|Who ya gonna call?|
However, I am going to try and get organised and write a least one post per week. I guess that a lost of this will be more Theoretical rather than Practical (everyone has read Know No Fear by now right?)
Which also bring me on to welcoming Dave to the blog. He's been threatening/promising to join for a while (delete as applicable) so it's great that he's finally on board and we're all looking forward to seeing some of his painting posts over the coming weeks and months.
|Dream a little dream of me|
Having said that, I did actually manage a game the other week against Mick's Throne of Skulls list and it was possibly the most boring game of 40K ever. Mick suggested playing Pitched Battle/Kill Points and I absent mindedly agreed. So, my three Long Fang packs stood on my board edge, Mick's three Long Fang packs stood on his board edge and we spent 45 minutes shooting each other. I went first, I won. The only unit from either side that even made it into an opponent's table half was one of Mick's Land Speeders that then got shot down for its trouble. At least it's given me a couple of ideas for posts which will pop up over the next couple of days...
|Winner, winner, chicken dinner|
I've been reading Andy's write-ups of the Throne of Skulls tournament with interest. Congratulations to Andy who managed to understand GW's ker-azy system that meant that the only person who won all five games didn't win the tournament. I've also been speaking to Mick about Caledonian Open from the week before where someone missed out on a top 5 finish due to painting scores.
In my opinion, tournaments should be decided on the tabletop. It's slightly facetious but you don't get extra points in football for having the nicest kit. Don't get me wrong, I think that everyone should have a painted, based, WYSIWYG army and there should be prizes for the best painted/converted etc. However, this should have no bearing over who wins overall.
There also need to be a way to differentiate between scale of victory. At ToS, a win was a win. So you could end up with 5 big wins having played against 4 guys who only narrowly won their games. I think that either secondary objectives (as in Nova) or VP adjustment (as used at Caledonian) are probably the best ways to sort this out.
What's the most boring game that you've ever had? How do you think tournaments should be scored? Generalship? Soft scores? A mix of the two?