Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

gjnoronh

Members
  • Content Count

    363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

169 Celestant-Prime

1 Follower

About gjnoronh

  • Rank
    Dracothian Guard

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. 173 registrations 55 for AoS Singles cap planned of 60
  2. gjnoronh

    Major and GT

    Depends on who is defining it various ranking systems may use different approaches. There isn't an 'official' and universal definition. It depends on the rankings system involved. ITC rankings system for example has their own definition I'm sure but I can't quite see on their site how they define it https://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/frontline-gamings-independent-tournament-circuit/itc-2015-season-40k-tournament-format/ In the old days of the defunct tournament scheduling website indygt dot com and their rankings system a "grand tournament" was by definition at least 2 days, at least 5 games, at least 35 players. However that was just for their listing and was influenced by the Direwolf community (which was the equivalent of Warhammer dot org before there was a warhammer dot org, which was TGA.community before this site existed.) So I think you'd have to ask 'why' are you asking and in what context to help you answer.
  3. Crossroads GT has hit their attendance cap and is taking wait list players only. Da Boyz GT is at 149 total registrations 44 for AoS singles and has 16 slots left for AoS. Gary
  4. Now at 149 total registrations with 44 for AoS Singles alone. Cap of 60 AoS singles players.
  5. You could argue there is even a subset that want list building/experience to trump at the table tactical acumen. The more defined the game conditions are "a priori" the less you need to think on your feet at the table top. I think many of the suggestions from GW (i.e. battleplans and realms announced at the start of the round) over the last year really push the meter towards rewarding players who 'think on their feet' vs those who parse the rules set pre game and find the best army list to win under highly defined conditions. Personally I love that tweak by GW to the standard way scenarios have been handled for decades in Warhammer.
  6. Got it. I'm not sure there is a big group (at least in this thread) arguing in favor of composition rules to up the efficacy of low tier armies. AoS players are pretty much taking the game as it is in terms of army balance (possibly complaining about it.) However those complaints I suspect are largely about the the investment issue I raised in a 2K AoS army vs a 12 man BB squad. I think there is a subset that want AoS to be a highly defined standardized game where list building and skill trump randomness. There is a subset that are happy with AoS rules as written and a subset that want it with max randomness. One way to think of it in the BB analogy imagine showing up to a tournament and being told after checking in all players are -3 move for one of the games of the event or instead a 1/7 chance each game that, that single game is -3 move. That nerfs some teams more then others. Some teams would pretty much give up on scoring at that time. Some coaches would be fine with it, but some even in BB might be unhappy about it. That's kind of like showing up and finding out shooting is heavily nerfed due to Realm rules in AoS. The core rules use it but a lot of players don't use the core rules. BB coaches are pretty accustomed to a moderate degree of variation in rules sets. But take something really wierd (all players strength 4+ are now -30K gold in cost! No players with Block are allowed!) and I think coaches would complain. Just think about the angst some podcasters and coaches have about Piling on changes in BB2016 or roster additions in BB2016 like halfling catchers.
  7. I'm quite a Blood Bowl fan myself and I think it's an excellent skill based tournament game (IMO better then AoS) despite a high degree of randomness inherent in the rules. Risk management, understanding of probability and assessment of the tactical situation are core skills that are really built into the core system allowing tournament games to separate the good players from the average. But I'm not sure what you mean in your post. There are bad and good team builds in Blood Bowl (orcs with all linemen vs a standard 4 BOBs, 4 Blitzers) but the basic list design part of Blood Bowl is largely 'solved' there are really very clear 'heres what you take.' If you mean why aren't people in AoS happy if an army is 'broken' it's because of the high investment (time, monetary, emotional) involved in building a full army only to find out it's not good (or so good your friends won't play you regularly) after that investment. What differs from tournament to tournament in Blood Bowl is intentionally the skill packages, team value and random quirks of home brew weather tables, scoring bonuses etc. List building to those unique tournament specific requirements is actually what I think adds a lot of long term interest to tournament play for BB and separates smart coaches from less smart. For the AoS fans that would be equivalent to sometimes having tournaments at 1,750 pts, sometimes 2250 points, sometimes 2000 points sometimes you use realm rules, sometimes you don't, sometimes you can use Realm artifacts sometimes you can't.
  8. Sure but whether the players use the realms (and presumably per the base Matched Play rules determine the Realm at the table as part of the pregame process) or if we actually use all GW terrain is indeed something posters are taking opposites sides of 'it's optional' vs 'its required if it's a matched play tournament.' As noted before I think a lot of people make unconscious assumptions 'everything I really like isn't optional' while also saying to themselves 'but of course these things that aren't really what I like or that feasible are optional.' It's a highly flexible rules set designed at it's heart for friendly games amongst peers. It can be used for tournament play but there are quite a bit of (conscious or unconscious) assumptions and adjustments to be made to make it work well in that setting. An extra pregame terain set up phase for example is a big challenge given that a sizable percentage of AoS games at 'standard 2K size' aren't finished in 2-2.5 hours. I don't think the GHB 2019 GW suggested model is the best model for tournament play at all.
  9. Why? Competitive play is competitive, winners should be respected for their legitimate achievement even if the rules aren't exactly the same from one event to the other. It's not Magic where there are set highly defined formats. AoS is very open ended and as someone pointed out on the first page that makes it actually a very interesting war game. Inside of matched play even as defined by GW's tournament rules there is a lot of weird stuff that can really mess with the competitive balance at any given 3-5 game event (realm rules as discussed quite eloquently by others here in this thread.) That's pretty RNG or organizer whim dependent competitive balance even if every last rule as written is folowed. There is a lot of variance in terrain from board to board and event to event even if we use all GW products for terrain. While some events use the terrain war scrolls including in the terrain compendium list on line the majority do not. That skews competitive balance from event to event quite a bit. How many events give players ID numbers and badges? That's part of the defined tournament rules from GHB 2019. If an event doesn't give out ID numbers is a winner 'less legitimate.' You might argue heck those ID numbers aren't important (and I agree.) But I think it's a bit odd to say w"e must use all the rules exactly as written" while also saying 'ignore the rules I think aren't important.' Again read upward on this page where the GW run events are generally considered not to be good models of how to run a 'competitive' tournament for decades. It's hard to reconcile that fairly universal sentiment with 'everyone should follow the exact system suggested by GW.'
  10. We are doing whatever is in GHB 2019 or in the app. Which is pretty standard for most events. I must admit I don't recall the WD Fireslayer materials.
  11. until
    Back for our 14th year Da Boyz Grand Tournaments and Gaming Weekend is excited to open registration for 2019. Rochester NY USA Last year we had almost 270 total registrations amongst all the different gaming systems and we anticipate hitting the 300 mark this year. In addition to our AoS singles tournament (58 registered last year cap this year is 60) we are adding AoS doubles which marks the first time in the AoS era we've had doubles as well as singles. In addition last year we hosted the North East US's only Warhammer Underworlds Grand Clash, as well as a Blood Bowl tournament, 40K ITC major, and much much more. Join us this year as of this posting 2 days into registration we have 33 total registrations for AoS already http://www.daboyzgt.com/
  12. Event Title: Da Boyz Grand Tournament Rochester NY USA 2019 Event Author: gjnoronh Calendar: Events USA Event Date: 11/08/2019 08:00 AM to 11/10/2019 12:00 AM Back for our 14th year Da Boyz Grand Tournaments and Gaming Weekend is excited to open registration for 2019. Rochester NY USA Last year we had almost 270 total registrations amongst all the different gaming systems and we anticipate hitting the 300 mark this year. In addition to our AoS singles tournament (58 registered last year cap this year is 60) we are adding AoS doubles which marks the first time in the AoS era we've had doubles as well as singles. In addition last year we hosted the North East US's only Warhammer Underworlds Grand Clash, as well as a Blood Bowl tournament, 40K ITC major, and much much more. Join us this year as of this posting 2 days into registration we have 33 total registrations for AoS already http://www.daboyzgt.com/ Da Boyz Grand Tournament Rochester NY USA 2019
  13. Registration is now open for Da Boyz GT. Now at 33 already registered. Cap is 60 Gary
×
×
  • Create New...