Multilist tornament - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Member Gintoki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    178
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    11 (x1)

    Multilist tornament

    i am not sure if this concept exists already but the aim of my idea is as follows: promote greater variations within armies used in a tornament.

    now here's the idea it's rough and straight from the top of my head: in this tornament for each round you must use a different army list, no list can be used more than once and (if the said tornament is 2500pts) every non HQ unit must be represented in at least one of your entered lists.

    there are alot of flaws within my idea and it wouldn't work for most armies but the potential concept i believe is possible even if it does force players to use sub standard armies.


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Member Gintoki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    178
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    11 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Gintoki View Post
    i am not sure if this concept exists already but the aim of my idea is as follows: promote greater variations within armies used in a tornament.

    now here's the idea it's rough and straight from the top of my head: in this tornament for each round you must use a different army list, no list can be used more than once and (if the said tornament is 2500pts) every non HQ unit must be represented in at least one of your entered lists.

    there are alot of flaws within my idea and it wouldn't work for most armies but the potential concept i believe is possible even if it does force players to use sub standard armies.
    damn right about those flaws gintoki...but even so the general goal is pretty interesting. Here's a new idea for you: each board played on makes use of specific 40k hazard rules (or random ones); Once the 40k hazard rules are bumped up to 5th ed and made slightly more balanced it would achieve the goal of people using multiple lists in a tornament without forcing them into it with over complicated list rules.

    http://web.archive.org/web/200605250...ds/default.htm is the page to go to

    i still find it weird that i need to converse with myself to get a discussion going on a topic i'm sure people would definitely have some form of opinion on.
    Last edited by Gintoki; February 26th, 2010 at 02:33. Reason: pointed to exact webpage for hazards

  4. #3
    Senior Member Sancraer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    658
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputation
    81 (x2)

    The problem is people would have to have very large armies with a variety of units to play. Unless you made it so they only had to change like one thing which sort of defeats the point.

    Another way to add variation is my own "its dead" rule. Basically, it means that when a unit has died you cannot use it in future games. Unfortuantely, this means that if someone gets lucky in one game they then have a bigger army than everyone else.

    Its a very difficult idea to get right. I'll be interested in what people have to say about it.

  5. #4
    Member Gintoki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    178
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    11 (x1)

    i'm liking my idea for using 40k hazards and then saying "you are allowed to use more than one list in this competition and we will tell you the special rules of the map before you make your list descision" yeah people will probably need a variety of units to play around with but it would definitely increase the tactical challenges involved with using the armies.

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts