Librarium Online Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 131 Posts

·
Now with STFU flames!
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Okay, I've decided. This VoteWar will be Round Robin fashion. We'll give it a try to see how well it works, and if we decide that Single Elimination was better, we can always go back to it.

SitRep - I have 20 lists at the time of this writing. I'm taking 24. That's 12 threads each round that people should peruse through and vote on. Once I reach 24 lists I will close submissions. If you want to be in the VoteWar, I suggest you get me your list ASAP. I am however waiting on one person to look over his list and make sure the points costs are correct.

If have submitted me a list, then be assured I have formatted it to make it easy to read. I may have PM'd you back, I may not have. If I didn't, don't worry - it just means that I didn't see any problems or have any questions about your list. I have not changed the upgrades that you have listed - however, in some cases I may have made executive decisions. For instance, I may have decided that in a Terminator squad that the Sergeant is the one holding the Thunder Hammer. I consider these changes minor and cosmetic - if you are worried that I may have compromised your list, PM me and we can sort it out. If it was a big change, then I would have PM'd you about it first.

I plan on starting the rounds in the next week and a half or so. Maybe next weekend. Mainly because I want to take a rest before starting in on this. I'll give fair warning before I do - like the day before I'll post in here.


How the Round Robin format will work -
At start, there will be five rounds. Each round consists of twelve battle threads pitting each player versus a random opponent. Each battle will have a random mission assigned to it from the Standard missions list. Voting will be the same as in MkII.V - the mission means everything.

Each mission will be played with the following rules - Infiltration, Deep Strike, and Victory Points. Due to great public outcry Escalation will never appear in VoteWar again.

The winner will be the list that has the most votes declared for it. In order for a vote to count, you must list reasons to why you think the battle will play out in such a fashion. "I agree" statements are not enough - you must word your own reasons, even if they've been stated before. Please try to read other people's arguements before deciding upon your vote. Though some people get long winded, they usually make extremely good arguements.

If there is a tie, it will come down to fluff votes. As you vote for the mission winner, consider which list is fluffiest. Fluff votes are not mandatory however. Fluff votes don't need a reason, but it is appreciated. If the fluff votes are tied (it has happened...) then the game will end in a draw.

The winner of each round scores two points while the loser scores zero points. If the game ends in a pure draw, both players score one point. After five rounds, I'll take the top four lists and run a second Round Robin style game. All four lists will play the other three lists - the list with the top score will be declared our winner.

Obviously I can't run the tourney so that every list plays every list - that'd take me 23 rounds, each with 12 threads. Yech.

Does that sound fair to everyone? It's not too late to change it. I was also looking at the Swiss Style, but I think Round Robin is a bit more fair for what we're trying to accomplish here.


Army List Formatting -
I have formatted the army lists to be something a bit more readable. I'll take a few examples -

(Example unit -)
Blood Claw Bikers – Five (5) men
Three (3) armed with Twin Linked Bolters
One (1) armed with Meltagun
One (1) armed with Twin Linked Bolters and Power Fist

(Example vehicle -)
Leman Russ Battle Tank:
Turret mounted Battle Cannon; Hull mounted Heavy Bolter; Heavy Bolter Sponsons; Extra Armour; Searchlight

How does that look? Is it easy to read?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
Two things: I think that wins by large margins should get more points. Example: if you win by more than a 3:1 ratio, you get 3 points instead of 2.

Also, I think that we should instead take the top 4 lists and do a round robin between all of them (that's 6 battles simultaneously). The highest scorer (using the same system) would be the winner.

The thing is that if we use quarterfinals, (the current idea) there's still 2 chances for elimination based on bad luck. Also, taking the top third of the lists seems a little excessive. Only those who score really well after 5 rounds should go on to the last rounds. (though this still leaves room for bad luck, probably). Finally, EVERY top list fights EVERY other. This would be a bit more fair.

The biggest disadvantage of course is that we don't have the "final battle" which is always exciting. However, if we only have 6 battles with the top 4 lists, it would create quite a bit of interest IMO. Just my suggestion.

Alternately, we could take the top 5-8 lists and do larger round robins (if we had 8 lists, we'd have to do 2 rounds of 14 battles).

Just my $.02
 

·
Now with STFU flames!
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
TheWamp said:
Two things: I think that wins by large margins should get more points. Example: if you win by more than a 3:1 ratio, you get 3 points instead of 2.
That unfairly penalizes the threads that don't generate much traffic. For instance, last VoteWar in the first round there were two or three lists that had a lot of interesting discussion which brought more voters in - but most of the lists were pretty one sided and people didn't seem interested in voting for them.

TheWamp said:
Also, I think that we should instead take the top 4 lists and do a round robin between all of them (that's 6 battles simultaneously). The highest scorer (using the same system) would be the winner.
That is a good idea, and I have indeed been thinking about running it like that. I was counting on the appeal of a "Final Battle" between the top two lists. But we can run the semi-finals with the top four lists just as easily. It'd just be three rounds of two battles each. I think I may go with this instead.

And I agree that the top eight lists is a bit much - it was just a nice, round number than was a power of two.
 

·
The Love Muffin
Joined
·
1,830 Posts
Sounds good to me. Very well thought out and the blue is easy on the eyes :-D

I'm coming off a first round elimination, so I have a few things to prove!!!!

*shakes fist*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
Caluin said:
That unfairly penalizes the threads that don't generate much traffic. For instance, last VoteWar in the first round there were two or three lists that had a lot of interesting discussion which brought more voters in - but most of the lists were pretty one sided and people didn't seem interested in voting for them.
Does it though? I mean, a 3-1 win gets you that extra point as does a 9-3 win. If it's the ratio that counts, you'd get the benifit as long as you could draw in just a few voters, and you were better than them by enough. This would also give incentive to vote for lists where it was obvious who would win: it would make people want to make sure that they got or were denied that overwhelming victory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,109 Posts
TheWamp said:
Does it though? I mean, a 3-1 win gets you that extra point as does a 9-3 win. If it's the ratio that counts, you'd get the benifit as long as you could draw in just a few voters, and you were better than them by enough. This would also give incentive to vote for lists where it was obvious who would win: it would make people want to make sure that they got or were denied that overwhelming victory.
But what happens if someone has a score to nil e.g 4:0? Also what about a ratio of say 7/3? do you round up or what?

The idea is good but would only work if there was compulsory voting so a set number of votes were had for each list.
 

·
Now with STFU flames!
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
numberofthebeastxxx said:
So whats the list count so far Caluin? I'm itching to get back in there.
Twenty three lists. One slot left. First come, first served. Although, I'm not going to start the VoteWar right after I recieve the last list - I'd like to take a few days to myself and relax a little bit, ya know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
Wings of Doom said:
But what happens if someone has a score to nil e.g 4:0? Also what about a ratio of say 7/3? do you round up or what?

The idea is good but would only work if there was compulsory voting so a set number of votes were had for each list.
It would just work any time the ratio was at ore better than 3:1, so 7/3 isn't good enough, and 4/0 is more than enough. Of course, a 1/0 or 2/0 battle could screw this up, but I don't think we'd have any of those.
 

·
The Love Muffin
Joined
·
1,830 Posts
numberofthebeastxxx said:
Who eliminated you Black? Wasent me was it? :ph34r:
I dunno who, but it was an IG list with lots of plasma. I got boned because of escalation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
Caluin said:
Twenty three lists. One slot left. First come, first served. Although, I'm not going to start the VoteWar right after I recieve the last list - I'd like to take a few days to myself and relax a little bit, ya know?
Sure. If anyone deserves a break it's you. :yes:

Black Katalyst said:
I dunno who, but it was an IG list with lots of plasma. I got boned because of escalation.
Ah. Wasen't me then. Perhaps we will face off sometime soon? 8)
 

·
Now with STFU flames!
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Black Katalyst said:
I dunno who, but it was an IG list with lots of plasma. I got boned because of escalation.
You can thank Ghandi for the Imperial Guard list that beat you. He's a friend of mine, so go easy on him.

Here's a question for those participating - I have an odd entry. Harlequins. The list creator and I have agreed that while they are listed on Chapter Approved website and I said I would allow Chapter Approved items, that Harlequins are not classified as strictly legal. Also, their rules are a bit tweaky but are freely avaliable to anyone that wants to download them.

The person who submitted the list and I have decided to leave it up to everyone else - if I get enough people who aren't keen on the idea, he'll simply submit a more suitable list. Otherwise, I'll allow the Harlies.

So lemme know what you think.
 

·
Dancing Peanuts? You bet!
Joined
·
1,350 Posts
I have no problem with the Harlequin army being used at all. It's an army like any other, so I don't see why not. They have their strengths and weaknesses, and, as I've seen before are beatable.

I can probably guess who sent in a harli list. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree for the use of Harlequins. Almost no one knows the rules. And even tho there posted who has actually seent hem in action? Who has seen their strengths or weaknesses? There is a HUGE difference between seeing an army on paper and playing against it or seeing it played. But the biggest objection I have is that it's not a real army. To quote GW: "Please remember that the rules and scenarios published here are not 'official', and may not be entirely balanced. They are intended to add an extra level to your games of 40K, not necessarily provide a complete, balanced new army."

I know we agreed to Chapter Approved, but only official chapter approved. Most players who use Harlies use the list and rules from a completely different site not certified by GW. And those rules are even more balanced.

So I'm gonna have to say no. Not enough people know about this army for it to be voted for accuratley and the rules are not official, nor entirely balanced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
Agreed. A new list would be fine. No need to disqualify the person.

I've been in the hobby for 8years and although I've read all the rules, I've never once played against them or even seen them played.
 

·
The Love Muffin
Joined
·
1,830 Posts
I have to object to using Harlequins.

Yes their rules are readily available, but not many people have played against them. I think the owner of the list should be able to send another one, due to insufficient tactical expirience of the masses.

Personally, I've been playing for about 5 years now and I've never even seen an army of them in person let alone played against them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
I wish there was a way for them to be fielded since they're pretty cool. However, I agree with the other points made here. The limit of my experience with them is: I proxied them twice. And once was with the list that isn't GWs version. And this was about a year ago. And even that places me as more knowledgable than many. So, "what they said" (the people who posted before me).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
520 Posts
Well, I can only hope this third Votewar is better for me than the last two. Each time I've gotten through the first round with total pwnage, only to be whooped hard in round two. It happened with my Dark Sentinels against Marines (I think), and it happened with my Word Bearers against a freaking Devastator Company (damn, I hate the idea of static lists; and a Dev company is a Reserve Company, not a Battle Company). I hope the higher amount of armor I have in my list here helps.

As for Escalation, I don't see why people are complaining. It's as much a part of the game as Deep Striking and Infiltrating. You have to adapt your play style to counter them, so why not do the same for Escalation?

One more thing. I'd like to suggest including the Night Fight, Patrol, and Rescue missions in the next Votewar. It'll add a nice flair to the mix, I should think. Last game I played was Patrol, and it was a refreshing change from the Standard missions without needing a different Force Organization Chart.
 
1 - 20 of 131 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top