Thread: 11/4 Dragon's Lair 40K Tournament Feedback.

Nick and Shannon asked for feedback. Here are my thoughts:

The format was pretty good, the presentation was a little confused but once that was cleared up I liked the format.

If the scenario with random point values is to be used objective markers with values should be provided.

Thanks to Nick, Shannon, Chris, and DL for an enjoyable day of 40K! BTW the kids all had a blast.

i really do not like W/L/D format, it doesn't matter to me the format for DL tournaments since we aren't playing for prize support but if this is beta testing for war-games con then i say i don't like it.

i think KPs are an excellent tiebreaker but it was confusing to count VPs, KP, and bonuses for the W/L/D and on the score sheet separately. it was just more likely that people won big when they might not have. I just don't think they should all be counted twice, which makes line breaker, kill warlord, first blood all the more important.

That makes me think, if you guys wanted to do KP as a secondary, why not just add another 1VP secondary objective that goes to the player who got the most kill points under the KP system.

I HATED the W/L/D format, but you guys already knew that. My games were fun in and of themselves, as is the case 95% of the time.

Originally Posted by CRP

If the scenario with random point values is to be used objective markers with values should be provided.

That one is pretty easy to mark out. Having custom objectives would cost money. Or someone's poker set! lol

I did not like the KP's as a secondary objective either. I have always thought KP's is terrible because certain armies are designed to have a large number of KP's. Dark Eldar, Eldar....almost all Xenos. There is a small balance there for the Xenos having more things to shoot with, but my point is that is pretty much the default mode for xenos races. That's why having one mission out of 6 is ok cause it should be there in some form, just not all of them. As a tie breaker, sure that is fine.

The games were fine. I like having multiple missions, but I don't like having different sets of control objectives. I would say that some balancing of point values would be a good idea - if you run Purge the Alien and The Relic at the same time again, the relic needs to be worth more than 3 VP's. I was ready to play that game by just ignoring the center of the table.

W/L/D just doesn't work consistently unless you have at least n rounds for 2^n players. There's a slight possibility that enough draws will give you a slightly wider spread, but there's too much invested in the tie-breakers and the method for the tie-breakers was not very clearly defined up front. (In fact, my understanding is that Nick as of last night thought we were recording total VP's each game, not KP's. I never listed the VP's I got from a game, just the KP's.)

Matt, Nick told me the VPs were used only to determine W/L/D so did not need to be recorded.

VP+W/L/D is a combination of my two least favorite tournament artifacts.

Yes bad communication on our part(nick!) about how the tournament was run.

I don't think Relic and KP's was a bad combo. For example, if your opponent has 8 kill points and you killed half, he killed half of your 8 kill points, but you got a the relic, you win by 3. So it can be even more skewed, you only managed to kill 2 of his units but focused on the relic, you win by 1! I think that makes for a much better game than just kill the other guy.

I will concede the Relic mission itself might be skewed though.

It is.

Why is it skewed? I think it is one of the most general missions-- there are many different types of armies that can compete at that mission. If anything it favors the armies that the other missions punish.