO. At the end of the day, the decision on whether or not to use some type of comp needs to be reflective of what the local gaming community wants and the ETC does exactly that for the ETC community. While I too find the ETC rules a little stifling, I think the intent is correct and wouldn't mind trying an "ETC-lite" variant of the rules myself - a variant, of course, that reflected the desires of our own gaming community.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 29, 2013 7:10:14 GMT -5
across the board restrictions such as limiting power dice cast at a specific spell, or special and rare choices are completely fine with me as far as "comp" as it levels the playing field with respect to everyone having to deal with less uber-units, over the top magic, etc.
The things you're talking about from Da Boyz for example seem like fine comp choices (and when you talked about this previously I said that then as well). taking specific armies that are "perceived" as less strong (ie: wood elves) and giving them more points to play with is also fine in a tournament environment, but let's face it, locally wood elves don't do badly at all. The more abusive netlists out there just aren't used around here very often (and we'd certainly razz anyone who brought the crazy stuff) so I just don't see the need for it at all...
if you're travelling to a GT, well sure, you probably want to make sure that when you run into the 50+ saurus block/slaan/life magic combo supported by 9 salamanders that you have a fighting chance, or that you just don't have to ever face that... ever... I get that...
comp is only necessary if the game is unbalanced... the books released in 8th did a great job in balancing out armies... yes there's a few armies still languishing in the old release schedule of 2 books a year (or none for a year!) that GW was doing... I think within a year there will be zero need for comp. That's my prediction.
Why would I even say this? well the GW release schedule has gone crazy fast... and they learned alot from 40k, which was terribly unbalanced in 5th edition, but within a year they fixed it. completely. The new edition of the game took care of the balance issues, and new army releases just reinforced that. Why didn't they do that with fantasy you ask? well I maintain fantasy 8th edition was a testing ground for some of the new 40k rules which they got down pat by the time 40k was released. We know that 9th edition is being released next year, and at this release rate, the vast majority of all the books will be updated as well... if they learned anything from 40k that is... but I would wager they want WHFB sales to increase... alot...
|
|
|
Post by canadianguy on Jul 29, 2013 7:16:32 GMT -5
I agree, simple changes can go along way ie some line of sight blocking terrain, any of the big six can do a max 1 wound with no save. I would be happy right there but would consider limits on some combos, chuck Norris, or units sallies as an example.
|
|
J4far
Immortal
Posts: 443
|
Post by J4far on Jul 29, 2013 11:40:02 GMT -5
Hmm well as I don't have as much experience in 8th as most of you, reading through the ETC rules seems harsher for some armies than others. I really like the points cap on individual units to avoid insane deathstars that are just not fun to deal with, but the magic restrictions are a tad harsh. I'm viewing this from a Tomb Kings bias right now, where I am forced to take a caster, and many things are geared towards magic dominance which actually makes the army work. They do get an extra 200 points to play with compared to many armies but considering the army can't march and relies on magic (partially) to offset their serious lack of mobility it would make it even harder to gain magic dominance with the dice generation restrictions.
Edit: That being said I would definitely try it out at least once to get a better idea.
|
|
|
Post by stonecutter on Jul 29, 2013 14:23:56 GMT -5
By the sounds of it, I think the following (or something similar) would probably work for our next tournament: 1) Magic - max 5 dice at any spell and maximum use of 12 power dice in a phase (gobbo magic mushrooms don't count but everything else does). Spells like dwellers, dreaded 13th, etc. allow a "look out, sir" roll. I am not as keen on the only one wound inflicted approach since it inherently favours any army with monstrous troops over those without. 2) Maximum Unit size of 500 with upgrades and magic. Who cares if someone fields 100 slaves/gobbos/gnoblars 3) Terrain & LOS - LOS consists of the forward arc of 90 degrees. Hills & buildings block LOS. We could give it a try this Thursday and see how it works. LMK what you think.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 29, 2013 14:54:11 GMT -5
I like it...
|
|
Edg3ofR3ason
Immortal
Champion of the Anvach Arena of Death
Contrary to popular opinion, 'I'm not dead yet!'
Posts: 340
|
Post by Edg3ofR3ason on Jul 30, 2013 7:37:13 GMT -5
I like it as well. I would also like to suggest that any comp not include exceptions like: If your DE army doesn't take lore of shadow then you can run two hydras or If you present a list that does not fit the comp rules but you present a good argument as to why it should be accepted and its deemed 'fair' then you can use it. I don't want to tread on anyone playing preference or style but it does make for a frustrating time for those who follow the comp rules set out if you knew ahead of time that 'exceptions' to the rules would be acceptable in preparing your list. Just my rant for the moment. And don't worry I'm not part a BZL member ..........................yet!
|
|
|
Post by stonecutter on Jul 30, 2013 8:29:44 GMT -5
Kbear - Not to worry. Since this is our "comp" system we can enforce it 100% with no exceptions. That is, of course, unless you would like to have an exception to the no exceptions rule
|
|
Edg3ofR3ason
Immortal
Champion of the Anvach Arena of Death
Contrary to popular opinion, 'I'm not dead yet!'
Posts: 340
|
Post by Edg3ofR3ason on Jul 30, 2013 9:01:17 GMT -5
Usay speakinay myay languageay.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jul 30, 2013 9:29:50 GMT -5
The three restrictions Frank posted seem to be good in that they are generalized across all armies and addresses the biggest complaint with 8th (the ridiculousness of the magic phase)to some extent. I say some extent because in my opinion until all the book lores are redone by GW with 9th edition magic will remain a highly broken system. I like what they've done with the army book lores much better, and I know they're trying, but the real problem needs to get addressed.
Having terrain matter would be great, and Scott has brought up several times that we need to be using impassible terrain more often. I didn't realize that LOS wasn't already in the forward arc, so that's obviously one I support.
Maximum unit size of 500 is likewise fine.. it's a pretty rare unit that would be bigger than that...
|
|
J4far
Immortal
Posts: 443
|
Post by J4far on Jul 30, 2013 10:36:48 GMT -5
Not hard at all when fielding a horde of elite troops. 40 WL are already over without any upgrades. Not that I would consider fielding that (or have the models to) but seeing as how that is the cookie cutter HE cheese unit with the banner of skill, I think it helps moderate a few other seemingly overpowered combinations without adding any unnecessary extra restrictions.
|
|
|
Post by davidp on Jul 30, 2013 11:50:19 GMT -5
I like the idea of comp (since it only ever benefits woodies) and the only problem I see may not be a problem at all. That is that the dreaded thirteenth and the buffed purple sun have casting values of 25 specifically because the average on 6d6 is 21 + 4 wizard levels = 25. Taking it down to 5 dice makes these spells much harder to cast (though maybe makes an argument for taking a power scroll). I know I don't like to see either of those spells, but am a sympathizer since I find myself sometimes in situations (playing against skaven or warriors) where I feel dwellers is an important tool in my arsenal, and without it I'm really handicapped. This despite all the hate dwellers gets. Also of note, look out sir against magic helps with pit and purple sun, but not dwellers or final transmutation. What I tried with some friends back home that we really liked (sparked by a grey seer being dwellered for the 3rd time) was allowing magic resistance against spells that don't allow ward. Since MR only works against spells, it seemed silly to have spells which deny it. Using the grey seer on a bell as an example (MR 2), and assuming dwellers is cast and not dispelled, the odds of killing the seer goes from 50/50 to to 1 in 3.
Overall I like what Frank suggested and am not saying my way is better, simply pointing things out for the sake of discussion.
|
|
|
Post by stonecutter on Jul 30, 2013 13:07:31 GMT -5
As a woodelf players myself, I know that dwellers is sometimes the only tool in the toolbag when facing hordes. However, with the limit on unit size, the hordes are much more manageable since the elite ones will be cut down to ~25 models, a number that can be tackled even by woodelves. The granting of a look out, sir roll for dwellers and similar spells makes them far less hate-worthy while retaining the utility of the spells. As for dreaded 13th, the skaven still have 11 other spells at their disposal and most skaven players use a power scroll anyhow since there is only a 50% chance of casting the spell with 6 dice - unless you are Scott, in which case the probability of success is ~2%
|
|