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

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'tournaments'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • TGA Community Rules and Announcements
    • New Member Welcome
    • Site Rules and Announcements
    • Feedback
  • The Grand Alliance Community
    • Age of Sigmar Discussions
    • Rules Questions
    • Narrative and Open Play
    • Underworlds
    • Warcry
    • Warhammer Quest
    • International AoS Communities
    • Age of Sigmar Champions
  • Organised Play
    • Events
    • Gaming Clubs
    • Age of Sigmar Rankings
  • Choose your Alliance
    • Order
    • Chaos
    • Death
    • Destruction
  • The Painting Table
    • Painting and Modelling
    • Gallery
  • Age of Sigmar Online
    • Podcasts
    • YouTube
    • Age of Sigmar Forums
    • Blogs
    • Facebook
    • Twitch
  • Market
    • For sale and Trades
  • Devizes & District AoS's General Discussion
  • Devizes & District AoS's Painting & Modelling

Product Groups

  • Dice
  • T-Shirts
  • Bad Dice TGA Events

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • Events UK
  • Events Poland
  • Events USA
  • Events New Zealand
  • Events Canada
  • Events Australia
  • Events Singapore
  • Events The Netherlands
  • Events Sweden
  • Events Germany
  • Events Belgium
  • Devizes & District AoS's Calendar

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me

Found 10 results

  1. Hi All, I recently attended the Sydney GT, which overall was a great event. I had a blast, 5 good games. However I was been left with a bit of an unsavoury taste in my mouth, which really has tarnished my whole opinion of the event. Sports Scores... that old chestnut. Disclaimer: I scored perfect sports during this event, I don't know if I got a best opponent vote, I have not been that forensic with my scores. I take great pains to have fun games; close, competitive games but fun first. That being said sports scores are rubbish. They allow for some of the most janky ******. The most janky that I have ever heard of happened over this weekend, being that; The TO allowed some players to alter the sports that they had given their opponents on day 1, on day 2. Yep, they gave their opponent full sports after their game and then over the course of the night decided that they would drop the score given the next day. I'll just let that sink in... The reason this change was allowed is that, some players may have been actively or passively intimidated by there opponent into giving them a higher score than they otherwise would have. Now while this may be an issue, allowing players to alter scores submitted is not a good way of handling it. There are other means to achieve that end. What it does allow for is collusion and sports sniping. When I heard that this had happened, and had happened a person that I know to be a good gamer, not just a good player but a good gamer I was left with a very unpleasant taste in my mouth and for me has tarnished what was an otherwise great weekend. I have never seen nor heard of that kind of adjustment being made in an event, ever. So the event used TTT software to manage the event. The TTT platform does have a visible ladder to review standings, this may have been hidden between day 1 and 2, not sure. But the round data was visible and you could easily review where people sat in the spread. Clearly this allows room for collusion between groups of players to actively bring down another player's score. Has anyone seen this done before in other events, sports scores being changed after the fact? Should this be allowed? Should a significant difference in sports scores for a single game be looked into? An example being I play a match and score my opponent a 5 but they score me a 1. Sports scores... that old chestnut.
  2. I'm disappointed to hear a lot of push back about using realm rules and in some cases endless spells in tournaments. I'm not sure where its coming from. Based on my experiences I don't think organizers should be shy about using these rules. I've been to 2 events since the new AoS dropped. Both of them utilized endless spells and the realm rules. Both of these are bolt-ons, the game designed to operate with out them. However, I feel that their inclusion is kind of 'opt in' even when they are included in a game. These bolt ons really came up in varying amounts across the games that I played in these events, but I never felt there was a dramatic difference between when they were employed and when they weren't. Obviously a game where I used a realm spell is different than one where I didn't, but it didn't feel like a different game. It certainly didn't feel like I was playing a different game than my opponent. It just felt like an aspect of that game. In the games where my opponent was totally on top of the bolt on rules, or was using an endless spell and I wasn't weren't problematic for me. These cases certainly didn't lead to disparity in the game. I can sympathize with organizers who don't want the extra load of determining a realm, realm feature, or secondary objective between rounds. It would be a shame if it became standard for them to not even give it a try. Variety is the spice of life, and I won't skip an event if it doesn't use these rules, I would just hate to have the community trend towards avoiding them. It just doesn't seem necessary.
  3. Event Title: General's War XIII Event Author: Jan "Kyoshi" Mejor Calendar: Events Poland Event Date: 04/28/2018 09:30 AM to 04/28/2018 06:00 PM 13th edition of Age of Sigmar "General's War" tournament at the seat of the Adeptus Mechanicus Club in Warsaw will take place in 28.04.2018 Full details can be found on battlemania.pl It will be held on the basis of the "matched play" of the official General's Handbook 2017, Battletoms and FAQ. We prepare the armies using the official application for 2000 points - Battlehost rules! Scenarios: We're playing scenarios from GH 2017 in the following order: Total Conquest Scorched Earth Knife to the Heart Each match lasts 2.5 hours We sign up by submitting an application with the name and surname of the army and the following clause to the email address unclekyoshi@gmail.com. "I consent to the processing of my personal data for the purposes necessary to carry out the General's War # 13 tournament (in accordance with the Act of 29.08.1997 on the Protection of Personal Data, consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2016, item 922). " General's War XIII
  4. until
    13th edition of Age of Sigmar "General's War" tournament at the seat of the Adeptus Mechanicus Club in Warsaw will take place in 28.04.2018 Full details can be found on battlemania.pl It will be held on the basis of the "matched play" of the official General's Handbook 2017, Battletoms and FAQ. We prepare the armies using the official application for 2000 points - Battlehost rules! Scenarios: We're playing scenarios from GH 2017 in the following order: Total Conquest Scorched Earth Knife to the Heart Each match lasts 2.5 hours We sign up by submitting an application with the name and surname of the army and the following clause to the email address unclekyoshi@gmail.com. "I consent to the processing of my personal data for the purposes necessary to carry out the General's War # 13 tournament (in accordance with the Act of 29.08.1997 on the Protection of Personal Data, consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2016, item 922). "
  5. (note, this is kind of a retrospective post as I forgot to post it originally!) This week i am attending the Coalescence event at Warhammer World hosted by Steve (@tinracersteve) and James (@jimbo9jimbo), part of the NEO network. For those of you that aren't aware of the event it is a narrative event being run at numerous locations around the world on the same day, and all feeding into a single narrative. I've chosen to take Tzeentch to the event, which gave me a bit of a dilemma as the Tzeentch book is pretty strong, so finding a narrative list that isn't ridiculously over the top was a bit of a challenge. One of the things I have noticed with narrative events is the different ways that people approach the narrative - some people pick a 'softer' army, which I have done before, and I didn't find that much fun. The solution I have gone for is to pick what I think is a strong list, but one that isn't ridiculously over powered, but I have decided to give myself a story and some goals for the days gaming. I have written a little bit of narrative based on one of the armies (or fairly shamelessly stolen) in the Tzeentch book: My plan is to use this as a kind of secondary objective for the games where I have to kill any magic users in the opposition army. I've played against someone before who had a goal for his army which he tried to achieve at the expense of the overall objective, and this was a game that I didn't enjoy at all as he basically let me walk away with the game as he made no attempt to stop me, and I just let him achieve his objective. We basically played two different games and I cant imagine it was overly satisfying for him either. I think its important that both players have the game objective in mind, but a fun secondary narrative goal is also a nice idea. My main aim of course is to have three excellent games and a nice slap up lunch in Bugmans though! So, how did it go....? Well, the event itself was really well run by Steve and James. From my point of view I had three fun games, although the first two were a little one sided for various reasons, but the third game was very good. I played James (the TO) first with his Seraphon. The game started off badly as I did hardly any damage to James's force, but I did manage to get my Harbinger into the Warscryer Citadel which allowed me to really start utilising the Malign Portent options. I had picked the Falling Star option as the narrative was all about seeing the future, which suited my backstory. I then found that for five prophecy points I could give the Skyfires plus one on their hit roles.... ...at this point we broke for lunch, but when we returned the three sky fires went mental and smashed their way through a whole unit of Saurus Guard. I shot the Skink Starpriest to achieve my narrative goal, and that was pretty much the game. The Skyfires go into battle as Zyclaw looks on from the Warscryer Citadel... Second game I played the Ironjawz, and the gentleman I played was a newer player so we spent quite a bit of time discussing how rules interactions worked, and talking through the intricacies of piling in and how to do it to maximise attacks etc. Once again the Skyfires went ballistic, and I also found out the an Exalted flamer does have some uses. The Screamers killed the war chanter early on to keep the narrative going, and after that it became a slug fest. In the end I had 10 Kairic Acolytes left who managed to survive the game due to being so out of position as to be virtually useless, and a single pink horror who managed to cast Bolt of Tzeentch and do the remaining five wounds needed to remove the last two brutes in the opposing force, thus carrying the day for the forces of Tzeentch. The battle lines are drawn... The Screamers assassinate the Warchanter... My third game was against Steve's son Ben who I've known for a while but never played. He had a tough Nurgle force with 20 Blightkings (we both thought James and Steve paid us up !) and a Great Unclean one, and for this battle I had a Lord of Change who had arrived to oversee Zyclaws quest and report back to the Changer of Ways. This game didn't look good to begin with, but I managed to send the screamers on an assassination run to kill a herald and a little bit of clever placement meant the Blightkings got pulled backwards away from my lines, and allowed me to get into them with the Lord of change and the Skyfires. It was a solid game, but eventually the Tzeentch force carried the day once again, however it was not enough to stop the Focus of Death from claiming the overall narrative victory. The Lord of Change goes into the Blight Kings... The guys had done a few awards for the weekend, and Matt Hinton took the Narrative prize. He was rocking a unit of custom Lion knights with their own war scroll which was something I realised I could have done with the War Wagon and the Free People - definitely an opportunity missed! I was lucky enough to take the best painted award for the event. Overall it was great fun day, and I hadn't played in a long time so I was happy to have the three games. I think the army was too strong for the event in all honesty - the three Skyfires were just ridiculous all day long. This is still the hurdle I think has yet to be fully cleared with narrative events - how do you balance the games as people have very different views about what the narrative game should be. To be able to devise a story and battle plan that allows a variety of army compositions is still the holy grail, and I hope the NEO group continue to push the envelope of narrative gaming so we can see how far it can go.
  6. Join us tonight as we discuss all you need to know about competing in a tournament. The tournament scene in Australia and around the world has really amped up with Age of Sigmar so now is a great time to get in the know! Want to see more? SUBSCRIBE and LIKE our channel to always be kept up to date with our latest content! Mentions: http://www.thatsnomoon.info/blog/aos-... https://www.facebook.com/groups/www.w... https://www.facebook.com/events/26746...
  7. Yo yo yo Fans! This is the forum for all things HeelanHammer - a long running Age of Sigmar Podcast. We release shows on the 15th and last day of each month. We cover Age of Sigmar only, and chat all topics related to the game (News, Gaming, Hobby, Events, Tournaments etc) http://heelanhammer.com/ How to subscribe to the show How to subscribe to 'SAWC' Contact Us: Dan@heelanhammer.com (email) @HeelanHammer (Twitter) @WayneKemp13 (Twitter) @HeelanHammer (InstaGram) 'HeelanHammerVideo' (youtube.com) /HeelanHammer (Pintrest)
  8. The Plan Here you can see the original drawing I did and the image from the Blades of Khorne book that Inspired it. The first piece I wanted to was a Blood Altar of Khorne. Building the Alter Base I've wanted to build a lava table for a while and running Warhammer Achievements has given me the option to do it. One of the centre piece items I wanted to build was a big alter that is dedicated to Khorne. I set out by cutting out some blue foam to make the main base and the steps. I angled the cuts and then went round the top with a craft knife to just rough up the edges and make it not too regular. I then drew out the base on hardboard and cut this to shape to match. Next I had to get a bit more technical. I drew out the Khorne symbol in 2D Design and then cut it out on the laser cutter. I did two parts so that I could have a recess that I planned to fill with some sort of blood effect. I cut these from Hardboard as well and then glued them together with PVA glue. I then attached this to the blue foam with silicon glue as this glues better than using PVA. The next step was to run some filler around the edges and then add sand onto the base. I decorated the Khorne symbol using sticky half beads that you use to decorate cards. I bought them from Hobbycraft. I did find that they needed some superglue to hold to the hardboard though. I also used a hole punch to cut out all the small circles that I could use as rivets. I cut out squares of card and glued them on as steps. The altar model in the middle is from the Reaper Bones line, which was a nice find and it works well in the middle, I didn't know quite what to put round the edges, but I ended up using cocktail sticks and some dowel which i sanded into points. I then used hot glue to hold them in place, I felt like these finished off the alter quite nicely. Painting the Altar I started off by painting the blue foam blue again! This was just to give it a good coat of something so I could spray paint the whole thing. I hadn't been happy with some of the previous Khorne stuff that I had painted, so I went with a tried and tested method. I spray painted the whole thing dark grey then light grey, then I sprayed a load of brown on the sandy bits followed by light brown. Once this dried I dry brushed the whole thing with white to detail it up. The Khorne symbol was based with Balthasar gold and then washed with purple. I used a sharpie pen to pick out the corners and lines as the terrain is so big this doesn't really matter about the quality of the highlights too much. The spikes were painted black and then gloss coated. I did consider that they should have some skulls stuck on them, and I might go back and do this later. The blood was interesting to do. I used Mephiston red and then stippled on some purples and oranges and whites. I made sure that the bubbles were gloss coated too. Then I had to do the resin. I mixed some blood for the blood god into the resin which totally didn't work - I should have used Caroburg Crimson instead. However the pour went well and i waited a few hours and then swirled in the blood for the blood god which worked much better. Building the Realm Gate The realm gate required quite a bit of chopping and cutting. I removed all of the swirly bits, and then had to chop up the gap in between the two halves to make space for some polypropylene sheet. Once this was glued in place ai assembled the realm gate as normal and then glued a few of the swirly bits back onto the bottom. I then had to assemble the Bull Demon (restic - yuck!) before slicing it up on the bandsaw. I then used super glue to glue it onto the polypro sheet. Painting the Realm Gate Again this was done with spray paints. I used the greys and browns first to do all the stone and the minotaur. I then blasted it with Mephiston Red to pick out the top parts of the demon. This also oversprayed the stone with some red glow which looked effective. Once all this was done I swirled on some purple ink and then glossed the realm gate before quickly painting the Demon. Because its a terrain piece I didn't spend a whole heap of time. It was just quick base coats, a wash and a n extreme highlight on the reds and golds. Overall Finished Piece In the end I am happy with how this has come out - its a nice playable piece of scenery that you can run figures over the top of. Combine this with some rules for sacrificing and becoming crazy fighters I think this should work well. Next up for this table will be the Fortress...
  9. Hi all, I'm new around here but am a relatively long time Warhammer player (since the mid to late 90's) and very long time competitive gamer. While I have not participated extensively in the Warhammer tournament scene, I have played quite a few other competitive games at a high level, both online and tabletop. Since getting into Age of Sigmar I've been reading quite a lot of talk about the current state of game balance. With the results of the UK Masters just coming out and the controversy over the use of compendium warscrolls at SCGT, there has been a lot of talk about whether certain warscrolls or even whole factions are "broken" and should be banned. This discussion extends to talk about what should be changed in the next edition of the GHB. As a person who has been following and participating in tournament gaming for a very long time, I find a lot of this talk to be troubling for a number of reasons. Specifically, I find the underlying logic of the arguments to be flawed and I am concerned that the logical conclusion of these arguments will be highly detrimental to the community over the long run. In order to make my point, I'm going to be making a number of analogies to Magic: The Gathering. While Warhammer and Magic are very different in many respects, I think it's extremely useful to look at Magic as a model for a number of reasons: it's arguably the most successful game in history, it's very challenging to balance, it has a similar design philosophy of releasing new content for the game on a regular basis and thus needs ongoing balancing, and it has a very long-standing and extremely successful tournament scene that has conclusively demonstrated crossover success with other games (IE: many of the top Magic players have proven to be able to also compete at the top level of other highly competitive games). I've also played Magic at a high level for a very long time, so my familiarity there is helpful. Anyway, back to AOS. One of the themes that I see coming up frequently is the idea that List X is broken, and the fact that it won Tournament Y proves it. I've heard this before about a number of different armies, and most recently I've been hearing it about Tomb Kings with respect to the UK Masters. All I can say is that the results of a single tournament are extremely insufficient to prove a point like this. Games with high levels of variance require large amounts of data in order to draw solid conclusions. Wizards of the Coast rarely if ever makes conclusions about balance based on the results of a single tournament, and even if it were to the tournaments in question would involve hundreds or thousands of participants and over a dozen rounds of play. I don't know that any AoS tournaments even come close to this scale. Even then, the strategy that wins the tournament is rarely what Wizards is looking at. There have been many instances of major tournaments in which the winning strategy ended up not doing much after that tournament while another strategy that performed well but didn't win went on to dominate the tournament scene in the following months, resulting in a banning. For example, Wizards of the Coast just recently announced the banning of three cards in the standard format. Standard bannings are very rare -- the last time one happened was in 2011, and before that was 2005. If you look back to the results of Pro Tour: Kaladesh (the most recent super-high level magic tournament), neither of the two finalists' decks contained any of the recently banned cards. It takes a LOT of data to really demonstrate that a strategy needs to be reigned in. We need to be very careful about jumping to conclusions based on a small sample of data. Perhaps more importantly, the philosophy of "Strategy X is winning, therefore it is broken and needs balancing oversight" is potentially very problematic for the long term health of the game. Most competitive games have a number of strategies that shake out into tiers of competitiveness. There are usually a couple of Tier 1 Strategies that are extremely competitive, some Tier 2 Strategies that are either broadly effective but not as effective at the Tier 1 Strategies or narrowly effective against a specific popular strategy, and then Tier 3 Strategies that are kinda strange and competitive enough to win sometimes but not with any consistency at the high level. Most tournaments will be won by a Tier 1 or Tier 2 strategy, and occasionally a Tier 3 strategy will sneak by and grab a trophy. Most casual strategies will be hopelessly outclassed by Tier 1 and Tier 2 strategies and may have some game against Tier 3 but will still be pretty dominated. Age of Sigmar is no different from this. I'm not deep enough into AoS tournaments to really talk about what strategy belongs in what tier, but I think we've all heard some things come up frequently. Clan Skryre, Kunnin Rukk, Warrior Brotherhood/Skybourne Slayers, certain Sylvaneth Lists, Settra lists, Beastclaw Behemoth Spam, Mourngul/Neferata, Ironfist, Letterbomb etc. all probably fit somewhere in AoS's tier system. I'm sure I'm missing some, so please don't consider this an exhaustive list. If your approach to balance is to identify what the Tier 1 Strategies are and then nerf them, all you succeed in doing is turning the Tier 2 Strategies into Tier 1. Then you nerf those and after enough nerfs eventually you get a really flat balance plane where nothing really stands out. Now, that may sound awesome to some people and honestly I think it would be if the game were static. The problem is that new stuff gets released over time. Wizards of the Coast puts FAR more resources into ongoing playtesting that GW ever has and likely ever will, and they still make mistakes on a fairly routine basis. GW has an absolutely terrible track record of balancing new releases, and they have an active financial incentive in making sure every new release is powerful. So in practice, a flat balance system very rapidly becomes a system in which whatever was released most recently is absolutely dominant. New release happens, it wins a bunch of tournaments easily, gets nerfed, then the next new thing comes along and the cycle repeats. A pattern like this is incredibly toxic for the game. Players love getting new toys to play with, but they hate feeling compelled to buy the newest thing in order to be competitive. So when is it justified to heavily nerf or ban a strategy? I'd argue that the most healthy long term method is to reserve this for strategies that emerge and are effectively "Tier 0". A Tier 0 Strategy is plainly dominant against most other strategies to the point where it's oppressive and the metagame devolves into Strategy X and Anti-Strategy X. In that case, Strategy X has to go for the health of the game. That's generally the approach that has been used with a good amount of success in Magic, and I think it would work well for Warhammer as well. Magic has a high level of investment. Cards are expensive, and it really sucks to spend a couple hundred dollars/pounds/euro on a deck only to have it banhammered into oblivion. The level of financial investment in Warhammer is fairly similar -- a competitive tournament army is going to run you a couple hundred at least. Then you have the time investment of painting it, which is substantially greater than anything you see in Magic. If anything, I'd expect Warhammer players to be more attached to their armies than Magic players are to their decks, so banning or nerfing an army into a non-competitive state carries a very high cost to the community. If bans and nerfs are a regular thing a lot of players will be lost and many prospective players will be turned off (why should I spend a bunch of time and money on this when they are just going to take it away?) Given the high cost of bannings and the unhealthy nature of a heavily policed metagame, I think we need to accept that there are going to be tiered strategies and some are just going to be better than others at a given point in time. Ideally, every major faction should have the ability to field a list that is at least Tier 2. In such a system, the Tier 1 and 2 Strategies are going to feel broken compared to kitchen table strategies, but the tournament metagame itself is actually quite healthy. When new stuff gets released it's less likely to dominate if there are existing powerful strategies that can compete with it. The key is to know the context you are playing in and negotiate with your opponent when possible. If you are playing casual games, don't bring a high-tier tournament list unless you talk it over with your opponent first. If you are entering a tournament, expect to see tier-level strategies and don't show up with a kitchen table build if you aren't OK with losing. So given that I'm arguing against an aggressive approach to nerfing/banning, what do I propose instead? Again, I think we can learn a lot from Wizards of the Coast. If you've followed Magic for a long time, you will inevitably notice that there are certain types of strategies that have all but disappeared from top level play. Broadly speaking, the strategies that have waned over time all fit into the general category of "strategies that are intended to prevent your opponent from participating in the game in a meaningful way". Two great examples are Combo strategies and Draw-Go Control strategies. Combo strategies essentially ignore the opponent and focus entirely on assembling a combination that ends the game in one turn. Needless to say, playing against Combo gets boring for most people real fast. Draw-Go Control focuses on countering or otherwise stopping every play your opponent makes. While playing against this kind of Control strategy isn't necessarily boring, it's often extremely frustrating. What Wizards realized is that while some people enjoy playing these strategies, very few people enjoy playing against them. And thus, through a series of design decisions they were basically phased out. You do occasionally see Combo and Control decks but they aren't nearly as extreme as they used to be, and they tend not to be Tier 1. Since making this shift, Magic has grown massively. Essentially, Wizards asked the question "what is unfun?" rather than "what is too powerful?" when determining the direction of the game. I think a similar approach could work really well for Warhammer. Over the long run, I think we need to identify the kinds of strategies that lead to bad games and eventually weed them out. Again, I'm not well versed enough in the tournament scene to really say with any confidence what these strategies might be, but I suspect that two culprits are leading contenders: Alpha Strike and Debuff Stacking. Alpha Strike lists are essentially trying to remove the opponent from the table before they can react either by shooting or deploying directly into melee. Debuff stacking prevents the opponent from playing the game by completely crippling their ability to use their units even if those units are still on the table. Both strategies have the same fundamental goal: stop the opponent from doing anything. I could very well be off on this though, so take that with a boulder of salt. When GW does identify strategies that are unfun, they should clearly articulate what it is that is unfun and make sure to check new designs against this blacklist of unfun things. For example, GW could decide that it will avoid introducing any new warscrolls that allow large numbers of units to deploy within close range of the opponent. Single units deepstriking might be fine, but whole battalions might not be. Occasionally, there will be game mechanics that are fundamentally too powerful and need to be adjusted. The need for this should lessen over time, and we can already see evidence of GW doing this. A great example is abilities that allow you to use multiple command abilities in a single turn. There used to be quite a few ways of doing this, and most of them have been removed through updated warscrolls. Unlimited summoning is another example, and we all know that one was demolished through the matched play rules (perhaps in too heavy handed a fashion, depending on who you ask). You can see this strategy used successfully by Wizards of the Coast as well. Over time, Wizards learned that things like fast mana were very frequently found at the heart of degenerate strategies, and so they stopped printing cards like that. The result has been much improved balance. The only thing stopping GW from doing this very easily is their potential unwillingness to alter legacy warscrolls that they don't intend to replace. Personally, I don't think that point adjustments will work well for this kind of balancing. I know that was an extremely long post, but I'm hoping that it will at least get us thinking about what kind of competitive balance would be healthy for the game over the long run, and I hope that we can look to other successful competitive gaming systems and learn from their successes and failures. TL;DR: One can't accurately assess balance based on the results of a single tournament An ongoing heavy handed approach to banning/nerfing will very likely be extremely unhealthy for the game over the long run A better approach to balance over the long run will involve accepting that there will be different tiers of competitiveness and that top tiers will always seem broken compared to kitchen table strategies as well as identifying strategies that are fundamentally unfun and abilities that are fundamentally too likely to be overpowered Aim to ensure that all factions have at least one strategy that is Tier 1 or Tier 2 Discontinue publishing warscrolls with mechanics that are identified as unfun or too likely to be oppressively overpowered Be willing to update all specific warscrolls that involve unfun or oppressive mechanics OR introduce rules that nullify these mechanics (possible examples include: you can never use more than one command ability in a turn, you must start the game with at least half of your points on the table, no unit can move more than X" in a single turn etc. -- note that this is just spitballing, I don't intend to advocate for any of these changes in particular).
  10. Was discussing this idea with a group yesterday. Batallion warscrolls are often quite good as it is, providing bonus rules and by allowing one to group an army into one or two deployment drops, also allow you to dictate first turn and so on. My thought was that to offset this somewhat, that batallion warscrolls in matched play should perhaps award victory points to the opposing player regardless of circumstance. This would only have an effect on matched play games when the game goes to the minor victory conditions in the battle plans or where a tournament uses VP's as a deciding factor, but I wonder if this would address where there is something of a wee black hole in the rules regarding VP's for battalions? Interested to see what other AOSers think about this?
×
×
  • Create New...