Over the holiday break I've been playing a few games of ETChammer to get used to the various changes in the core mechanics - Magic, LOS and VPs. Can generally say that that the changes aren't as huge as I thought they would be and require adjustments in play rather than a rethinking of the game.
The most radical thing is playing "Battleline" continuously. I can see this getting old very quickly. The scenarios bring something to the game and I always find it slightly humourous the thought that to be serious you shouldn't play them. I understand that at the ETC (with its multitude of variables) but not in singles games where they bring and added challenge to the table.
It does seem to be a very "English" thing as well. The UK tournaments - especially at the top end - seem to eskew them as the have the potential to be "unbalanced and ruin the game". All I can say to that is....nonsense. The rulebook scenarios force you to make concessions in your list, plan your composition and have a plan where you can accommodate what life throws at you. If this means, for instance, that Brets might need a unit of Men At Arms, then so be it.
So it was with some bemusement that I listened to a UK podcast review of 2013 where they bemoaned the lack of infantry in the game. Perhaps if they included scenarios in the event they organise they might see some different behaviour.Perhaps if they played Blood & Glory there might be a need for banners perhaps? Or Watchtower you might need that infantry block?
dice have the potential to unbalance the game, do we eleminate them? It seems to be prevalent amongst hyper comeptitive players to want to reduce variability in the game. They have taken out the big spells that autokill, then they take out scenarios.
ReplyDeleteas you reduce the variability the optimum answer to the puzzle simplifies and with the instant replication of forumals available via the internet, the birht of winning net lists is born.
I think the best example of this is the constantly updated Swedish comp system. Every update (I think they are up to 1.11.0) seems to be about removing the imbalance the last one created. Bring in scenarios (something Swedish is not designed for) and surprise surprise you cannot win with full chariot core, or banner less armies etc etc.
DeleteThat's not quite true Joel, I have played many FOB tournament with blood and glory which I have won, even though I had already defaulted on the fortitude.
DeleteMal
Not possible in last 12 months Mal. In 2013 the best you could get if you lost scenario was 9 points
DeleteI think it is possible to win tournaments while losing a game. If you lose blood and Glory in your army design, if that design buys you sufficient advantage in the other scenarios then thats still an advantage.
DeleteNote to self
ReplyDeleteMust take 10 x 10 Skink units with standards for B&G
Mal
And 5 units of Camo Skinks!!!
DeleteI just think scenarios makes the stronger warhammer books (DoC,WoC,rats) better and the weaker (Wood elves, Brets, tomb kings) even weaker. The former have strong infantry who have ability to carry flags (or can knock down the building and stick a bell unit on the spot) and the latter have nothing that can kick out a lot of attacks to take/hold a building
ReplyDelete