Events UK: Sheffield slaughter

[Chris Tomlin]

Morning,

I wasn't sure whether I was going to come in the run up to the event (mostly due to financial restraints), but I'm glad my friends convinced me. I had 5 great games of Warhammer vs @Ben Johnson, @Liam Cook, Rob Noyes, @Russ Veal and Tom Fretwell and got to hang out with lots of awesome people...so in that regard, it was certainly a success.

Overall I was very pleased to take 12th place in that field with pure Ironjawz and be 2nd placed Destruction behind @Darran Palmer (shame on all you other mixed Destruction filthmongers! ).

On the topic of being 2nd placed; painting! Seems like it was super tight between me and @Bananaman Timmy, so congrats to him on the win. It's an awesome army and as someone that's been loving his work online for literally over 10 years I'm more than happy to see him pick up his first AoS painting trophy, many more to come I'm sure! Thanks to anyone who voted for me, always greatly appreciated.

I'll be honest, I do have my reservations on the scoring system as the GH battleplans address kill points by way of secondary objectives for the minor win, so further rewarding that arguably places more power in the minor win and felt like a step backwards and away from objective play, IMO.

Also the lack of paint scores is potentially a concern going forward (not specifically aimed at this event) as we are starting to see some dubious armies sneaking back into the scene. However, on the day, everything was scored as per the published pack prior to the event, so there can be no complaint on this front. Perhaps it could be reviewed going forward though, interested in hearing the TO's debrief/thoughts on these.

One thing I would've liked is a bit more attention/interest towards Best Painted Army. It's fine if people are to self nominate (although as both a TO and a painter, I know that people do really appreciate the TO nomination), but it would've been nice for us to have a dedicated area to set up our armies so that people could've gone to one place to see them all as opposed to them being randomly dispersed across two rooms.

But yeh, please take that all as intended; purely constructive and not at all a criticism. Just the opinions of one guy (of 72!). Thanks to @Pete Scholey, @Adymc and anyone else involved.

Congrats to all the other winners, notably @AlexHarrison taking out 1st place at his first AoS event!

Thanks to everyone for a good time,
Chris

Edited February 28, 2017 by Chris Tomlin

[Adasi]

are you missing a battleline from the winning list pete?

[AlexHarrison]

15 minutes ago, Adasi said:

are you missing a battleline from the winning list pete?

The 3 waywatchers were battleline. There was 3 waywatcher heroes, and a unit of 3 battleline waywatchers.

[Adymc]

Cheers  for the thanks and the feed back is most welcome. I will be in the driving seat next year so will mull over peoples thoughts and take it from there

[Lord Aquillor]

On 2/17/2017 at 2:48 PM, Pete Scholey said:

Oh. And no proxies.  Wysywyg please 

I know this event already took place... just curious from a TO perspective. For WYSIWYG, would you consider a Mournfang Hornblower, Skalg, Banner bearer, ECT, that have a Culling Club modeled on them but the regular models in the unit have Gargant hackers to be legal?  The FAQ on GW about such units states that you don't have to model the special models (such as Skalg, Banner Bearer, ect.) as they are expected to have the weapons as the rest of the unit.  I modeled mine like this due to it being more ascetically pleasing to me to have the variance and it appears to be in line with GW's rules.  I also alert my opponents to this fact prior to a game.  I just wanted to see what you guys thought.

Here is the FAQ I refer to: 

Q: How do models like horn blowers and standard bearers work? Do they lose the weapons they would otherwise carry, or do you just gain the benefits of the upgrades without penalty? A: You just gain the benefits unless specifically stated otherwise. The model is assumed to still have any weapons it had before it was upgraded, even if the weapons are not shown on the model itself.

Edited February 28, 2017 by Lord Aquillor

[Terry Pike]

On 17/02/2017 at 7:48 PM, Pete Scholey said:

Oh. And no proxies.  Wysywyg please 

There were so many proxies I saw while walking around from table to table. Will be writing some full feedback but sadly the level of painting/effort from the players at this event was some of the worst I've seen in an AoS. A strict pack and TO's taking off unpainted models was missing from this event

[Pete Scholey]

thanks for the feedback so far  

we tried to encourage a different game dynamic by introducing the kill points being added to the scenario scores to give people another option when picking their army. As well as giving them a chance to get something out of the game by killing more stuff...I had loads of positive comments over the weekend re the scoring system and of course several who were not so keen..That's always the case. We tried it, we may improve it or bin it depending on full feedback and the future systems in GHB2. 

Painting,,,I agree, it was a mistake not putting all the best armies in one place for selection..the reason we didnt have a TO picked best army was to ensure that for one everyone looked at the armies to get their 5 points and I personally feel a best painted from your peers is more worthwhile than one from an individual whose idea of what is good or not is singularly subjective. 

Painting standard...several people, most of whom are high profile in the hobby commented to me re the standard of painting..Unfortunately the quality of peoples painting is something as a TO you can not either predetermine or dictate other than ensure all models are painted to a basic level and based.

I know at this event there were numerous people attending their first AoS event and even their first tournament.  HOpefully as they look around at some of the better armies it may inspire them.

I have a concern at the moment at the direction the hobby is going in respect to modelling an inspiration. GW seem to be more rigid in ensuring that there are no proxies, and even people are having to contact them in regards to their events to ensure their conversions and modelling ideas are representitive of the army or unit they are trying to represent.

WYSYWYG is an ideal. Do we really want to say to a person, who has paid for an event, booked a hotel, travelled across the country, that that unit of XXXX cant be used because its not the correct model. It is fair to say that there were models not WYSYWYG at the slaughter. But there was a scoring system included for people to mark their opponenent in regards to this. The wining army, had 6 glade guard, three painted one colour as waywatchers, three painted another colour as waywatcher heroes...ALex,the winner had three opponents mark him at maximum. SO as far as they were concerned they clearly had no issue..

They were bowmen, and the opponent knew them as such. Indeed going further, do we all know what every model GW makes looks like. proobably not..But then to expect a TO to go around every table and ask every player if every unit is correct and if found wanting, eject the unit or tell the palyer he can carry on but cant win the event is starting to smack of elitism at best and exclusioning at worst.

AoS is a growing community after the end of WHFB. Its going to take time for everyone to get on board with regards to what is acceptable at an event. I agree we need to make efforts to get everything looking nice and correct, but unless a tournament pack states that if you dont bring the correct model you cant use it then we are stuck with the present situation.

I have not seen anyone yet being told they cant use a unit for wysywyg...I know ben c stopped someone using a soul grinder at B&G because it wasnt on a base, but other that that Im not aware of any other issue.

Perhaps it is something as a community we should push harder...On podcasts and forums let it be known the standard we want to achieve. But at the moment whilst the hobby is growing again I think we need to be a bit flexible and encourage people not turn them away

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Louzi]

Could you post the top 10 lists with the player's names?

[Adymc]

One of the armies highlighted by a preeminent pod cast as not being worthy of the table  and would not be allowed at the podcasters event, has been at most of the main events this year and has not been identified as poor. The same army as also appeared on Warhammer TV twice with positive comments from the WHTV crew on air.

I faced one 'under painted' army at the Slaughter and faced four either well painted or excellently painted armies. The 'under painted' army was  the new tzeentch stuff painted by Mark Wildman, who is a great painter, but with the book and the army being new he did not have time to finish his work, should we have banned the list, I would say no as once again I have seen said painting standard at several events including all of the preeminent podcast run events. IMO if you go looking for a subject to criticise you can often find it. I have faced lots of people over the years with shockingly painted and presented armies and they have not been removed by T/O's.

I think we have to be inclusive not exclusive, taking models of tables or banning a paint scheme is very dodgy ground, what if said painter was registered disabled and they were using their best work......

For the rest of my opinions on painting at the Slaughter see Pete's comments above

 

ady

 

Edited March 1, 2017 by Adymc

[BobbyB]

Had an incredible time at the event, have quite a lot going on at the moment and wasn't really on the ball socially so apologies to anyone I was odd(er than usual) with but gaming-wise it was spot on. Thanks Pete & Ady for all your work in getting it together.

I enjoyed the kill points scoring in so far as how it effected games, but I wasn't on the top tables so the potential huge points swings didn't really figure to me but there was the possibility of the tournament being wrapped up before Game 5 which could be disheartening for those competing at that end.

Agree with the comments on painting entrants being displayed but you've obviously taken that on board.

I don't think the rate the guy stuff was in the pack, and may have impactedl list design for some people. While I didn't have a real problem with it it did lead to some awkward situations, especially with how the scoring was recorded, and I probably gave at least one 8 when I shouldn't have.  I also felt like the painting scores should come from on top, rather than given by each person for each game, although I appreciate that's hard to police

Don't want that to sound overly critical as it was an awesome weekend, and I'll definitely aim for the next one

[Lwatt1]

Are all the lists being published?

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[wanderingrogue1]

"WYSYWYG is an ideal. Do we really want to say to a person, who has paid for an event, booked a hotel, travelled across the country, that that unit of XXXX cant be used because its not the correct model. It is fair to say that there were models not WYSYWYG at the slaughter. But there was a scoring system included for people to mark their opponenent in regards to this. The wining army, had 6 glade guard, three painted one colour as waywatchers, three painted another colour as waywatcher heroes...ALex,the winner had three opponents mark him at maximum. SO as far as they were concerned they clearly had no issue.. "

 

This. Also personally i feel there is a very negative attitude on proxies which stifled conversions. To the point i actually class proxies and conversions as seperate. 

 

A proxie is using something - unchanged - as something else - A giant as siege giant, a glade guard as a waywatcher hero etc - this should be discouraged

 

A conversion is something someone has taken time to make look different for asthetic purposes - and this should not be discouraged

 

I personally as a newcomer on the scene am getting more than a little hacked off with a certain prominant player getting a bee in his bonnet about a "proxie" of mine.,,,its not its a conversion.... i hate the actual sayl model. so i have done my own, with time and conversions and effort. I could of just used a normal sorcerer, i didnt, i sourced some bits i liked and did my own cos i hate the tentacled freak look of the original model.  By yet every gaddam tourney he moans about this "proxy" like it somehow offended him personally. Even asking "if anything could be done" at sheffield.

 

Stifling creativity is a nono, and while i agree proxies should be stamped out, it should not be at the cost of stopping people converting - other wise everything will be samey and dull and frankly not a hobby id want to be part of.

Edited March 2, 2017 by wanderingrogue1

[wanderingrogue1]

Great tourney btw - will deffo come again so long as no knee jeerk rules are put in place to stop conversions.

Edited March 2, 2017 by wanderingrogue1

[Terry Pike]

2 hours ago, wanderingrogue1 said:

I personally as a newcomer on the scene am getting more than a little hacked off with a certain prominant player getting a bee in his bonnet about a "proxie" of mine.,,,its not its a conversion.... i hate the actual sayl model. so i have done my own, with time and conversions and effort. I could of just used a normal sorcerer, i didnt, i sourced some bits i liked and did my own cos i hate the tentacled freak look of the original model.  By yet every gaddam tourney he moans about this "proxy" like it somehow offended him personally. Even asking "if anything could be done" at sheffield.

Just use the correct model for special characters to avoid any arguments at the table. Converting up a non named chaos sorcerer is something people will not have a problem with, or take both, then you can use your proxy when the tournament/your opponent allows proxy's and use the official model when the pack says you cannot use them, which the Slaughter pack stated.

Was it the correct model, no, they were probably within there right to ask if something could be done about it, especially if they had all the correct models/equipment/special characters for you to clearly see.

If you want to use bent rules, at least bring the correct model But then I personally really like the Sayl model!

Edited March 2, 2017 by Terry Pike

[Nico]

Quote

Just use the correct model for special characters to avoid any arguments at the table. Converting up a non named chaos sorcerer is something people will not have a problem with, or take both, then you can use your proxy when the tournament/your opponent allows proxy's and use the official model when the pack says you cannot use them, which the Slaughter pack stated.

What are people's thoughts about using old versions of named characters (on sensible bases) as generic stuff? By way of example, I foolishly acquired a resin Kairos in December (not anticipating the New Kairos). I'm using the new Kairos and the new LoC as themselves, but thought I could use the old one as a Daemon Prince of Tzeentch.

It should be very obvious which is which (New Kairos would be double the size, on a much bigger base and generally awesome).

Edited March 2, 2017 by Nico

[Pete Scholey]

I would have no issue with using the old version of kairos as a DP of tzeench. If going forward TOs are making you use the new bigger figure then it would soon make a lot of peoples collections obsolete.. I have the Mierce miniature Greater demon that looks like a Loc...I use him as a LoC..i have the old LoC on an approp base and use him as a Dp of tzeench..Its a perfect model for the job and on the table there is no confusion. 

I think there needs to be a thread and a strong push towards what is acceptable on the tournament table. Do we really want to start banning people playing cos their bases are not homogeonous after they spend money to attend. Im going to thr SCGT. Its costing me £200 in entry, hotel and fuel before food and beer. I would be pretty pissed off if I was told I couldnt play. However, having said that, if i am investing that amount of money into an event the least I would do is read the pack and see what the criteria and acceptable level is. 

Having been in the hobby for over 20 years I would never turn up with a hodge podge army. I have always tried to bring my best efforts to events and even pick my army around the figures I think look nice, hence I dont do so well anymore...

We need to be careful not to alienate people especially as we are trying to build the scene back after the end of whfb. Clearly this is moving fast with the upcoming scgt having 200 entrants. I think the slaughter was about the 4th highest attendance after last years scgt, facehammer and blood and glory. I dont count gw events which are a law to themselves, so AoS is certainly building and growing, and indeed attracting players from other systems like HW and 40K. Perhaps their attittude to painting and modelling is different, I dont know. but clearly if we are trying to raise the standard of events then a unified and well publicised acceptable standard and indeed consequences for not meeting the standard needs to be made clear.

We tried something different at the slaughter with rate the guy. Obviously trhis didnt work as I had hoped as the majority of players gav the maximum 8/8 when clearly these scrores were never merited. Peer pressure, lack of moral conviction or just cant be arsed to give anything less than max might have been at play, again, only players will know. Its back to the drawing board in respect of that idea but some form of sanction for armies/painting and behaviour should be included at the event...

[Chris Tomlin]

6 hours ago, wanderingrogue1 said:

I personally as a newcomer on the scene am getting more than a little hacked off with a certain prominant player getting a bee in his bonnet about a "proxie" of mine.,,,its not its a conversion.... i hate the actual sayl model. so i have done my own, with time and conversions and effort. I could of just used a normal sorcerer, i didnt, i sourced some bits i liked and did my own cos i hate the tentacled freak look of the original model.  By yet every gaddam tourney he moans about this "proxy" like it somehow offended him personally. Even asking "if anything could be done" at sheffield.

I agree that creativity with conversions should not be stifled, however I think there is a difference when it comes to Special Characters and what you've described is 100% a proxy IMO. If you'd taken Sayl and maybe changed his arm or whatever so it's still recognisable as Sayl I suspect no one would bat an eyelid. Special/Named Characters should be instantly recognisable, it doesn't sound like yours would be?

@Pete Scholey - Good post. It's down to us as TO's and a community to ensure the acceptable standard is made clear to all entrants. Also it's a bit of a shame that all this has overshadowed the fact that there were some really nice armies at the event!

Edited March 2, 2017 by Chris Tomlin

[wanderingrogue1]

3 hours ago, Terry Pike said:

But then I personally really like the Sayl model!

Each to thier own.  I think its a heap of ******. Thats why i did my own tentacle armed sorcerer with a helmed head.

 

If no one can tell who it is i weep for some peoples common sence.  Not yours, just this one person who ill keep nameless. Im not spending 25 quid on a model i think looks like ass. 

 

A conversion doesnt magically become a proxy just because the model is a special character. Thats nonsense talk 

[Terry Pike]

1 minute ago, wanderingrogue1 said:

A conversion doesnt magically become a proxy just because the model is a special character. Thats nonsense talk 

Thats not the stance that some events take though. Which is why I only use GW models and official special characters now. I know that at least 6 events I'll attend which are 100% you have to use the correct model.

Can continue discussing in a separate thread if needed and steer this back on track to the Slaughter

[Adasi]

i have mixed feelings with wandering rogue's point in some respects. 

if he has converted a sorceror lord to have the defining feature of the Sayl model (tentacles etc) then i personally would be totally fine with that. Conversely if he plopped down a Sorc lord with a new staff and told me it was Sayl i'd be insulted. I think there IS a fine line.

We have to ensure we are inclusive as a community. The scene is rebuilding and we need to make sure we nurture it rather than turn people away with elitist attitudes. That said, my view has always been that if you go to a tournament you bring your "A-game" model wise and i know there were many shoddy armies.

If the winning army did indeed have 3 glade guard as waywatchers and 3 glade guard as waywatcher heroes and the only distinguishing feature was the paint jobs then i think that's taking the ****** and i'd feel very disrespected as an opponent or TO. If you're going to play the filth the you should at least buy the models. 

I swear i saw Chaos models that were based beautifully but were essentially painted to look like stone (grey and washed an highlighted).

 

Regarding the actual slaughter - i had a great time socially but realised i'd brought a plastic spoon to a gun fight early on and so took my swan dive to the bottom tables as best i could. It sucks being sober around other drunk people!

I've took a keen interests in the podcasters review on the tourney and more importantly the meta since the tournament and it's a very perplexing time. GW are releasing so many models so fast that i think people are meta chasing and so aren't devoting the time into their armies that they could when you knew it was a couple of  years until an update. I'm basically at the point of selling my chaos because i know that for it to be competetive, i need to buy Sayl and some Skyfires and thats not how i want to play. If i get over £350 for them i'm gone!

and by gone i mean into another army...but therein lies the problem. If i want to compete, i have to buy a power army and right now, to me thats either Stormcast or Thundertusk spam (for my aesthetical preference - there are obviously more). I've tinkered with a Pheonix Temple themed army and with a wanderers/sylvaneth army which id LOVE to go with but know hand on heart just aren't going to be competetive becasue they're the old stuff...

[WAAAGHdogg15]

I was going to do a lengthy feedback post for the event, then @Chris Tomlin wrote pretty much exactly what I was thinking.

My only additional points would be:

The venue - it has a lot of charm and is, in many ways, perfect for what we do. I just wish they'd give it a lick of paint and repair some of the damage. Easy jobs for not a lot of cost most of them - obviously that's not the TO's issue though unless a similarly equipped and priced venue pops up in Sheffield at some point and there's an opportunity to switch venue.

The scoring system, to me, was fine but the sheet that we recorded the results on was a bit confusing in terms of what went where and which bits we added up or left to the TO to fill in e.g. Should I add my battle points to my scenario points to give a total out of 40 or enter two totals out of 20? I saw about four different ways of recording the scores and that can't have made Pete's job any easier.

Other than that, a fantastic event which felt less divisive than previous years somehow I.e. As a player who plunged to the bottom tables fairly quickly, I didn't feel any less a part of the tournament than the big guns on the top table (I have felt this at this event in previous years). Never easy to achieve this when you have two rooms but I think Pete's friendly and laid back approach is largely to do with my more positive experience. Also maybe just that I know more people on the scene now than I did three years ago. Definitely a change for the better though.

thanks to the organisers and congratulations to all the prize winners.

 

on the proxy debate, personally my definition of a proxy is when you are using a non-converted model as something else e.g. An araknarok spider as Archaon - they're on the same base and are roughly the same size but clearly they aren't the same model. A conversion, as long as it has made some attempt to look like the model it is supposed to be, is fine in my opinion. It sounds like the Sayl conversion in question falls under this description of fine to me but clearly some people have a different definition of proxy to me. I played against Kai Bird's Arabian themed order army last year with a huge converted genie that he was using as Celestant Prime. What's wrong with that? It fits the theme of the army, it's clearly taken a lot of effort and time, it looks great and the fact that it looks nothing like GWs CP model doesn't matter a jot to me... Just my 2 penneth.

[AlexHarrison]

1 hour ago, Adasi said:

If the winning army did indeed have 3 glade guard as waywatchers and 3 glade guard as waywatcher heroes and the only distinguishing feature was the paint jobs then i think that's taking the ****** and i'd feel very disrespected as an opponent or TO. If you're going to play the filth the you should at least buy the models. 

 

As it has been brought up I will elaborate:

Coming from the 40k scene we have conversion ideas to save us money which has been acceptable. 

Now for me it was a case of; do I spend 3 times the amount of money on effectively 6 models, which look almost the same anyways, or is there a cheaper alternative? 

I went with the cheaper alternative as I simply cannot afford to spend vast amount of money on the hobby. 

I converted the glade guard using different heads, bases and colour scheme to depict waywatcher lords and the waywatchers themselves. Not 1 of my opponents had an issue and nothing was said by the TOs. Im very surprised it is even being mentioned as I have not taken the Mickey by using (as stated in the wysywig rules pack) a sword and shield guardsman for a bowman. That to me is proxy.

I have made a conversation using GW models which has cut the costs down which I see no issue in? If this is the case and people were offended then I apologise but I cannot afford to spend more money. Currently in the process of saving for a house and paying for 3 holidays comes first. 

If I did offend anyone I genuinely do apologise and will happily change my models in the future if neccesary. I had some positive feedback and actually a few people commended my paint scheme. 

Hopefully as a scene we can all move forward and respect that not everyone is a godlike painter and converter. For me I feel accomplishment to paint an army let alone paint it amazing haha. I do think there are some great painters in the scene..More so than 40k so it's great to see and something to aspire to but I'm a terrible artist. If someone asks me to draw something...Expect a stickman!

Just my 2 pence

[Beardyface]

Hi Pete 

I had a brilliant time at the event and played against 5 great opponents. The atmosphere in the venue was cracking so couldn't ask for more.

 

I really liked the attempt at mixing up the scoring but when it is straight up KP it can give a big advantage to some armies. I know this can be planned in advance but it could limit some factions ability to compete. The difference between armies KP could be interesting, particularly if this then impacted on points awarded for the scenario. Maybe it'd encourage too much defensive play though?

 

In regards to painting there were a lot of good armies around. I was of the opinion that gaming and painting should remain separate before the event but if enough points are awarded for the effort of just basing, washing and highlighting your models it'd give reason to make that extra effort and not exclude anyone. I'm no artist and can find painting hard work at times but I like my opponent to have something cool lined up against them. 

It was cool to see a different approach at Slaughter. Thanks once again for all  your effort.

Cheers fella

[Rusted Weapons]

We're fyreslayers on the top table here? Where can I see the list?

[Liam]

9 hours ago, carrigher82 said:

We're fyreslayers on the top table here? Where can I see the list?

Runefather, 2 Magmasmiters, 2 Battlesmiths, Runesmiter.

30 Pick/Shield Vulkites, 20 Twin Axe Vulkites, 10 Broadaxe Hearthguard, 10 Poleaxe Hearthguard, 3x5 Auric Hearthguard, Forge Breathren Formation.