VoteWar Mk V Discussion Thread

[Caluin]

Note that this is not an Info Thread, but a discussion thread for what we would like to see in the next VoteWar. Any suggestions are welcomed. I'm not accepting lists just yet, since we still don't have all the ground rules set up yet.

To start off, I'm thinking of running 1500 point lists. However, that's not set in stone, and we can run anything. 1850 points are out, since I'd like to see some variety.

Does anyone have any ideas for spicing things up a little bit?

For VW MkV, I think it would be interesting if we had a 400 point extra force, in addition to the main force. That force would be combined with the main force, if the two lists were playing each other for the second time. Or something like that. It's just that fighting the same list twice seems unavoidable, and it'd be interesting if the battles were different the second time around.

Or possibly, instead of adding 400 points, removing 400, or something. And 400 is entirely arbitrary. I just like the number.

I like that idea. Maybe something like you're only allowed half of your original list, as the others are recovering from the fight? Or perhaps adding in a set amount of points, but a lot of times that'll only result in one extra unit, so the matches will often times be the same. I think it'd be more fair to just halve the list, and perhaps allow one unit change to help even out points.

[Shas'o Tau Dev'n Kauyon]

Personally, I feel FOC chart limitations would be the most interesting change to this. As you can see, most of these armies are extremely powergamed/min-maxed. By forcing a specific FOC, you can really force an interesting force. Yes, I forced those force's to reinforce the forecful nature of this forced war. RAWR! I mean, FORCE!

But seriously, by making the next war a 1HQ 2ELITE 4 TROOP 2 FAST ATTACK 2 HEAVY SUPPORT composition battle, I could see some seriously interesting debates.

And while I like the idea of the additional 400 force, I like the idea of Side Combat Patrol force battles effecting the primary one more. For example, you could have a pre-game which could determine 1rst turns. This is a major factor in these wars so having a combat patrol determine it adds a tactical, fluffy, and debate stabilizing factor. IE, no more "whichever army gets first turn wins" situations.

Alternatively, you could have the surviving members of a combat patrol pre-game join the resultant battle.

Another option is Post-game patrols: Allowing for "save face" options, adding another possible voting selection to keep armies in the running. Essentially you would have Mission/Fluff/Patrol voting. I think it'd be sweet.

Another great option is the Combat Patrol only war. But that isn't really the issue. :shifty:

Anyway, I hope I helped, I love this stuff, keep it up.

~O'Dev'n~

[ForgedInTheFurnaceOfWar]

I dont like the idea of halving the lists, I typically try to design my lists to function together, each part is dependant on the other members for sucess. If it where simply halved, the army would fall on its face.

Also how would the list be halved?

Would both players get to pick which units they wanted to send at the enemy again?

Or would the list be devided some other way?

Anyway, if there is a second meeting of army lists, i think the mission should be differrant first off.

Then id love to see a second detachment force come in, perhaps they would even have to arrive using reasevers, even if they couldnt normally use that ability.

Or perhaps the player would be able to trade 1/4 of his list for any of his reasevers. The reasevers would need to be premade, but once made, he could choose 460 points of replacement (or perhaps just 400 points) This way he could make minor adjustments to the list, allowing for better killing power.

Peace

[Shas'o Tau Dev'n Kauyon]

Or perhaps the player would be able to trade 1/4 of his list for any of his reasevers. The reasevers would need to be premade, but once made, he could choose 460 points of replacement (or perhaps just 400 points) This way he could make minor adjustments to the list, allowing for better killing power.

Peace

I second the concept of PRE-MADE substitutions.

Also, missions really should vary on secondary matchups.

[JORMAGI]

These are some interesting ideas. . .
I don't like the force orginzation chart limitation. Particularly the HQ limitation. Some armies could really be handycapped by this. Notably armies like Lost and the Damned, that have to spend one HQ choice for every 3 squads they want anpiring champion in. Then if they want a traditional HQ they need another choice. I'm sure there are other armies that are similarly affected. Also in my Lost and the damned army I use: both HQ's,3 elite, 6 troop, 2 fast attack, 2 heavy support. that's 2 slots I don't use in 2000 pts, in 1850 remove a single troop choice from that list. now going down to 1500 would remove a few more choices, but that's really limiting the options at that point. Now this is an extreme case, but the point is that such a rule would favor armies that tend to utilize less of the FOC over ones that tend to use more of it.
(Not that I'm planning on using my LatD again already.)

I like the idea of having a flexable amount of troops for each engagement. Here is an idea that I've been thinking of to make things different: say we can have 2000 pts worth of troops total, then we specify 1500 that we are taking into battle. With a default 1500 pts specified. Each round starts with a 1 day prep where the matchups are announced(Opponent and Mission). Then the lineup is submitted to the orginizer. If no linup is submitted then the default is used. Next day the lists are posted and votewar happens like it normally has in the past.
I see each squad being preset. If you want the same sqad with different option, you have to buy the squad independantly each time.

Advantages:
1)allows for flexabilty in engagements.
2)allows players to make tactical decisions about engagements.
3)allows rematches to be fesable and interesting should they come up.

Drawbacks:
1)requires more time out of those involved, expecially the orginizer.
2)each round would take about an extra day to do finish dragging out the votewar for longer.

I see drawback one being the big kicker here. What do people think?

[ForgedInTheFurnaceOfWar]

Advantages:
1)allows for flexabilty in engagements.
2)allows players to make tactical decisions about engagements.
3)allows rematches to be fesable and interesting should they come up.

The only thing i dont like about this is it does not reflect tourney style play.
Pretuning your army list gives a lot of different advantages, also legistically this is very difficult.

Generally my squads have somewhat speratic point costs, without editing the size of each squad, it would be very difficult for me to change things out. This seems like it would get tidious after a few rounds.

(unless it was only used when two lists meat eachother again.)

This would ensure lists changes do not happen to much, keeping it more like a tourney.

However, i think something like the following would be interesting as a mini votewar, (although with the same point costs)

(this example only applies to marines since they are way easier to figure out then other armies)

You may field up to 80 marines, and 20 scouts.

Your Wargear avalable: 10 bikes, 6 skimmers, 4 attack bikes, 20 jump packs, 16 heavy weapons, 16 special weapons, 6 drop pods, 2 rihnos, 2 razorbacks, 6 suits of terminator armour (not including HQs,) 2 dreadnoughts.

From here you must craft your army, total 1500 hundred.

So you could field 20 assault marines, but not 25, since you dont have enought jump packs.

Every tank uses 2 marines from your total.

Example:

HQ, termini armor,

4 body gaurds, 2x ACs.

drop pod

So, youve used 4 of six terminator suits, and 2 of your 16 heavy weapons, one of your drop pods, and 4 of your marines.

Now you add in two 6 man tactical squads, each with a lascannon and plasma gun, now youve used 16 marines, 4 heavy weapons, 4 suits of terminator armor, 2 special weapons.

I think it could be interesting, espeically with vehicels taking up two marines.

However this might be unfeasable with other armies.

[Caluin]

Okay, one at a time.

@Shas'o Tau Dev'n Kauyon -
Limiting the FO slots would be probably the most feasible of ideas, but severly hampers certain armies. As Jormagi mentioned, LaTD quickly fill up their Troops and HQ slots.

@Forged's first post -
No, I don't like the idea of splitting lists either. I do like your alternate plan though, which I may consider.

@Jormagi -
While I really like that idea, it'd not work for our purposes. For every person that actively participates in VoteWar, there is an equal person who likes to only watch his list go and not actually participate. If I gave only one day for everyone to choose their lists to go up against a certain army, then people would need to preplan their schedules around VoteWar, which I'm not willing to have happen. I'd rather let VoteWar be something relaxing and enjoyable, rather than something you have to power game.

@Forged's second post -
Neat idea, and it'd work great for Marines. Hrm, that's an idea for a mini. Everyone has the same pool of items to choose from, and people have to make the best list that they can. That'd be something neat! Of course, it'd always be Space Marines versus Space Marines.... but the idea is neat.

So here's what I'm thinking. The lists are going to be 1500 points, with a 300 point Reserve unit.


1) The Reserve unit will only be used in the off chance that two lists meet up again.

2) The Reserve unit will always enter play via the Reserves rule, but this can be in any fashion, including through Deep Strike, Monolith Portals, or Daemon Summoning.

3) Only one unit is allowed, even if that unit does not fully equal 300 points.

4) You may not use extra points from the main list to fund the Reserve Unit. 1500 points max for the main list, 300 points max for the Reserve unit.

5) Transports are allowed for the Reserve unit. They'll come on the table at the same time, and the unit will be mounted the turn it arrives, though may disembark if they wish.

6) The Reserve unit may not break any FO rules, so no taking 2 HQ in the main list then having a third for the Reserves. If you fill up your entire FO chart through the main list, then the Reserve unit must be a Troops choice.

I figure that'll shake things up so that no two battle is ever the same, and allows people to build a huge, power house unit that are always so fun to play but not always tactically viable in real games. I mean, do you ever see Tzeentch Possessed riding around in a Landraider in a competitive game? Well, now you just might!

If no one objects to these rules, then submissions are open on Wednesday at... say... 7 am Pacific time (3pm GMT). If there are objections then we'll hammer them out and set a new date.

[ForgedInTheFurnaceOfWar]

So, we make this uber huge unit, if we make meet an opponent for the second time we trade one unit form our army, for an uber 300 to 500 point unit?

:wacko: Seems odd, but it would really mix things up. I guess it would only happen 4-5 times in votewar anyway, so probably wouldnt be that big of a deal.

My biggest objection is 1500. I dont like that army size

[Caluin]

So, we make this uber huge unit, if we make meet an opponent for the second time we trade one unit form our army, for an uber 300 to 500 point unit?

No - the unit gets added onto the army. So it'd be two 2000 (or 180 point lists fighting each other the second match.

My biggest objection is 1500. I dont like that army size

I could make it 750 points..... (Insert cute smiley face here)

[ShadowZora13]

1500pts is the standard for my group. We rarely do anything but 1250, 1500, and 2000 pt battles.

Now, to decide what army to field... might do my bikes again, but most likely not, or my other SM, or some other stuff i got planned. We shall see

oh, and how many entrants are there gonna be?