Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: 40k Escalation Must Die

  1. 05-02-2015, 12:57 PM #1
    Bullymike
    Bullymike is offline
    Senior Member Bullymike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    ATX
    Posts
    1,041

    40k Escalation Must Die

    I have gone on about this before but it deserves its own discussion.

    I strongly object to these pointless Escalation artifacts in 40k tournaments. Escalation was released before 7th edition as a standalone way to include superheavies in 6th edition 40k. Why are TOs maintaining that armies playing with superheavies need some kind of handicap. specifically, giving the opponent bonuses for seizing the initiative, victory point bonuses, and/or allowing the warlord traits.

    I can play against 5 knights with my stompa and he gets ****ing bonuses against me for no reason. awesome.

    Are TOs actually thinking this stuff in between GTs through or is everyone just "rolling with it"?

    I petitioned the Alamo broes but never heard back.
    "The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  2. 05-02-2015, 01:31 PM #2
    morella888
    morella888 is offline
    Senior Member morella888's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Taylor
    Posts
    1,013
    Just a general feeling I get from reading through various event guidelines:
    The trend seems to resemble a game of telephone, stuff keeps getting added or changed but the original intent is lost in translation. Case in point, see the houston carnage guide. Few seem to recognize 7th as a rather complete break from prior tradition necessitating a start from scratch approach. From comments I have read in assorted places online, this extends to players as well. And people then point to the confusion and attribute it to the rules. The RAW to me are pretty damned clear though; the confusion is the result of poor reading comprehension and/or an inability to separate 7th from past editions.
    So in answer to your question, I would say the latter condition often seems to be the case in large part.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  3. 05-02-2015, 03:18 PM #3
    vermicious knid
    vermicious knid is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    580
    Really fixing nonsense like this would require the company publishing the game to give a single solitary **** about competitive play.

    Could be solved with just a little official effort. Maddening that they refuse.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  4. 05-02-2015, 06:46 PM #4
    Bullymike
    Bullymike is offline
    Senior Member Bullymike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    ATX
    Posts
    1,041
    optimum ruleset for me personally is 7th edition, no mysterious objectives or terrain, no duplicate detachments, one LOW, 3 color minimum. i could play that at any point level but 1500-2000 would be best, 1850 being cherry. id pay $20 a month to play that reliably in a 3-game setting.
    "The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  5. 05-02-2015, 07:32 PM #5
    Caldera02
    Caldera02 is offline
    Senior Member Caldera02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    3,449
    Why is duplicate detachments a problem? Looking at eldar book, there are lots of good formations I'd want to take copies of that wouldn't even be OP.
    Wargamescon 40k Judge
    caldera40k.blogspot.com
    Hogleg - "only in my head someone bought CRP's OOP Wraithlord then stuck its toe in cover."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  6. 05-02-2015, 08:13 PM #6
    daKing
    daKing is offline
    Fashionably Late daKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,375
    Somehow JR would make 6 hawk squads OP
    Wrecking Crew Member

    I would punch his baby in the face! thats how i roll! ask around, it happens! ~spines
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  7. 05-02-2015, 09:31 PM #7
    Beamo
    Beamo is offline
    Senior Member Beamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    2,372
    Quote Originally Posted by daKing View Post
    Somehow JR would make 6 hawk squads OP
    Problem is that the same option allows for 6 WS squads, which would just be bat****.
    http://drownedinplastic.blogspot.com/

    My CMON Profile
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  8. 05-03-2015, 12:04 AM #8
    ace423
    ace423 is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,483
    Quote Originally Posted by Beamo View Post
    Problem is that the same option allows for 6 WS squads, which would just be bat****.
    Sisters of battle fear no warp spiders!

    Do ho ho....
    Sigh. Why did i have to have emergency service during WGC...
    Something something won awards in something something.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  9. 05-03-2015, 12:27 AM #9
    rand0mnumb3r
    rand0mnumb3r is offline
    Senior Member rand0mnumb3r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1,015
    Quote Originally Posted by Caldera02 View Post
    Why is duplicate detachments a problem? Looking at eldar book, there are lots of good formations I'd want to take copies of that wouldn't even be OP.
    because canoptek harvest exists basically.

    That and stupid **** like a 60+ WC army you can do with inquistion and such, or my personal favorite of only taking the Spore Mine Formations and ending up with like 200+ models that come back on a 4+ and nothing in the army counts as a kill point.

    But It'd be nice to see multiple Aspect Hosts be allowed. They are a "duplicate" detachment in name only so I could see an exception based on that possibly. That and the formation throws a bone to eldar players not spamming jetbikes and wraithknights which is awesome.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
  10. 05-03-2015, 05:45 AM #10
    Bullymike
    Bullymike is offline
    Senior Member Bullymike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    ATX
    Posts
    1,041
    i stand by no duplicates.

    back to my original point which is, yall need to make some fukin noise about this escalation crap every chance you get. it is mindboggling.
    "The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
« Previous Thread | Next 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
  •  

Forum Rules