Battleplans for Matched Play. Which can you use?

[Greasygeek]

The general handbook provides us with 6 battleplans for matched play but what about the remaining 24622564228??  battleplans found in battletomes, realmgatebooks etc. Will none of these work in MP games without breaking balance too much?

 

What do those of you who run MP games do?

In our group noone of us are into tournements we just prefer the Matched Play style.

[BaldoBeardo]

It depends.on what you mean by "matched play". It sounds like your group just use points to try and keep things even.
You can use *any* of the battleplans if that's the case. When you get battleplans that talk about having twice as many models or whatever, skip it or adjust the point values.
The "competitive" issue with a lot of the battleplans is that there are too many random events or the players have conflicting objectives, so it isn't (and I use the term very carefully) "fair".

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Greasygeek]

14 minutes ago, BaldoBeardo said:

It depends.on what you mean by "matched play". It sounds like your group just use points to try and keep things even.

That's about right.

You can use *any* of the battleplans if that's the case. When you get battleplans that talk about having twice as many models or whatever, skip it or adjust the point values.

Could you give an example?  I Thought the whole point for objectives like twice as many models, was to give an advantage to huge units/armies.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

 

[BaldoBeardo]

Sorry, wasn't clear. Some of the battleplans are intended to be one-sided, so you will have to either skip those battleplans or accept it's a David & Goliath thing and adjust points values.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[wayniac]

In my experience, people are so caught up on "fairness" that anything which isn't an absolutely equal chance of victory is seen as "unfair" and therefore shouldn't be played.  They seem to forget that even older editions of Warhammer had a couple of scenarios where one person had more points than the other (IIRC in 5th edition the "Last Stand" mission had the attacker with twice as many points as the defender!).  It's been an uphill battle as far as I can see, trying to get people to do more than "Matched Play only; Pitched Battle battleplans only"

[Ollie Grimwood]

Matched Play as defined in the GHB is a specific set of extra rules and Battleplans to make a more balanced game, so I'd say it's only the six Matched Play battleplans that really count for it.  Nothing inherently wrong with using the rules of one or pitched battle profiles with other Battleplans but one should be prepared for them not to be balanced. 

It pops up on Facebook quite a lot with folks complaining about balance when playing without a Battleplan or just math hammering damage potential and not considering the further implications of the Battleplan objectives and how the points were created with them in mind. 

[Veterannoob]

We've been using those narrative plans, sometimes use points as a very rough guidelines for models in many cases.

[wayniac]

48 minutes ago, Veterannoob said:

We've been using those narrative plans, sometimes use points as a very rough guidelines for models in many cases.

Really the best way to do it IMHO outside of actual tournaments.  A few points over, different battleplans, no big deal at all IMHO for casual games.

[Mace108]

I have found that the matched play battle plans are not always suited to a 4 by 4 so my playing group does change the number of objectives sometimes. Other than that we are stuck in the matched play rut, mainly because it is so easy to roll a dice and have the battle plan chosen where we all know the rules and think it is fair.

Some times we start going through the campaign books to find a good one but then end up just playing a matched play battle plan anyway.