In the first instance, I think it is that I am trying to achieve with the event. Fields of Blood NZGT has from the beginning been billed as a hobby event.There are plenty of "Highest Battle Scores = Winner", indeed I pioneered them in the NZ 40k community with the NZ Masters starting in 2008. Before then pretty much all NZ events had a significant hobby proportion - including list selection.
So when I said FoB NZGT was "Bringing the Hobby Back", I meant it would be different from the current "norm".
The Type of Pitfight I'm Looking For
The idea for FOB is to play cool games on great tables with fair armies. I don't want people being tabled Turn 2 by the latest internet beatstick so I am trying to incentivise/encourage more balanced armies than the current tournament norm.
My aim is to have people turn up and have six tightly contested games....
The two key criteria here are Theme and Balance and they go hand in hand. The armies that score well at FOB will be "in Theme" and they will be balanced. Some things that will score you well:
- Single Book selection - dragging things from multiple books generally is done for efficiency rather than theme e.g. a CP battery to power a beatstick
- Selection reflects theme. Read your codex e.g. if you are Ulthwe then I want to see Guardians, Warlock Conclave, not Reapers and Spears. Same with Alaiaoc - Rangers, Autarch, War Walkers not just Eldar with +1 to Hit. This works for every codex....Hivefleet is not just a trait etc
- Leadership options - I'm going to give anything overly invested in HQs a second glance. I don't think Mortarion comes out to solve a dispute over lunch money.
- Combined arms...Not just Characters, Troop Tax and Heavy Support for example. If you have a variety of Force Org slots then great.
- Lack of Cliches - same relics, choosing a Army Trait so you can access a certain stratagem - Vect has stopped taking recruits for Kabal of the Black Heart
The limit on Detachments will help this somewhat. The players are the additional step.
You will be incentivised for following the above. And conversely, you don't have to but then don't moan if your score is at the lower end. I calculated that the difference between top and bottom of range is just over a "win". It is a risky strategy in a field of 64. So are you feeling "lucky"?😀
And no I am not going to put out a mathematical rubric. Books aren't even and any system can be gamed.
So when you put your list together, rather than three Riptides you might want greater variety.
I'm on the wrong side of the world to participate, but I like the idea. I assume there would be some variance in how "multiple source" Armies would be scored, depending on the split and which Armies, right? For example, a Custodes Army with an Astra Militarum CP battery would get docked harder than a Slaanesh Army that contains both Emperor's Children CSM and Slaaneshi Daemons?
ReplyDeleteYep...esp if the AM were Valhallans
ReplyDeleteHey there, I like the idea but as a fairly new player playing pure Harley's I'm not certain how I'd approach this to make sure I'm not penalized for my list. Thinking mostly point 4. I have basically 3 options (troupes, Skyweavers and Voidweavers) to fill out my list and with such elite units it's very difficult to make a list that is 'balanced' across all options and still performs okay. My lists always weigh towards one of the 3 options, so I can expect to loose points for that? Many lists I run have only troupes (and a few transports)!
ReplyDelete