A friendly group of people looking to share their Hobby!!!
 
HomeFAQSearchRegisterMemberlistUsergroupsLog in

Share | 
 

 Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 01, 2014 3:32 pm

I intend to host these every other month on the second Saturday.

Warhammer 40K Tournament

Hobby Shop
153 Springboro Pike
Dayton, OH 45449
(937) 436-6161

Saturday, January 24th
• Check-in 10:00-10:45
• Pairings at 10:45am
• Games start 11:00am
• 30 min break for lunch after round 1
• 3 rounds timed 2 hours each. Tentatively, finish about 7pm
• Rankings determined by Win/Loss then VP GP (technicality)

Missions and Objectives

$10 entry with prizes awarded to top placements (depending upon number of participants). Maximum 16 players.

7th Edition, Battle-forged Armies (Bound) 1850 pts. Limit of one combined arms detachment. Avoid spam lists and numerous detachments/formations/dataslates.
Players must bring legitimate, published material for all relevant rules for their army (no pics or scans of pages with stats, illegal pdf copies, and so on)

Painted armies encouraged but not required

All Formations, Codices, and Dataslates published up to a week prior to tournament
Forgeworld Warhammer 40,000 approved

May select 0-1 Fortifications from the following:
a. Aegis Defense Line
b. Imperial Bastion
c. Skyshield Landing Platform
d. Firestorm Redoubt
e. Vengeance Weapons Battery

No Gargantuan or Super Heavy Lords of War. Players are permitted to use codex Lords of War that are not Gargantuan or Super Heavy.


Last edited by dewen on Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:15 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Ghost_Raptur
Neophyte


Posts : 1
Join date : 2014-07-13

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:05 pm

What is the spam limit exactly? Would this apply to things like bikes, rhinos, wave serpents equally etc? Also, what is the detachment/formation limit?

Thanks!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Fri Dec 05, 2014 5:49 pm

I did not want to secify a spam limit or limit on number of detachment/formations. I know some tournaments specify 1 CAD and 0-1 of all the other things you can add. I like the flexibility of list building in 7th but do not want to see someone show up with a crazy list they found on the internet that is HQ x, Troup t with 8 detachments of the same models. Bring your bike army or mechanized list or whatever else you want. For the tournaments I have played in Cinci and Dayton I really haven't seen anyone with an abusive list. I only stated the limitation to deter spam players and encourage new or other players. In Nov we had a player who played in his first tournament. With some tournaments using the limitations I mentioned, you couldn't run CAD Ultramarines with Allied Detach Crimson Fist AND an Allied Detach of Imperial Fist. Have fun and be creative. If you have a specific question, you can always post it or PM me.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Jaysic
Neophyte


Posts : 68
Join date : 2014-01-29

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Fri Dec 05, 2014 11:19 pm

9 Wave serpent list, HERE I COME.


JK. I might bring a few hundred gaunts, though.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 08, 2014 10:27 am

Nice, I'd like to see hundreds of gaunts, especially all painted like the rest of your awesome looking nids.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
40Kwill
Neophyte


Posts : 109
Join date : 2013-08-27

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 08, 2014 8:58 pm

Ohh a chance to spam. I too could bring gaunts and we could spend hours just moving them.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Tue Dec 09, 2014 11:45 am

40Kwill wrote:
Ohh a chance to spam.  I too could bring gaunts and we could spend hours just moving them.
Measure your movement for each of your hundred+ gaunts to slow the game to a painful pace...no, don't do that
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 12:42 pm

Hobby Shop owner had forgotten about another event and asked me to reschedule the Dayton Tourney from 1/10 to 1/24.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Redbeard
Neophyte


Posts : 51
Join date : 2014-05-27

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:52 pm

Does your detachment specifically have to be CAD from the BRB? Can it be one of the codex specific detachments (i.e., the SW codex detachment, DE codex detachment, BA codex detachment)?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
cebalrai
Neophyte


Posts : 21
Join date : 2014-01-22

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:56 pm

Most LoW that are coming out are just chapter masters and things like that. Is there any reason why they're completely banned?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Redbeard
Neophyte


Posts : 51
Join date : 2014-05-27

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:15 pm


Yeah, have to also ask that same question. For instance, Space Wolves and Blood Angels both just had all their codex chapter masters (Logan, Dante, Gabriel Seth) moved from HQ to LoW. Same thing happened to Orks with Ghazghkhul.

Why restrict players with these codexes from playing some of the better models in their codex?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:46 pm

Redbeard wrote:
Does your detachment specifically have to be CAD from the BRB? Can it be one of the codex specific detachments (i.e., the SW codex detachment, DE codex detachment, BA codex detachment)?

I think you're confusing BRB detachments and Codex detachments. You are permitted to include codex detachments. I did not limit them.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Redbeard
Neophyte


Posts : 51
Join date : 2014-05-27

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 3:50 pm

I wasn't confusing them in my head, but my question was probably poorly worded =p. Thanks for clarifying.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:03 pm

cebalrai wrote:
Most LoW that are coming out are just chapter masters and things like that.  Is there any reason why they're completely banned?  

Redbeard wrote:

Yeah, have to also ask that same question. For instance, Space Wolves and Blood Angels both just had all their codex chapter masters (Logan, Dante, Gabriel Seth) moved from HQ to LoW. Same thing happened to Orks with Ghazghkhul.

Why restrict players with these codexes from playing some of the better models in their codex?

Interesting you mention this because I was discussing this today with another player and Makari, who typically TOs at EGC. With the recent HQ to LoW moves in new codices, I personally do not like my tournament restriction.  One option would be to allow Codex LoW entries only, but this would give Orks access to a powerful LoW, stompa.  A second option is a point limit. This seems arbitrary but could allow for the HQ-like-LoWs (a term I just made up). I would set the limit to 350pts, which would allow for Ghazghkhul, Dante and Seth. I am not a SW player so I am not sure if this allows Logan. I am open to input and with the two week reschedule, I can still post a change to the tournament restrictions.

Not all of the Hobby Shop tournaments, which I plan to host in the future, will restrict LoW at all.  But for the first few, I think it is necessary. I also want players who have bought with hard-earned money, assembled and painted their LoWs to be able to show them off in a tournament.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:04 pm

Redbeard wrote:
I wasn't confusing them in my head, but my question was probably poorly worded =p. Thanks for clarifying.

No problem. My "spam" limitation probably should have been "cheese" or something like that. As I posted earlier, I doubt it'll be an issue.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
justin.cress
Neophyte


Posts : 24
Join date : 2012-03-05

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:12 pm

dewen wrote:
cebalrai wrote:
Most LoW that are coming out are just chapter masters and things like that.  Is there any reason why they're completely banned?  

Redbeard wrote:

Yeah, have to also ask that same question. For instance, Space Wolves and Blood Angels both just had all their codex chapter masters (Logan, Dante, Gabriel Seth) moved from HQ to LoW. Same thing happened to Orks with Ghazghkhul.

Why restrict players with these codexes from playing some of the better models in their codex?

Interesting you mention this because I was discussing this today with another player and Makari, who typically TOs at EGC. With the recent HQ to LoW moves in new codices, I personally do not like my tournament restriction.  One option would be to allow Codex LoW entries only, but this would give Orks access to a powerful LoW, stompa.  A second option is a point limit. This seems arbitrary but could allow for the HQ-like-LoWs (a term I just made up). I would set the limit to 350pts, which would allow for Ghazghkhul, Dante and Seth. I am not a SW player so I am not sure if this allows Logan. I am open to input and with the two week reschedule, I can still post a change to the tournament restrictions.

Not all of the Hobby Shop tournaments, which I plan to host in the future, will restrict LoW at all.  But for the first few, I think it is necessary. I also want players who have bought with hard-earned money, assembled and painted their LoWs to be able to show them off in a tournament.


IMHO - the stompa by itself is not a great reason to ban LOW. Yes, the model is big and it has a lot of scary guns and whatnot, but it is by no means uber-powerful. It would be more than half of any 1850 list and would struggle to justify its points cost in most games.

There may be other models that justify a ban, but, I don't think the stompa is really worth worrying about.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:16 pm

I was necessarily saying the stompa is awesome. If the restriction was codex LoW, most are moderately pointed. Orks being the exception having access to an expensive one may create the perception of an unfair restriction.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Redbeard
Neophyte


Posts : 51
Join date : 2014-05-27

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 4:23 pm

I think for future events either option would work: 1) allowing codex-specific LoWs, or 2) allowing all LoWs with some sort of points-based restriction.

Who knows....by the next tourney maybe the Necron codex will be out and maybe they'll be given a LoW model in their codex rules, too.

Thanks for listening =).
Back to top Go down
View user profile
cebalrai
Neophyte


Posts : 21
Join date : 2014-01-22

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Mon Dec 15, 2014 7:08 pm

I guess what I don't understand is why LoW are getting restricted or banned when people are permitted to run 1850 points of LoW if they use the Knights codex.  I realize that they're not in the LoW slot but for all practical purposes they're the same thing.  The fact that people can do that with Knights means nobody else should have a restriction if consistency is valued.

If the real problem is a small number of LoW models (Revenant and the Necron ones) then IMO deal with them like any other OP unit.  Otherwise a list with a bunch of knights is at least as OP as a tranny c'tan. My 2 cents.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Redbeard
Neophyte


Posts : 51
Join date : 2014-05-27

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Tue Dec 16, 2014 12:40 am

We really need to stop using the terms "Lords of War" and "Super-Heavies" interchangeably, it just confuses things. There are LoW models that aren't super-heavies and vice-versa.

If what people want to stop in games is the super-heavies, then put a ban on super-heavies, don't ban LoW. Banning LoW leaves no other super-heavies to deal with imperial knights and penalizes a bunch of other models that aren't problematic (i.e. war bosses and named chapter masters).

In my opinion, ideally, the banning is kept to a minimum. However, the current approach of banning LoW models seems like the worst kind of compromise for all the reasons mentioned. There are better suggestions on the table, imo.  


santa
Back to top Go down
View user profile
pinkie007
Neophyte


Posts : 6
Join date : 2014-12-16
Age : 29
Location : west carrolton, ohio

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:56 am

Hey guys its that new player, David, that participated in the previous hobby shop tourney. Finally had the time to make a profile. I'm pretty excited to participate in the next one if I've got the time off of work. I promise i won't be nearly as sleep deprived or rusty about the rules lol. Everyone was super friendly, nice and helpful.
As for some more input on the LoW stuff I've been curious about why some of the "named" guys like Logan and Ghazghkhul get the shaft. However I've never played with any or against so I can on see the state lines and not shake in my boots. FYI Logan is only 250 or 320 with sled
Imperial Knights are not very over powered as they can be handled by most heavy support groups just require a bit more focusing.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Makari
Supreme Forum Overlord


Posts : 3251
Join date : 2007-11-10
Age : 38
Location : Milford, OH

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Tue Dec 16, 2014 6:55 am

In regards to the LoW CAG is assembling a team and using feedback from here, facebook, and tournaments to get an idea of how things should be handled.  Dave E is running this tournament and he and I felt that we wanted to try different approaches using the rule sets from some of the larger tournament.  Dave using NOVA and I'm using BAO. We are not necessarily agreeing with or supporting a permanent ban on LoW but want to at least try the different ways that others play it.  We are all aware of the reasons for running or not running LoW.  And we are also in the same mindset of not wanting to restrict things in 7th, however we are realist and GW is doing a wonderful job to incorporate rules that specifically cause headaches for T.O.'s and it forces us to make compromises that in some cases may not be fair to all involved but we are at least trying different avenues to satisfy as much as possible for an enjoyable game and event.

I will say regardless of outcomes For the love of the Emperor stop equating LoW/Superheavies/ Knights as the same. I understand the frustration but they are not interchangeable, GW has made this clear and done this on purpose.

_________________
The footprints made in the sands of time are not made by sitting down... Unless your playing Warhammer WAAAGH!

New times calls for new Records:
Orcs & goblins (3-1-2)
Empire (0-0-0)
6th Edition
Orks (0-0)
Marines (3-1)
Imperial Guard (0-0)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://myspace.com/makarithraka
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:21 am

For clarification, NOVA is where I started with my rules. My restrictions are much looser. For example, NOVA is no FW and 1 CAD, 0-1 Allied Detachment plus additional limits on dataslates and detachments. If you went through the trouble of buying a FW model and have the supporting book, bring it. You want to take advantage of multiple allies or detachments, bring it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Redbeard
Neophyte


Posts : 51
Join date : 2014-05-27

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Tue Dec 16, 2014 2:18 pm

Sean, I 100% agree. We need to stop inter-mixing LoW/Imperial Kights/Super-heavies in our language/coversations. They are all different for different reasons. There are super-heavy LoW and non-super heavy LoW, etc.

I understand the mindset for setting the rules for these two tourneys, and I appreciate that you are trying new rules. That is fantastic!

One thing I will say is that BAO and NOVA were Summer tourneys. If I recall, BAO was late July and NOVA was late August. Because of the size of these tourneys, the rules get set months ahead of time. This means that the TOs for those two tourneys were setting tourney rules based on the 40k codexes and meta as they existed in the April-May timeframe.

A lot has changed since then...lots of new codexes, new LoW models, new detachments, etc. The 40k rules world is changing at an extraordinarily fast pace. If the TOs for those two tournaments had it to do over again, I would doubt that they'd have the same rules today as they did when they established them back in the Spring.

As a more recent GT, you can look to the 11th company GT that was run in early November. Here are the rules they used:

Army Construction Rules:
- You may not select more than 2 total Detachments, and must contain a Primary detachment. A Formation counts as a detachment.
- You may not select more than 1 Combined Arms Detachment.
- All Formations, Codices, and Dataslates published by 10/1/2014 are considered legal (subject to
discretion given GW’s crazy release schedule of late). Exception: the new Dark Eldar Codex
and Supplement are legal for this event.
- Forgeworld rules will not be legal for 2014.
- You may select 0-1 Fortifications from the following: Aegis Defense Line, Imperial Bastion,
Skyshield Landing Platform, Firestorm Redoubt, Vengeance Weapons Battery.
- Conjured units are not considered part of an explicit Detachment. As a result, benefits from your
Warlord such as Conqueror of Cities and benefits granted by being a part of a given detachment do not apply to Conjured Units. Furthermore, as a RAW clarification, Conjured Models interact with other models as per the Allies Matrix, regardless of the Faction that summoned them.
- Super Heavy/Gargantuan Lords of War are not allowed at this time (meaning you can still take Ghaz/Logan/Draigo and an Imperial Knight, just not a Baneblade).
- Allied Detachments MAY BE SELECTED from the same Faction as the Primary Detachment.
- Fortification upgrades from Stronghold are not allowed. Rulebook Quad Gun, Icarus, and
Comms are allowed.


Also, they do not use the Escalation LoW secondary objectives (through attrition victory, etc.). I know from their podcast that they consider these to no longer be the default rules for LoW models in 7E, since the FAQ came out. I also know that the 11th company TOs were considering making the rules even less restrictive (allowing FW, etc).

Also, they did have some interesting secondary objective ideas that may be worth considering:

Available Secondary Goals:
1. First Blood (Be the first player to destroy an opposing unit)
2. Linebreaker (Model from a scoring/denial unit within 12’’ of opponent board edge)
3. Slay the Warlord (Kill enemy Warlord)
4. Heart of the Matter (End the game with your Warlord base contacting the centerpoint of the
table)
5. Moment of Bloodshed (Destroy at least 3 enemy units in a single player turn)
6. Kill Points (earn more Kill Points than your opponent)
7. Leave None Behind (All your surviving units must end the game outside your deployment zone)

Back to top Go down
View user profile
dewen
Neophyte


Posts : 208
Join date : 2011-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Tue Dec 16, 2014 4:26 pm

Redbeard wrote:

One thing I will say is that BAO and NOVA were Summer tourneys. If I recall, BAO was late July and NOVA was late August. Because of the size of these tourneys, the rules get set months ahead of time. This means that the TOs for those two tourneys were setting tourney rules based on the 40k codexes and meta as they existed in the April-May timeframe.

A lot has changed since then...lots of new codexes, new LoW models, new detachments, etc. The 40k rules world is changing at an extraordinarily fast pace. If the TOs for those two tournaments had it to do over again, I would doubt that they'd have the same rules today as they did when they established them back in the Spring.

As a more recent GT, you can look to the 11th company GT that was run in early November. Here are the rules they used:
All valid and good points

Redbeard wrote:

Army Construction Rules:
- You may not select more than 2 total Detachments, and must contain a Primary detachment. A Formation counts as a detachment.
...

I don't understand the purpose for this limit. Is there a potential abuse for a certain army?

Redbeard wrote:

Conjured units are not considered part of an explicit Detachment. As a result, benefits from your
Warlord such as Conqueror of Cities and benefits granted by being a part of a given detachment do not apply to Conjured Units...
This is a good addition.

Redbeard wrote:

- Super Heavy/Gargantuan Lords of War are not allowed at this time (meaning you can still take Ghaz/Logan/Draigo and an Imperial Knight, just not a Baneblade).
...
This is an interesting limitation.

[quote="Redbeard"]
Allied Detachments MAY BE SELECTED from the same Faction as the Primary Detachment.
...
[\quote]
I'm not sure I agree with this.

Redbeard wrote:

Also, they did have some interesting secondary objective ideas that may be worth considering:
...
I have already added these or something similar plus many more to keep the objectives fun and different.


Redbeard wrote:
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament   Today at 4:45 am

Back to top Go down
 
Hobby Shop (Dayton) Jan 24th 40K Tournament
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 3Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Hobby Shop (Dayton) Mar 14th 40K Tournament
» Hobby Shop (Dayton, OH) April, 11th 40K Tournament
» 40K Tournament The Hobby Shop Dayton Sat, 8/22
» 40K RTT, Dayton, OH, Saturday november 15 - big prizes!
» Clint Dunning - University of Ottawa Tournament

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
CAG :: General :: Tournaments & Events-
Jump to: