Meeting Engagements

[EMMachine]

2 minutes ago, Mungrun said:

Any idea of how this will affect Idoneth's gameplay? If most of the army appear in turn 2 they won't be synchronized with the waves system. 

Perhaps Deepkin has do go with MSU deployment so you have 6-7 units and field 3-4 Units in the Spearhead and fast stuff in Main and rear.

[Gaz Taylor]

I think everybody is getting too fixated about how some armies will be too good under these rules. It’s a set of rules to let you take a small army, hop on a train or bus and play at local store. It’s a set of rules to play quickly over lunch or after work. It’s a set of rules to play when you’ve just painted up 1000 points.

Its just another way of playing 😉

[Dead Scribe]

It is another way of playing, but one that people think will be a new tournament standard.  I am dubious on that.  If it does become a new tournament standard, it is pretty easy for me to see what type of armies are going to do really well based on the restrictions posed to us.

[Overread]

I think it won't replace 2K tournaments, but that GW hopes it will make 1K events a viable alternative. This is again GW removing barriers to entry and play. 2K is a lot of points to work out to for many people, esp those who are younger and aren't earning regular money. Promoting 1K events and making them more viable is a great way to encourage that generation and market segment of newer gamers who don't have a 2K army. 

It's also great for the segment who army hop a lot, who might have several forces that only just get to 1K or maybe not even that. Again encouraging them by giving more potential staging points to play at is all about encouraging people to reach easier targets - get more into the hobby and thus make the further off ones not so distant.

 

It's about shattering that system that the Old World game had whereby you had to build up to 2.5K typically for many events in a model heavy rank and file system that defeated many before they'd even played their first "proper" games. 

[kenshin620]

Oh yea completely agree, this isn't suppose to be some new tournament format everyone needs to follow, just a new way to play 1000pts.

 

I do wonder though if Bonesplitterz will have a leg up since everything they have is battleline!

[Dead Scribe]

t's about shattering that system that the Old World game had whereby you had to build up to 2.5K typically for many events in a model heavy rank and file system that defeated many before they'd even played their first "proper" games. 

Keep in mind that the previous version of warhammer also had 1000 point games and 3000 point games as well.

The reason everyone had to build up 2.5k points for events was not because there was no format, it was because the community enforced that standard.

[EMMachine]

20 minutes ago, kenshin620 said:

Oh yea completely agree, this isn't suppose to be some new tournament format everyone needs to follow, just a new way to play 1000pts.

 

I do wonder though if Bonesplitterz will have a leg up since everything they have is battleline!

In case of Free People, it is partly the same.

I have wrote a list in the Free People Thread:

where basicly everything except for the hero is battleline it I would play Free People Allegiance.

[Sadysaneto]

loved it. Only thing i might be concerned is forcing minimum/double minimum size for units 

 

-Units in the spearhead can only be taken at their minimum size.

-One Battleline unit in the main body can be taken at up to double their minimum size. -any number of Battleline units in the rearguard can be taken at up to double their minimum size.

[EMMachine]

23 minutes ago, Sadysaneto said:

loved it. Only thing i might be concerned is forcing minimum/double minimum size for units 

 

-Units in the spearhead can only be taken at their minimum size.

-One Battleline unit in the main body can be taken at up to double their minimum size. -any number of Battleline units in the rearguard can be taken at up to double their minimum size.

It's basicly the only way, to restrict the game that there aren't only hordeunits on the field (except for cases like Clanrats what only have 20 or 40 models)

[Kramer]

32 minutes ago, Sadysaneto said:

loved it. Only thing i might be concerned is forcing minimum/double minimum size for units 

 

-Units in the spearhead can only be taken at their minimum size.

-One Battleline unit in the main body can be taken at up to double their minimum size. -any number of Battleline units in the rearguard can be taken at up to double their minimum size.

Personally I think that's the main change. The 3 parts of the army is already in a couple of scenarios. Although I do see why it works for the goal of meeting engagement. 

[SwampHeart]

Looks like a fun way to play - probably won't become my default (mainly because I don't think it'll replace 2k as the tournament standard). But it is a nice way to get more games in on a Thursday night game night. I also expect to see lots of Friday before the main event Meeting Engagement tournaments as well. From a balance stand point its already no better than what exists in AoS right now (Morathi isn't a behemoth for example). 

[Elmir]

3 hours ago, Gaz Taylor said:

I think everybody is getting too fixated about how some armies will be too good under these rules. It’s a set of rules to let you take a small army, hop on a train or bus and play at local store. It’s a set of rules to play quickly over lunch or after work. It’s a set of rules to play when you’ve just painted up 1000 points.

Its just another way of playing 😉

Oh? I thought this game mode was done specifically with 1k matched play (tournament style) in mind as the community articles made it out to be.  In fact, I've included the quotes from the original warhammer community article  that pretty much says so. 

I thought the specific intent of this new way of playing, was to make 1k point games slightly more engaging and not just boiling down to "can you stop this deathstar"? But no restrictions whatsoever are placed on the type of behemoth you can field. 

" Meeting Engagements are designed for matched play"

"In practice, this means that Meeting Engagement armies are pretty lean – rather than depending on a single, deadly unit or unstoppable Behemoth, you’ll need to pick your units carefully, using all of them in tandem to claim victory."

I'll be waiting for the full set of rules of course, but it does seem like they kind of let something slip in their original design if I could just field my grisstlegore AGKoTG in a 1k point game (with the main nerf being, missing out on one turn to curbstomp an opposing 1k force). 

[Sadysaneto]

42 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

It's basicly the only way, to restrict the game that there aren't only hordeunits on the field (except for cases like Clanrats what only have 20 or 40 models)

yeah, but on the other hand, it might make impossible to hordes armies to face elites.

Dunno, i think they balance each one this way volume vs power.

[Kramer]

32 minutes ago, Elmir said:

Oh? I thought this game mode was done specifically with 1k matched play (tournament style) in mind as the community articles made it out to be.  In fact, I've included the quotes from the original warhammer community article  that pretty much says so. 

I thought the specific intent of this new way of playing, was to make 1k point games slightly more engaging and not just boiling down to "can you stop this deathstar"? But no restrictions whatsoever are placed on the type of behemoth you can field. 

" Meeting Engagements are designed for matched play"

"In practice, this means that Meeting Engagement armies are pretty lean – rather than depending on a single, deadly unit or unstoppable Behemoth, you’ll need to pick your units carefully, using all of them in tandem to claim victory."

I'll be waiting for the full set of rules of course, but it does seem like they kind of let something slip in their original design if I could just field my grisstlegore AGKoTG in a 1k point game (with the main nerf being, missing out on one turn to curbstomp an opposing 1k force). 

Also from The  community site:

‘Meanwhile, Meeting Engagements let you enjoy all the thrills of matched play in a fraction of the time and with smaller armies’

which was their original announcement and while both can be true... This paints, in my view, a different focus. Not tournament play but faster play being the main concern. 

But like you said we we’ll have to see the full rules. And I’ll add to that the intent we’ll never be known. 

[tripchimeras]

I am going to be honest, I was pretty worried when I saw the announcement that the GHB would be bringing focus to 1k pts as a more competitive pt level.  1k pts definitely was not balanced at all, and generally sucked to play unless you and your opponent were very careful to work together to create 2 lists that balanced and played off eachother well.  So I had no issue with them giving a little love to make it easier to pick up and go without too much balance worry, but the mention of competitive made me worried they would spend A. too much time on an impossible task (1k is never going to be as balanced as 2k unless they completely rewrite the game) B. They would try to supplant 2k entirely.

Neither appears to be happening.  The rules are honestly quite bold for GW, and look a ton of fun, some of them even look like things they should consider scaling up to 2k in the future.  They do a much better job of balancing out the worst aspects of 1k games (minus summoning, hopefully they do something about that as well at some point), without it dominating the entire handbook.  It looks like a lot of fun, and it will not only be more balanced but give a different feel then 2k games for a nice change of pace.  1k is never going to be a real tourney option, and based on these rules, it doesn't look like GW really even tried for that.  But what it can be now is a fun organized event at a smaller store, or in an escalation league. 

I love 2k games, and the massed feel of them is why I enjoy this hobby.  I never wanted them replaced in the first place, and to boot, point levels and unit abilities are balanced around that higher army total.  1k still is going to experience the pain of units that are too powerful for the point level, or who's rules are wonky without the larger armies.  There are still going to be endless spells that are fine at 2k but too powerful at 1k, and singular behemoths that have counters at 2k, but pretty much just roll through your army at 1k.  But honestly, I am fine with that.  These rules look fun, and most of the stuff that is still OP at 1k is pretty obviously now.  What these rules do is provide a different experience, and make it far more difficult to accidentally roll your opponent.  It should be much easier now to make a balanced, competent list without one person having no fun, then it was before.  I think that was the only realistic goal to be had in a game where so much is balanced around a higher point total, and I think they achieved it. 

If someone wants to be "that guy" in their local shop, they can certainly do that, even easier then they can at 2k.  But at least now it should make it harder to do accidentally.  My friends and I are slowly getting back into the hobby after finally recovering from the sting of WHFB being disbanded, and I can't tell you the number of times we have accidentally rolled over eachother at 1k or 1.25k without having any idea it was about to happen, simply due to how unbalanced list building is at that point level.  This should help a lot with that.  I'm still going to struggle with my Deepkin at the lower point total though, but such is life with an elite army.  It is very difficult to find balance at low points with them, it feels like I either take unoptomized ******, or I take god units that can't be handled at the low point spread.  This is going to help, but Deepkin are def still going to have trouble bringing balanced lists at low point levels (maybe the pt changes coming will turn some of our garbage to middle of the road units, which would go a long way to fixing this problem.  Deepkin are pretty much entirely feast or famine with very little in the middle).

Anyways, I think as long as the community accepts it for what it is, and doesn't try to make it the tournament replacement some want it to be, it is going to be great.  We just need to understand the limitations.  At 2k I get miffed at people complaining about power gamers within reason.  In general I always advocate reading the room, when not playing with friends before you bring out your list, but the game is meant to be balanced at 2k so in general 2 guys bringing what they believe to be good, shouldn't be an issue.  But 1k is different, and power gaming at that point level shouldn't exist to begin with, because I don't believe competitive play to be possible at it, and I think that is pretty much still true, but I don't have any issue with that fact personally.  Sorry for crazy long rant as first post on this forum, I just think the 1k changes can't be interpreted as anything other then making a casual experience more fun.

[Equinox]

59 minutes ago, tripchimeras said:

Anyways, I think as long as the community accepts it for what it is, and doesn't try to make it the tournament replacement some want it to be, it is going to be great. 

I believe you are misreading some of the reactions people are having to this new format.  I have yet to read anyone claiming it will replace 2k Matched Play.  Instead, it seems those like myself are excited because it provides a format within a point level that we enjoy.  I am sure those that are inclined to do so will break this format.  How is that any different from what is seen at 2k?   

  

59 minutes ago, tripchimeras said:

1k is never going to be a real tourney option, and based on these rules, it doesn't look like GW really even tried for that.  But what it can be now is a fun organized event at a smaller store, or in an escalation league.

Why?  If someone wants to invest the time and effort to run a 1k tournament, how does that make it any less of a valid option?  That would be like saying little league baseball tournaments are not as real an option as those held at the collegiate level (or MLB level).  Speaking for myself, I have driven 4+ hours each way for the last couple years to attend a 1k tournament held in another state.  In comparison, I don't even bother with the 2k tournaments that are closer because I find them to not be a good fit for me.  Just because something doesn't fit what you are wanting out of a hobby, that doesn't mean it cannot be a valid option for others.

Edited June 12, 2019 by Equinox

[tripchimeras]

1 minute ago, Equinox said:

I believe you are misreading some of the reactions people are having to this new format.  I have yet to read anyone claiming it will replace 2k Matched Play.  Instead, it seems those like myself are excited because it provides a format within a point level that we enjoy.  I am sure those that are inclined to do so will break this format.  How is that any different from what is seen at 2k?   

  

Why?  If someone wants to invest the time and effort to run a 1k tournament, how does that make it any less of a valid option?  That would be like saying little league baseball tournaments are not as real an option as those held at the collegiate level (or MLB level).  Speaking for myself, I have driven 4+ hours each way for the last couple years to attend a 1k tournament held in another state.  In comparison, I don't even bother with the 2k tournaments that are closer because I find them to not be a good fit for me.  Just because something doesn't fit what you are wanting out of a hobby, that doesn't mean it cannot be a valid option for others.

Maybe not in this topic, but I have absolutely seen people asking for it to become the standard.  I am speaking from a competitive standpoint, 2k is the competitive standard and it is the standard to which point values and battle tomes are balanced.  Play whatever you want, and organize whatever events you want.  If you prefer 1k as a point level, play it.  That is all great.  But 1k is not as balanced as 2k and it cannot be without a significant rewrite of rules and either wholly changing the balance point of the game from 2k to 1k, or publishing seperate unit rules and points costs at each level.  Doesn't mean you can't play a 1k tournament, but it does mean that I do not think people should be expecting a 1k tourney to be balanced or competitive.  If you disagree, that's fine, but I think it is difficult to argue with that 2k is more balanced, and that these new rules do not change that.  I certainly think they will make the 1k game vastly more entertaining then it currently is, and events for it more fun and enticing.  But for all the balance issues 2k has, they are infinitely worse at 1k, and as a someone who has always loved competitive tabletop gaming I don't think 1k is a level you can successfully accomplish in the same manner you can at 2k.  That is the point of my post.  These rules are a great way to revitalize 1k as a fun casual play style, but I do not think they will work so well if people start trying to take the format seriously as a competitive mechanism.  I am sure you can have a ton of fun at a 1k tourney, but competitive play is just going to be horrifically unbalanced, and I don't see much point in trying to make it less unbalanced when the game is literally built around 2k.

[Carnelian]

11 minutes ago, tripchimeras said:

 competitive play is just going to be horrifically unbalanced, and I don't see much point in trying to make it less unbalanced when the game is literally built around 2k.

I think its way too early to judge how competitive 1k tournaments will play under this format. We're not even sure if we've seen the full rules for it yet.

Why not back up a bit and give the new format a chance to breathe and get a few games in before pronouncing it as "horrendously imbalanced"? 🤣 We've literally only had a warhammer community article that came out yesterday. 

Also, the game is not "literally built" around 2k. The game is built around 3 ways to play with each way within that having multiple other ways to play that way.

[Gaz Taylor]

2 hours ago, Elmir said:

Oh? I thought this game mode was done specifically with 1k matched play (tournament style) in mind as the community articles made it out to be.  In fact, I've included the quotes from the original warhammer community article  that pretty much says so. 

I thought the specific intent of this new way of playing, was to make 1k point games slightly more engaging and not just boiling down to "can you stop this deathstar"? But no restrictions whatsoever are placed on the type of behemoth you can field. 

" Meeting Engagements are designed for matched play"

"In practice, this means that Meeting Engagement armies are pretty lean – rather than depending on a single, deadly unit or unstoppable Behemoth, you’ll need to pick your units carefully, using all of them in tandem to claim victory."

I'll be waiting for the full set of rules of course, but it does seem like they kind of let something slip in their original design if I could just field my grisstlegore AGKoTG in a 1k point game (with the main nerf being, missing out on one turn to curbstomp an opposing 1k force). 

It’s just another way of playing. A lot of players will approach it from a competitive point of view but it’s not just for that. 

If you want to field a tough army, that’s fine. For mean it means it’s easy to tweak my 1000 point force to have an answer to it or come up with something else. 😉

But I think this is a brilliant framework for games, especially for pick up games. I’m looking forwards to using them as starting a new job near a GW store so hoping it means I can play more games in future. 😁

[tripchimeras]

1 minute ago, Carnelian said:

I think its way too early to judge how competitive 1k tournaments will play under this format. We're not even sure if we've seen the full rules for it yet.

Why not back up a bit and give the new format a chance to breathe and get a few games in before pronouncing it as "horrendously imbalanced"? 🤣 We've literally only had a warhammer community article that came out yesterday. 

Also, the game is not "literally built" around 2k. The game is built around 3 ways to play with each way within that having multiple other ways to play that way.

Again I am specifically refering to "competitive" play.  There is 1 competitive "way to play" matched.  Within matched the game was balanced and tested at 2k.  Just as in 8th edition fantasy it was 2500pts, and 6th edition fantasy it was 2000pts.  That is always how GW has made there games.  You can do whatever you want, but the balance is built around a specific level.  To your point, there could be more rules to come that could make it more or less balanced at 1k, but what I am trying to say, and what you may very well may disagree with, which is fine, is that 1k will not be as balanced without either a wholesale change in approach by the company precipitating either a wholy new edition and/or rebalancing of the entire game, or a level of support requiring different point costing/ different rules for every unit at each point level.  Competitively they did not design a game that is kind to scaling, for better or worse.  Wholesale unit restrictions (and I admit I am surprised they went as far as they did in restricting units and unit size thus far, so this definitely may be speaking too soon as you suggest) are the only other way to go.  And I just don't see GW wholesale banning any unit from use at any of their point levels, which baring individual unit and spell rule changes is really the only other option I see to make 1k and 2k simultaneously "balanced".

[Frowny]

I really like it. The spoiled rules already get rid of some of the biggest abuse potentials

1) Only 2 of a certain warscroll in combination with min sized units means that any army with single OP units can't really take advantage as effectively, since they will be forced. For example, all-eel idoneth, can now only take 12 eels, and they will be coming in turns 2 and 3. A big improvement from 18 on turn 1. 

2) Min or 2x min sized units means endless buff stacking is not really viable either. My friend has a 120 grot list at 1k points that is normally pretty rough, which gets slightly nerfed (but 80 grots is still a lot). Similarly hordes of skeletons are a lot less scary when they are only 20 models. Makes killing them off before the regenerate much more doable.

3) Behemoths don't get active until T2 or T3 if you take more than 1: Really takes the wind out of some of the abusive Nagash+3 dog builds, as you are playing down most of your army for a turn, and he'll start off at the back of the board and have to move up after that, maybe taking him another turn to really do much. Multiple terrorgheists starting on t3 is also much more balanced

 

We might still see revealed rules that change summoning. Seraphon with all their summoning tied to a single slaan are still quite annoying at 1k points. They get their full battletome of summoning but it only really costs 260 points. Similarly, anybody who thought an archeregent at like 240 immediately bringing 200 points of models while also being a burly 2 cast wizard was a bit confused. Khorne, Tzeentch and Slaanesh are already bounded by army size (# Units/# casts/# wounds). Nurgle is not, but is also the weakest of the 4 in terms of summoning. 

 

Big winners: 

Beastclaw raiders, Stormcast. Anybody who can use the Other 0-2 to put down  a lot of value will be quite effective. For example 4-600 points of evocators on or off dracolines will murder most other small units easily, and you can follow up with a bunch of judicators to contribute immediately after arriving (without having to walk)

[soak314]

3 hours ago, Frowny said:

Big winners: 

Beastclaw raiders, Stormcast. Anybody who can use the Other 0-2 to put down  a lot of value will be quite effective. For example 4-600 points of evocators on or off dracolines will murder most other small units easily, and you can follow up with a bunch of judicators to contribute immediately after arriving (without having to walk) 

Great points, this in particular. First thing that came to mind after I mulled over the article was how nasty certain options could become as a turn 1 choice. Troggoths for example could spend turn 1 moving into position relatively unthreatened, with a trogboss (not a behemoth!) and 3x2 of the rockguts/felwaters. There's a very select group of min size units that can confidently deal with that many trogs.

Summoning might be curbed by tying it to the mode's set rules.

For example, if you summon some ghouls with your archregent you'll only get 10 of them, and you won't be able to call them in if you already have two units of ghouls elsewhere on the list. The archregent could hold off and summon them turn 2, therefore getting the full 20 stack.

Alarielle could come in as a behemoth choice in turn 2, but she wouldn't be able to call in a free treelord on that turn. If she comes in turn 3, she wouldn't be able to summon a treelord at all.

Edited June 13, 2019 by soak314
Rules clarification!

[Dead Scribe]

I don't see how they are going to restrict summoning without needing to rewrite a bunch of things.  

[eekamouse]

1 hour ago, Dead Scribe said:

I don't see how they are going to restrict summoning without needing to rewrite a bunch of things.  

The post JUST prior to yours did it pretty effectively and efficiently.

[mmimzie]

One thing about this meeting engagement format is that i don't know that it would really change match speed a 2 or 3 hour game might only see about 3minutes taken off the total game time.

The different wings being set up mid game are going to kind of slow the flow of the format, and i feel like with out big mega kill units (side from the few behamoths aloud) chaffe units that can hold table will still be big. Think clan rat squads, gloom spit git mobs, and other such difficult to remove units that in the current game are killable after potential 2 turns of combat by some of the most killing units, will  likely last the whole game against most other units being dramatically limit in thier size and effectiveness.

That said i do think it might be a bit faster, and the tournament scene for 1k could be very compelling. So it would be cool to have a 2nd format that is completely different. Imagine the 2k format after the release of a few books becomes unbearablely terrible, we could potentially have a compelling 2nd format to work with.

Also i think 1k being a thing with compelling game play is a good move for  GW to make  if they seek to reduce the par to entry into the game as whole (i feel i said this last one already, but i must be too tired right now in rereading i can't find where i said as much T.T)