SwampHeart

Absolutely I am serious, the damage output and durability a KoS at 360 is poor, especially when compared to basically any Verminlord.

Yeah because a Keeper without depravity is worth 360 points. Come on now.

Skaven, Daughters, and Idoneth, all top 10 armies.

Interesting given that 2 of the top 5 armies currently have access to either 0 summoning or at most a tiny unreliable amount and 4 of the top 10 don't.

I'm not, I'm pointing out that they are two very different mechanics that work to accomplish different ends. I agree with the bulk of the rest of your post though - I think a simpler fix could just be increasing the Depravity Cost to summon most units.

Yeah I mean Slaanesh totally gets it for just killing units out right, any unit on the table, with any model right?

I adore when people compare Slaanesh summoning to Khorne summoning without realizing the difference in the two mechanics (or the fact that Bloodtithe is better spent on boons than summoning).

Here's our Underworlds Warband:

What is the BoC playerbase's fascination with/need to have ally options/things other than what's in the BoC book added to the pool of choices? This is an honest question. We already have what amounts to one of the most flexible Tomes in the game - you can port the army into 5 different allegiance abilities with additionally access to those allegiance warscrolls. Why does everyone feel the constant need to have every possible new thing be a BoC option as well?

This isn't how Warband Underworlds work out. You get the exact warband with rules converted for AoS use - they're always underwhelming and over costed. They don't result in new units that can be fielded but instead one specific selection of the models specifically in the warband.

I was just seeking clarity. Hard to evaluate your 32-0 without understanding the context, 32-0 including 3 or 4 5 game majors is very different from 32-0 in a small pond.

Weird, Matt Pashby plays almost exclusively IDK and yet you're #2? Maybe you're the #3 guy who's best finish is 2nd at a 32 person event and every other finish is first a local level RTT?

Then you should elucidate on this point because the exact language is the opposite of that it says "All terrain features will be scenery models from the Games Workshop range...". This doesn't say ideally, it says ALL which has a very clear meaning.

This is what you said. You quoted this as something you'd like to see done - obviously then posting a tournament using non GW terrain as an example of what good looks like is counter intuitive to this quote.

Right but that's directly counter intuitive to what you posted (and what I quoted).

You mean the ones where TOs used to asked players to bring terrain? Because I've seen coverage from most major UK tournaments and I've seen maybe half? And that number has dropped as organizers pick up stuff from places like Dark Fantastic. To add to this, I worked for GW for roughly 8 years and even we used to make MDF terrain to supplement things like Games Day tables and store tables because GW wouldn't shell out for all GW terrain at the time.

I've been to majors that GW supports (LVO, ACon, NOVA, and ATC) and I can tell you that even tournaments this big can't have tables of only GW. Its not remotely feasible given the cost of GW terrain. There is a reason MDF and 3D Printed terrain is the primary terrain you see at tournaments - its the only cost effective method to stock, in some cases, hundreds of tables. To stock one table with all GW terrain is in excess of $100 (USD), even if we assume you could buy it all at trade discount (40%) you're looking at $60 a table - it would have cost adepticon in excess of $5500 in just terrain to run all GW terrain.

How much money do you think TOs have to run events?

Oh you aren't? I could have sworn that's exactly what you were doing and if I might even think you did it on purpose because the tournament community (to be clear that's both in the UK and the US) doesn't agree with your position. But hey - you keep telling people who don't use realm rules that they're playing open play - you live in the world you want.

That's cute, very wrong but cute none the less. In case you missed it matched play is neither defined as using GW's suggested tournament format or using the realm rules sweetheart.

Fortunately they won't because GW's tournament pack is asinine and awful and TOs have been doing it longer and more successfully than GW.

So basically unless someone wins an event using an arbitrary rule set that you think is the correct rule set then their win has no value? Weird flex.

Completely uninterested in a 'it's life' justification for using bad rules for a game. I get enough of 'it's life' in my actual regular life, would rather my hobby serve as some form of escapism for that.

But GW themselves don't actually do this, to be very clear. They don't use Ghur at WHW events so they're full on admitting that all the realm rules aren't suitable for competitive play. Also you're telling me you think the WHW GTs are a better barometer of competitive play than literally any other major event? Just because GW says a thing is true doesn't mean it is, if you recall GW said Gutbusters would remain Deadly as Always in the GHB. Furthermore all the best tournaments have always deviated from GW - in 8th Comp was king for a reason. The idea that you should be playing the game per GW's frankly terrible tournament pack has no basis in the reality of major tournaments.

Even their clarifications aren't enough. Its a bad pack and I'm responding to a post about them. Part of the core of their use is that realm rules will be in use - and as I'm sure is clear at this point that is something I don't believe should be used in tournaments.