Improving Tournament Play

Email in:

Hey Fritz,

I just have a general tournament question for you. I am trying to move

from the Beer & Pretzels scene into the 40k tournament scene within

the next few months and I have been doing a lot of research. Now let

me further preface this with the fact that I used to do tournaments

and such, but this was late 2nd edition and early 3rd edition, when

the tournament scene was really small compared to today. So, in other

words... this animal has changed, or should I say evolved.

Now, we both know there is a great disparity with the "validity" of

certain builds and even some codexs on the tournament level (or at

least from the data online, since I have yet to attend a major

tourney). Here is my question to you, as a veteran tournament gamer,

why don't the tournament organizers set more stringent guidelines and

limits on lists? For further clarification let's refer to Magic: The

Gathering.

In M:TG there are certain formats, which will restrict the amount of

certain cards, or even the availability to these cards at all. Now,

these limits serve a few purposes, primary a financial one, as type 2

is almost always the most current sets, but also... more

importantly... they level the playing field. I think you are an

experienced enough gamer to take this example further. Do you think

this same system could be used to level 40k? Bringing up the poor

codexs, and limiting the number of the Ron Popeil Army lists (set it,

and forget it).

Another example... I notice that a lot of the Warhammer Fantasy

tournaments have strict guidelines on which units can be brought, in

which amounts, or which combination of magic items used, etc...

well... why not 40k?

It just seems like the game is so primed and ready for serious

tournament play, but because of the codex creep and really a system

not built to be completely tournament ready, 40k just lacks. Perhaps

6th will change all of this. Perhaps not.

I guess if we, as 40k wargamers, are so into Tournaments, why are they

organized so differently than games which have been in heavy

tournament play for many many years?

Thanks for reading the e-mail and I look forward to your input.

Joseph

Reply Out:

Joseph, thanks for emailing.

Tournament play is a VERY hot topic depending on what angle you approach it as a gamer.

Let’s look at competitive tournament play which is what I think your email is addressing and asking about.

Competitive tournament play is all about pitting the skill of one player against another, while removing as many randomized chances as possible. If we are talking pure skill vs. pure skill then random is a real handicap- I can be kicking your butt with my skillz, but then the dice go cold, or some wonky rule tips the scale of balance, etc.

As a result you see these vents capping in at 2000+ points so your list can handle all the threats that your opponent can throw at you- you won’t get caught flat footed against a gimmick list- so at 2K points you get to have all your bubble wrap/expendable units, assault units, max troop choices, shooty units, vehicles, blah, blah, blah. You have all the tools you need to deal with all the threats you need so it is skill vs. skill.

These events also seek to limit randomness by making both sides of the table the same for terrain, set round and time limits (in theory), and a large number of games over the event to get a true player pool.

This type of event also assumes no codex or army bias on the part of Games Workshop- which is another hot button depending on who you ask IMHOP. Let’s dismiss the Space Marine conspiracy for a moment and just look at edition vs. codex.

We are currently in 5th edition and the codexes written during this game cycle work best with the rules- cheap scoring units and cheap vehicles since the first is needed to win games, and the second is good due to the awesomeness of the vehicle damage chart.

Books written pre-5th like CSM, Eldar, Tau, etc. are at a disadvantage right away since they essentially use a different set of rules.

All this imbalance, and the fact that there are so many ways to build a list (competitive spam vs. random or favorite units, etc.) means an unbalanced tournament system if everybody just shows up with what they want to play.

First glance might be for the tournament organizer to limit certain units, builds, etc., essentially comp, but this is doomed to fail for the simple reason the game (40K) is just way flawed to do this effectively, so essentially it comes down to the opinion of the TO- which will just piss dudes off with nerd rage when they can’t play X unit or take some HQ choice.

Another hurdle is that since there is no standardization beyond what GW puts out in a slow and poor manner (from the tournament perspective, and not the hobby perspective) players would be really reluctant to go with any house rules, etc.

Let’s talk Necrons- right now they are “OK”- certainly not Ward approved GK OP, but much better than before…

A few months back if you played them in a tournament all your opponent had to do was go for phase out for every mission and win. Let’s say a big tournament or group of tournaments decides to just house rule and declare no phase out for their tournaments- well as a Necron player a few months back this would have a huge impact on my list as I don’t have to worry about putting down useless warriors to get around phase out…so I build my army, paint, convert, and I’m set for that tourney, and maybe I do well, but then if I play in any other tourneys that use the regular rules, essentially my army is going to be really handicapped.

Essentially we are stuck with the stuff that GW writes as “official” and that is that.

Part of the problem is also the gaming community at this point and time, and I’m a bit guilty of it also, but fortunately things are about the change…

Everything about 40K 5th edition has been “unlocked”- we know which books are best, what army lists are best, what tactics will and won’t work in the competitive 2K+ tournament scene…so essentially it comes down to Grey Knights vs. Grey Knights on the top tables playing the same mono-builds- there is nothing “new” under the sun.

But once 6th edition rolls around, the tournament spam, WAAC units, etc. will all be reset- everybody will be racing to figure out how the rules will be exploited, what army build templates are top tier, etc. We will all be back on equal footing…for a time anyway.

The biggest problem I see is the fact that all tournaments are lumped into one heading: Tournaments.

I think as a community we need to host three types of events for everybody in the gaming community- WAAC competitive tournament events where it is skill vs. skill, hobby tournaments with an element of randomness for normal player looking for a tournament experience, and hobby tournaments for the casual games looking for a way to branch out in their gaming experiences. Some groups and events do this, other don’t- but as long as tournaments are advertised for what they are there shouldn’t be a problem knowing what you signed up for.

-Fritz