Breaking Down Dark Angels and their Power in Review:

Hey all, Kevin here from the show. It's nice to get back into blogging since, if you even ever read my blog, its kind of a ghost town as of recent. I will do something about it sometime....maybe...eventually....

Anyway I thought I would come over here to my 2nd blog guest spot, free bag of potato chips to whomever can guess my first one, to talk a little bit on the power level of the, relatively new, Dark Angels Codex by breaking it down by it's units. So lets start at the top.

Note I may skip a few of the mediocre units imho....

HQ's

So there are only three real HQ choices in this book, barring the add on free slots which I will get to later, and those are Azreal, Ezekiel, and a normal Librarian.

Yes, I said Ezekiel, and no I am not on crack. Ezekiel has always been one of my favorite HQ characters and is my personal favorite Special character in the game. I even used him back before this codex dropped when I used Dark Angel allies. He use to be and still kind of is a combat beast (against MEQ's and weaker units only of course). He has a decent amount of attacks and WS5, which outside of Mephiston is good for a librarian equivalent. He also has 3 wounds and a 2+ save which is high for a librarian even a special character. He also has a 6" WS bubble, better than his old fearless bubble. He is a relatively cheap Mastery level 3 psycher at only 145 points (25 less than last edition fyi). Even though one of this is a sort of personal spell it doesn't suck and has some termie killing power. He also has divination access. Not a bad choice overall yet my problem with him is he lacks a useful list in any list I right for anything competitive. He tends not to be used when I do play hims o for right now I have him sitting in foam.

Next of course is Azreal, one of the most useful HQ choices I have seen in awhile. Also not a bad combat character with a S6 power sword with a 2+ save and 6+ FNP. Yet its his abilities that make him useful. Azreal allows every Dark Angel unit in your army to use his leadership for whatever you need. He also makes all deathwing and ravenwing in your army troops choices. Now he is disjointed in a pure list for either wing since he cannot deathwing assault nor is he fast enough to hang around in a biker army. This ability is more a bonus for a more balanced build approach. Making the odd supporting wing unit scoring is just a good perk. Yet the ability he is known for is his ability to confer a 4++ save to any unit he joins. This makes cover pointless and really helps a lot of units, such as guard blobs now with a better save, as well as shooty terminator units as they now would have a better invulnerable save, their largest downfall. He is a great choice overall even with his price tag equivalent of a terminator squad.

Lastly we have the noble and cheap librarian. An excellent cheap choice just to fill need as well as a divination caddy. He also has access to unlock other units which is nice but its his ability to attach a power field generator for a cheap price is why I get him. He basically rides shotgun in my Magic Flag Land Raider lists to give the raiders  a 4++.

Now of course we cannot skip the odd add on unit Techmarines. They also ca take a PFG which is very useful. Also for some reason Dark angel Techmarines can bolster any piece of terrain, go ahead read the book it is there, which is pretty neat.

Also we have the obligatory command squad with their set of magic flags. The banner selection is what makes these guys worth grabbing again. Most popular is the Magic Flag itself, The Devastation banner, and it's salvo aura. This, in synergy with a PFG caddy and/or even a deathwing vehicle upgrade, makes Land Raider Crusaders just plain filthy and are the cornerstone of my lists. Now I would want to try and make the FNP banner work but it really jut isnt worth it outside of a all deathwing fun army....

Now I will say Sammael and Ravenwing CS's are very popular and quite cool, they just aren't that good with Helljerks flying around right now ruining everyone in power armor's day.

Troops 

Now troops are quite simple. Tactical squads got cheaper, much cheaper, which would make them more useful you think? Well yes and no, Helldrake still don't care. The presence of helldrakes in the meta makes power armor, even in rhino's, not worth it unless very well hidden. I want to run power armor based rhino lists but I cannot in fear of Puff the Magic Helljerk.

Notably through FOC swaps deathwing and ravenwing can become troops. Honestly they both can be fairly useful and durable. I tend to run a straight mix since Azreal is common in my lists and utility is key in balanced list building.


Fast Attack

Now whomever wrote the rules for the two flyers I would really like to slap in the back of the head. I really, really, really wanted these things to work since they look a ton cooler than storm talons. Yet the suck so don't expect to see them anytime soon.

Ravenwing still will be a popular FA choice with bike squads being very useful. These guys combined with darkshrouds can be fairly cool and quite common around my FLGS's. Ravenwing support squads are another neat little option as well as land speeders can be useful. Combining Ravenwing and the Magic flag is also gold.

Elites 

Same with the Fast Attack wing deathwing are the only winners here and even then they aren't as useful as they use to be. A slightly more expensive terminator yet they come with split fire which is awesome. They also can alpha strike in  a deep strike nicely as well with DWA rules as well as twin linked weapons upon deep striking. Yet with torrent of fire being 6th Edition thing to do I cant bring out my deathwing like I wanted to as much other than support.

Heavy Support

Now there are two big winners in this department, the first one is devastators. Not only do they have flak missile access they can tote a very cheap squad of 4 multi-meltas in a rhino. A nice filler unit I would always recommend to the balanced list builder.

Now the one big and cheesy winner of the codex is the Land Raider Crusader. With synergistic combinations of the magic flag and a PFG caddy inside this thing becomes pure win. Heck even through the DW vehicle upgrade and this is a 4++ save venerable Land Raider with 24 twin linked boltgun shots always not counting the twin linked assault cannon and obligatory multi-melta. Against MEQ's between all the vehicles weapons you tend to get around 15 wounds caused from it including a armor ignoring shot or two. It is a staple to every Dark Angel list I run and I tend to run multiple of these since the investment spreads out the more LRC's I take.

In General... 

The book does tend to seem kind of bland. Basically deathwing and Ravenwing are the only falvor and I still only want to run green angels. The one  power build this codex seems to have is the Magic Flag Super Crusader list although Ravenwing is getting more popular. Yet unless Heldrakes get banned everywhere I go I don't think I will see many Ravenwing Player's winning. It is a shame but hey, Heldrake don't care.

All in all I still like the book. you can run some interesting lists coming from a few different angles in this book. IT is a fun army book to run and you can compete with it, although only with a fairly extreme Land Raider based list. I hope to see this book used a lot in tournaments and use it myself as well......more on this later....

Now I wouldn't call my word canon but what do you think of the Dark Angels book being the first Loyalist Marine book released in 6th edition? I know I am not a Ravenwing player so there is a lot to be discussed about that build's excellent potential.

BAO Display Board

So it has become almost an annual tradition, where the Tactical Terrain segment spends some time on how to make effective display boards.  This year is no exception.  Tactical Terrain Eric here, and I am sharing with you the behind the scenes of my latest project. Many of you saw it at BAO, but today I show you the steps involved in the creation of this new display board.

Coming into a new tournament season, I wanted to make some improvements. What I learned last year was:
Using the Dry Erase board was great until I tried to pick it up. I needed a way to get my fingers underneath the board to pick it up safely

I wanted to use magnetic bases to minimize sliding around as we shuffle back & forth from table to table

Cookie Sheet, slightly used

It still has to fit in my carry-on bag for air travel.

Like many stories, this project has humble beginnings. I used an ordinary, slightly used, 11”x 17” cookie sheet. This gives me the handles I need to pick up the board easily from a flat table, and the steel material allows the magnets to stick to the board wherever I put the models.

Next step was an experiment that paid off in spades. I wanted to add a texture to the board, but I wanted to avoid flock or scale ballast. I used this on my last board and found little bits in my socks after every tournament I traveled to. I also needed a material that was thin enough so the magnets would still connect to the cookie sheet. The solution was textured wallpaper. It provided a textured look but still had a flat upper surface so I didn’t have to worry about wobbly model syndrome.

Textured & Primed

A quick shot of Crystal Blue Primer (to match the army) and a dry brush of a Behr Sorcerer (yeah, I use Home Depot paints for terrain). Things were well on their way to getting completed.



Dry Brushing in progress

That was until I changed my list. I cannot recommend enough try placing your army on your display board early and often as it can affect the design. As you can see, I was running out of room quick.



Not much space left for the army

My solution was (again) to build an upper deck. This year I wanted to build something that I could take apart and collapse to fit in my bag.  Here was the original idea, just using the foam to get enough space to make this work. I realized quickly there were too many walls blocking the models from view, and this really did not convey a 40k feel. For some reason “Nativity in Black” came to mind, so I got out my Gothic arch templates and drew a pattern onto the foam.

Using my table saw hot wire cutter, the arches were cut out in no time. A quick check of sight lines and assembly, we are on to the next phase: adding detail. First, I used a hand held wire cutter to add weathered look to all the corners. In retrospect, I made the archways a little too thin and I was worried they may not withstand travel turbulence, but so far I was proven wrong. If I were to do it again, I would have kept some foam along the bottom of the arch to add stability.

Templates are essential part of terrain building



Always cut foam in a well ventilated area

Yeah! It fits!

After a few hours of cutting out tiny rectangles, I attached each of these stones around the archways. I wanted something with a little thickness so dry brushing would be easy in the later steps.

















I gave the whole thing a coat of the previously mentioned Sorcerer grey color, followed by several dry brushed layers of a light grey.

Now it was time for a backdrop. My original plan was to use a sci fi background with forced perspective to give the illusion of a vast planet scape when you pear out the window. In practice it was too dark and top heavy. Maybe next time I will be able to pull it off. As a substitute, I went with old favorite, stained glass.

The effect is simple to pull off and turns heads.

Find a piece of art you like

Adjust the size of the image to fit within your arch

Print onto ordinary paper and inspect. You may need to adjust the brightness & contrast. Photoshop does have a “Stained Glass” filter that comes in handy for this

Once you have a printout you like, photocopy the image onto a clear transparency

I cut out random sections in the shape of jagged triangles to give it the broken glass look

That is it. Hope you enjoyed and that this inspires you to try something of your own.

Heldrake Does as Heldrake Pleases

Q:  Can Heldrake really do as Heldrake pleases?


A:  Heldrake is now an Assault Vehicle.

The Legions of the Chaos Space Marines have learned to climb onto the back of the Heldrake and ride it into battle. They launch assaults by swooping up high and then leaping down off the back of the Heldrake... DEATH (the the false emperor) FROM ABOVE!!!!!

Models "on board" a Heldrake can launch an assault after disembarking from a Heldrake. Measure from the Heldrakes base (naturally) in any direction (of course), however add 5d6 to their assault range to represent the boost they get from diving off a super-sonic Heldrake's back. Furthermore, models on board can draw LoS from any point on the board to launch their assault.

Also, all models launching an assault will ignore cover saves, gain the Crusader special rule, have Missile Lock (to be redacted later), have Preferred Enemy (Tau), and naturally, gain Furious Charge.

Models equipped with Plasma Pistols gain the Salvo 4/8 rule.

Finally, the Heldrake himself can participate in the assault to support his passengers. The Heldrake fights in combat as a Walker. However, at the end of a round of combat, the Heldrake is not locked and instead returns to a Swooping/Gliding (player's choice) state in the same position he was in. The Heldrake does not need to pile-in nor make a charge move nor has to be anywhere near the actual combat to participate. 

Furthermore, in subsequent turns, the Heldrake can continue to fight in any combat he was in that is still ongoing no matter where he is at on the board. 

Lastly, the Heldrake now has the Skilled Rider special rule and can be mounted on a Palanquin for 35 points."

Read as Wrong: What is Correct? Reading Comprehension.

This is Part 2 of an article series.  You can find Part 1 here: http://11thcompany.blogspot.com/2012/12/read-as-wrong-origins-of-bizzaro-40k.html

Introduction and Recap:

To recap, in part 1 of this series, I closed by stating that this article series intends to move forward with the notion that there is a BETTER way to negotiate rules disputes other than “Read as Written”, that “Read as Written” (RaW) as a sole rules arbitration tool produces the same “Bizzaro 40K’ that gets produced when rules arbitration takes place without applying the RaW philosophy.  Moreover, part 1 also sought to introduce the idea that the RaW banner has become a sort of cult-like mentality which I refer to as the “Church of RaW”, to which many people within our community flock to and follow.  Mostly, this is because the promises of the Church are quite alluring as it promises a method of rules arbitration which is logical, results in absolute truths, and disregards our human nature’s incessant ability to interject our personal feelings into arguments.  However, the siren’s call that is these idealistic principles has some very serious drawbacks of which I believe our community is growing to ignore.

Ultimately, where I will end up with these essays is not as a denial as to the usefulness of the philosophy of RaW.  Rather, what I am seeking to do is to help provide the community with the thoughts that perhaps RaW is not the ONLY answer but rather a TOOL that when combined with all the other myriad tools out there, HELPS to CORRECTLY resolve rules disputes.  I will contend that using RaW as anything other than one tool out of a tool box ultimately leads to INCORRECT rules resolutions, the same INCORRECT rules resolutions that a follower of the Church accuses anyone who is not a member of the Church of arriving at by any other methodology.

What is Correct?

If I really wanted to, I could devolve this essay at this point into a riotous romp through thousands of years of philosophy about “the Universe”, “Universal Truth”, “human perspective”, and close out with a ton of links to thousands of philosophical essays covering this topic.  We could all sit around, toke on a hookah, talk about our small part in such a massive Universe, and ultimately resolve nothing except getting high while stroking our egos.  (Hell, we could get really interesting, hit some acid, and end the night actually thinking we’ve solved the Universe’s greatest mysteries by tapping into the stream of unconscious energy and reading each other’s minds.  Seen this happen, so true story, bro. :) )

Fortunately, though, I don’t have to go there!  Our beloved gaming system has definable boundaries and actual answers to the mysteries that it manufactures, and even better, solely because our game system is manufactured, that means our brains can actually wrap themselves around the concepts it presents.  Sweet!

So, if we actually do have correct answers, then why are there so many rules arguments?  Where are these correct answers when I’m sitting at a game table trying to explain to some very emotional competitor that actually, a Flying Monstrous Creature not being grounded after it takes a grounded test is wrong even though the Rulebook doesn’t explicitly state that, is neither “Read as Written” nor correct.  (See what I did there?  Used a RaW argument that was proven WRONG!  Note the Bizzaro 40K that this rules issue created.)

One of the major tenets of the RaW philosophy is that if you read the words of the rules exactly as they are written that you will arrive at the only possible, logical conclusion.  If this were not true then the Church of RaW would be forced to acquiesce that perhaps correct answers to rules questions can be found by some other means than just reading words.   

Although I agree that this line of thinking is very alluring, there’s this BIG problem that we know for an undeniable FACT that RaW doesn’t always produce correct answers.  What encompassing proof by contradiction is this that is so absolutely powerful? 

The GW FAQs.

See, correct answers in the 40K Universe don’t come from logical proofs.  They don’t derive themselves out of undeniable, mathematical certainty.  They come from the gaming company that wrote the game.  GW is the supreme court of our game.  What they say is the correct answer regardless of if what they say is logically ascertainable from the Rulebook or not.

This is what CORRECT is. 

Ultimately, as a TO and podcaster, when I get asked a rules question, I’m not interested in providing WRONG answers.  I’m interested in providing RIGHT answers.  RIGHT answers are those that when the rubber meets the road that the gaming company will agree with me on., not those that I can obscure in a drawn out proof misquoting or cherry picking sentences and words.

This is very important because it introduces the notion that what we should be seeking is to actually find those CORRECT answers, not logical proofs of INCORRECT ones.  And this leads to our next topic.

Reading Comprehension

One thing that is immediately obvious about our set of CORRECT answers is that our governing body doesn’t always rule in favor of the direction that the “Read as Written” results in.  Fundamentally, this should be all you need at this point to out of hand reject RaW as a rules governing philosophy, and I could end this essay where it stands.  However, as stated, that’s not my goal nor intent.  What I want to express is that RaW is IMPORTANT but only because RaW is the first baby steps into a much broader area, known as Reading Comprehension.

I LOL’ed when I read this:  (WIKIPedia on reading Comprehension)

“Reading comprehension is defined as the level of understanding of a text/message. This understanding comes from the interaction between the words that are written and how they trigger knowledge outside the text/message. .^[1]”

Woah!  “the interaction between the words that are written and how they trigger knowledge outside the text/message?”  Hold the phone!  Are you trying to tell me that there is meaning to some text besides what is actually written on the paper?  That true comprehension of what you read doesn’t just involve the words on the paper but also knowledge outside the paper?

“That Which Isn’t Written.”

I recall a time in my life where I HATED analogies.  I could write an essay on that topic.  You know, those statements on the SAT that read something like: “this is to this as that is to _______”.  And you were expected to come up with an answer to this.  Absurd!  Preposterous!  You can’t prove a result to this bogus question.  There’s nothing factual here.  There is nothing but assumptions based on what you “feel like” the common ground it.

I loved history when I was in school in no small part to my Dad being a history teacher.  I specifically remember a teacher I had junior year who would use standardized tests at the end of each chapter in our book.  I was a smart-ass teenager like everyone else, and I remember several times, thinking I was funny and not realizing that I was just being a jack-ass (see statement about nerd culture above), that I would go up to her in the middle of tests and express to her that although I knew the answer to Question #36 was “A”, that arguably “C” could potentially be correct as the question itself was ambiguous due to wording.

And even then, I couldn’t admit it to myself that if it was so ambiguous, provably so, why did I know for certain that “A” was the correct answer even though by logical proof it wasn’t?

Because there are forces at work which drive CORRECT answers which aren’t necessarily WRITTEN DOWN in the text you are reading.  “That which isn’t written” is exactly what English professors are trying to beat into your skull with all that jazz about context, bias, history, and a load of other jargon that I of course memorized (math geeks have zero trouble memorizing and regurgitating) but not actually internalized (because it’s tripe and unprovable to begin with. 

Wouldn’t you know?  Just because you can argue ambiguity in an analogy doesn’t mean that the analogy has no CORRECT answer?  All that means is that you flatly just don’t perceive the answer.  It’s not ambiguous at all if the guy that scored an 800 on the English portion of the SAT blew through it.  You just suck at reading comprehension (and probably at vocabulary which is a big contributor, but I digress).

Think about it.  The lauded authors of history didn’t get that way because “they wrote good words”.  You don’t MOVE people emotionally with text.  You move them when they comprehend what you are really trying to say.

And what I’m really trying to say is that it is fundamentally obvious with any amount of reading comprehension that our governing body, the body which produces the CORRECT answers, doesn’t just use words to find them, it uses comprehension of the text to produce them. 

“That which isn’t written”  NOT EQUAL TO “Read as Written”.

More to come.

Read as Wrong: The Origins of Bizzaro 40K and the Need to Argue.

I’ve been thinking about this BLOG post for a while.  It will also translate itself into a podcast topic.  I really just haven’t had the courage to actually write these thoughts down, and courage is exactly what it takes to go against the grain.

Specifically, this article is about rule resolution in 40k or rather the methodology by which rules issues are resolved.  The play on words in the title is a reference to “Read as Written”, the rather dominant rules philosophy which permeates the greater public consciousness when arbitrating rules issues in 40K.  “Read as Written” (RAW), is a philosophy of rules resolution which works under the notion that the only path to resolving rules questions within the system is by exact readings of the words and their application as exactly stated.  This form of arbitration is highly regarded, especially in the competitive community, as being the only viable method by which 40K rules issues can be resolved, and furthermore, to the large number of proponents of this philosophy, the only way rules issues SHOULD be resolved.

The tenets of the “Read as Written” philosophy are very compelling.  As a competitive 40K gamer, tournament organizer, podcaster, and overall 40K rules nut, I at one time found myself waving the banner of what I now more sarcastically refer to as the “Church of RaW”, so named because of the zealous nature by which followers of the RaW philosophy will defend the tenets of RaW even in the face of insurmountable evidence to some potential contrary.  The pull of “RaW’ is very seductive to a reasoning person who is seeking correct rules interpretations because it attracts followers with seemingly plausible and great promises such as:

• Read as Written is common ground for all players and groups.
• Read as Written is logical, not subjective, basing rules interpretations off of what is present rather than what is interpreted to be present.
•  Read as Written does not assume intent.

Indeed, for many players, both actively in the competitive 40K scene and not, “RaW’ has become somewhat of a banner or wary cry.  It’s a statement of philosophy, like someone stating their political affiliation, group identity, or other source.  Just a quick Google search and I can find articles written by well-known BLOGgers and community personalities all espousing their membership in the Church of RaW and why it is the best choice for playing 40K.

And that is why it takes courage to write this series of articles.  Having anything negative to say about a very dominant philosophy, be it a religious faith or even something so tripe as 40K rules arbitration, especially when the dominant group is so very vocal about their opinions, requires some guts.

My motivation for doing this, however, is not rooted in trying to rebuke what is basically an idealistic form of rules arbitration but rather that I have travelled that road and come out on the other side only to look back and realize that the rules philosophy that I once touted is now actually becoming the one thing that it originally sought to destroy, namely a game of 40K in which the rules were dictated by the whims of players rather than the rules themselves.

The Origins of Bizzaro 40K

Way back in the dark ages of 40K, laughably less than a decade ago by most accounts, before the explosion of the independent tournament scene, when GW ruled the circuit, the game of 40K was decentralized outside of the control of the parent company.  For those of us who were playing the game then, the GT circuit at the time was barely worth mentioning in terms of competitive play.  Most games of 40K took place at a local shop or your buddy’s house, and rules disputes?  Well, they were resolved by either calling the GW customer service line and asking Bob for a random answer or by house ruling your way into solving problems.

However, with the rise of the 40K internet scene, the explosion of the Indy GT circuit, local tournaments, and so on, it was very quickly realized that, given the very loose manner in which GW manages the rules of 40K, more competitive games of 40K really aren’t possible without a tighter set of rules.  More importantly, what was really needed was a tighter philosophy on rule resolution than “well, that’s just how we play it around here!”

If you are like me and have to travel many hours to go play 40K, having the rules be different every place you go gets really AGGRAVATING!

I referred to this time and place as “Bizzaro 40K’, a Universe in which nobody actually plays 40K but rather plays the version of 40K that their local group has decided is correct.  Forget what the rules actually say!  We are doing it our way!

Thus, the seeds were sown for the rise of the Church of RaW.  We NEEDED, and still do, a way to globalize the game and more importantly, the rules of the game.  Seemingly, the only fair way to do this is to take the words written into the rulebook at their absolute face value.  Everyone has access to the exact same rules, and so long as well all follow them to the letter, we should all be playing the same game of 40K.

That’s the theory anyways.

And thus, Bizzaro 40K gets banished from the realms.  All is well in the newly globalized world of 40K.

The Need to Argue

But, as should be expected, not everything has exactly gone according to plan, and unfortunately, Bizzaro 40K is still quite alive and well, just not in the form we all remember.  Bizzaro 40K has taken on a new mask, one created by intentional rules mis-readings, over-analysis, and an undeniable need for many members of our community to simply argue.

And thus, the backlash of the Church of RaW begins, rooted in that need to argue.

Turns out, once you walk the road of RaW and come out on the other side, you turnaround and instead of seeing a utopia ruled by logic and administered by the great custodes of principle, what you actually see is a cancerous pit of rules lawyering, intentional disregard of the obvious, cherry-picking, denial of proof, acceptance without evidence, and what is flatly an utter lack of reading comprehension.

And moreover, what you really see is that there are very vocal members of our community who just NEED to argue about anything and everything and at the expense of whomever is unfortunate enough to come across their path.

What RaW Creates

My favorite quote of this week from a devout member of the Church of RaW went like this:

“See, when you have people talking like they know how to play 6th, then I expect them to know how to play it.
This includes having a grasp of the fundamentals, which includes understanding English at a higher than 1st grade level.”

This is great because it shows two very important points about the Church of RaW that over this series of articles I really hope that I can convince you aren’t necessary, factual, nor good for the community.

First, RaW has created a false God in that there must be a “right answer” to any given rules question and that therefore, if you don’t understand the “right answer” provided, you are either stupid or can’t read.  Because, RaW, is, after all, just using what is written, RIGHT?!!! RAWR!!!!1111!111"  (Bow before the Church!).

Second, RaW creates a notion that if you can read, then you must always arrive at the same conclusion as everyone else.  I get a chuckle out of the rant above accusing people of not being able to read at a first grade level as to the reason why they don’t agree with the poster in this sense is itself humorous because 1^st grade reading skills, even up to 5^th grade reading skills, which is why newspapers are written to that standard, fail to incorporate MUCH higher reading skills, namely comprehension, context, and implication, most of which the author of this quote was intentionally disregarding in this conversation.  But, after all, if things like context exist, then the tenets of the Faith just aren’t true, are they?

Where I’m Going with This

My favorite part about the Church of RaW is that it assumes that there are right answers.  In fact, it provides vacuous truths, stating that what it provides is the ONLY answer to any question because it is an answer based off of written words to which there is no dispute and that ANY other form of argument is itself “Read as Intended”, being the only other way in which rules can be interpreted.

I guarantee you that before this article series is over, someone in the comments will accuse me of not reading the rules or not using the rules as they are written.  This will be done as a blanket statement, a knee-jerk reaction to what is ultimately not only a false notion but a horrible assumption that the poster himself is right in the first place based on a prayer to a false God.

There is another way.  You don’t have to play Bizzaro 40K.  Not just the Bizzaro 40K created by complete lack of rules regard but also the Bizzaro 40K created by arguing rules that flatly are argued incorrectly or argued into a state in which the game is no longer the game we are all playing.

RaW creates Bizzaro 40K, the same Bizzaro 40K that is created by people who make up the rules as they go along.

That’s the point I’m driving at, and hopefully by the end of this series I will have at least put some thoughts in your head that perhaps we can help the pendulum swing back a little more to the middle rather than “IT’s RAW!!! Quit Uzing FLUFF To make an Rule sdiscusison RAWRRR!!!!111!!” as the final word in rules debates.

Bought XCOM last night....

And I'm super impressed thus far!  That's a hard thing to do for a guy that's "seen it all" in terms of video games over the last 25 years or so.

Of course I was around when the original XCOM came out, and it still is for me one of the best games ever made.

So, what's up with this one?

Simply put, I just got finished playing Diablo III.  ( I know, late to the party ).  Diablo III was a big disappointment for me after Diablo II (also one of the best games ever made).  All anyone ever wanted out of Diablo III was Diablo II with some updated graphics.  What did we get instead?  A heavily modified version of the game. :(  Nobody wanted that.

What does XCOM deliver?  4 hours in?  An almost identical experience to the original XCOM with updated graphics, game play mechanics, and a user interface.  This is EXACTLY what I wanted from this title.

Not sure when the honeymoon will end, but right now, I haven't been this excited by a game in a long time!

Running a GREAT Tournament

(insert random picture!)

This was a huge e-mail response I just made to a listener who asked me for advice on how to run good tournaments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There's a lot of very subtle and underlying choices that go into running tournaments which are designed to increase player enjoyment of their tournaments which go above and beyond just playing a few games with some fair rules judging.

Each one of these elements is designed to increase player enjoyment of your event, not to increase some sort of misguided competitiveness or other such thought.  Overall, just like with any event your run, you will be successful if you are focusing on ALL players having the most FUN possible, not focusing on if your top table guys got competitive games or not (although these things generally go hand in hand).  Overall, remember that the same guys will always win the events, they will always play each other in the end, and so on.  However, this will be just a small portion of the people at your event.  Your job is to cater to everyone, the majority, who won't be winning all their games or playing at top tables.  

In a nutshell, if you make it fun for "most" people, your top guys will be having fun because your events will be large, and top guys like large events because it makes them feel like they are doing better.  Hope that makes sense.

So, here's some elements that make a great tournament in my opinion.

1)  One prize for top players, multiple prizes for people who won't make top tables.  - Top players don't care about prizes.  They win them all the time.  What they care about is proving themselves, prize or no prize.  A top player gets satisfied by a trophy, not so much a box set.  Give them a token prize and a trophy, they go home happy.  Distribute the majority of your prize support to non-winners.  Do this for painting competitions, runner-up brackets, best sports, best army, or really anything, and make sure that at least a few things can be earned just randomly.  A great concept here is to randomly distribute a prize weighed towards people who have lost games.  (I.e. the more you lose the greater your chance at a random prize).  

This all depends on prize support of course.  However, do not fall into the trap where you give the farm away to the guy who won the event.  He doesn't really appreciate the prize, and everyone else will get discouraged and stop coming, which eventually leads to the top players stopping as well because they no longer have an event to prove themselves at.

Pro Tip:  You can buy sweet dog tags for like $3 on the internet that say things like "Tournament Champion". custom made.  Great trophies for a little bit of nothing.

2)  Pick a mission/tournament format that is fair and simple.  The more fair a mission, the better everyone feels about playing it.  The simpler it is, the better everyone can understand it.  Top players are going to win missions no matter what they are, no matter how wonky.  To break a myth, non-top players do not enjoy wonky missions.  They are complicated, not fun, and take a lot away from the game.  If you want to run "wonky", story missions, do those in a non-tournament event, like a narrative event, games day, or something that isn't competitive.  

Pro Tip:  No matter how smart you think you are, you won't come up with perfect missions.  Nobody likes wonky missions.  If I have to read a entire page of text and discuss with my opponent just to understand what we are supposed to be doing or how some deployment works, I'm not having fun and neither is he.

Pro Tip:  Use national level GT missions for events that are close to you. Generally, their mission packets are vetted, very well thought out, fair, simple, and even better, attract people to your event because they can use your event for training for that event.  (For example, you are in Sacremento, I would highly suggest then the Bay Area Open format which is not only very good, simple, and vetted, it's used in many GT level events in your region by the Team Zero Comp crew that run them).

3)  Complete fairness and impartiality.  Whoever is judging should not be playing, PERIOD.  This just creates a sense of hostility and unfairness.  Keep in mind that people are paying a fee to play in your event (even if it is a tiny one).  They don't want to feel like they are being robbed.  I've been there before where I had to run an event and could not play in it because of it.  Yes, it is a thankless job.  You do it for the love of the hobby. :)   If you want to play in an event that your organize, you need to strive to find a good judge who is impartial to you.  (I.e. do not pick your best friend).  Alternately, a good idea for smaller events is to randomly nominate a few entrants and have a council judge system for larger rules disputes.

Pro Tip:  Use a nationally vetted FAQ.  The INAT in my opinion is the best one, like their rulings or not.  Alternately, several large GTs produce their own FAQs.

4)  Terrain Set-up and Policy.  Adopt a fair and balanced terrain set-up policy, not some random assignment.  Pay very careful attention to your terrain and that policy.  For example, I highly recommend the NoVA Open terrain format.  WargamesCon also has a very good terrain format.  Their policies produce very fair boards with very fair terrain layouts.

Contrary to common wisdom, players do not enjoy playing on wonky or crazy terrain.  Also, consistency provides for fair and fun games for all involved, not "boring" games as some people will claim.

5)  Use a Scheduling Algorithm that Attempts to Match Top Players to Top Players where possible in the end.  The point of this is that top players love playing top players.  That's why they show up!  Non-top players do not, however, enjoy playing top players.  It's discouraging.  Use a scheduling algorithm which will favor top players jumping out of the pack so that they play each other in later games so that your non-top players end the day playing each other and having FUN.  

For example, during Round 1, try and set your initial match-ups so that Top Players are not playing each other at all.  This way, for Round 2+, they will jump out of the pack and play each other the rest of the day.  This frees up non-Top players.  

I am not suggesting you FIX the tournament.  If someone legitimately loses, they must play at a lower level.  What I'm suggesting is basically seeding the tournament based on expectations.  This produces a FUNNER tournament, not a less fair one.  By the laws of random, it could have ended up the way you seeded it anyways.  

6)  Adopt a scheduling algorithm that attempts to not have friends play each other and attempts to schedule players to tables they have not played on before.  Most of the tournament software I have available for free use will do these things.  It's on our forums.  My Bay Area Open format scorer is out of date, but I plan on updating it soon.

7)  Save the wonky missions and story terrain for events that are not tournaments.  Bottom line is, a tournament is a competition.  

If you or your player base really enjoys narratives, wonky terrain, crazy-fun mission formats, comp'ed lists and so on, there's nothing wrong with that at all!  However, that does not make for a very fun/good tournament.  My recommendation then is that is your calling is to run narrative events, games day style events, and just in general, events which do not intend to reward winning.  You will enjoy yourselves so much better that way!  Do not run a tournament expecting everyone who shows up will want to play in a wonky game.  You will find yourself getting upset as people will show up who are competitive nature and want to win, play hard, and so on.  Your event will not turn out like you want it to.

8)  Lastly, always remember if you are a TO, your job is to ensure the most people are having the most fun!  This does not mean creating an event that only caters to the 2 guys who always win.  BORING!  Not to mention, discouraging for everyone else.  

Distribute prizes in non-competitive ways.  Call up people who win best painted (take best painted SERIOUSLY!, also best sports if you want to) and laud them just like you would best general.  Applaud participation and reward guys for just showing up.  Remember, if no one shows up, you don't have an event.  

Other than that, here's my top picks for terrain/mission formats:

Terrain Formats:
NoVA Open Terrain Format
WargamesCon Terrain Format

Mission Formats:
Bay Area Open Mission Format
NoVA Open Mission Format
WargamesCon Mission Format
Adepticon Mission Format
Feast of Blades Mission Format

FAQs
INAT

11th Company GT 2012

Just under 2 months to go!

The 11th Company GT is a NoVA Format GT taking place on Nov 10-11th (Veteran's Day Weekend) in Myrtle Beach, SC.

Tickets:
http://www.tangtwo.com/11thcompany/tournament.cfm

Lots of Info about format, scoring, etc.
http://the11thcompany.freeforums.org/the-11th-company-gt-2012-myrtle-beach-sc-t3743.html

Next week, the 11th Company will be live video broadcasting the top tables at the Nova Open starting next week Thursday roughly at 4PM Eastern time. http://www.ustream.tv/user/the11thcompany

We will have the players wear wireless mics, so you can hear their discussions during their game. We will have between game interviews with various attendees and guests, and have the channel open for players wanting to broadcast their game live before and after the tournaments during open gaming.


Please join us in the chat room while watching the broadcasts live Thursday August 30th - Sunday September 2nd, or catch the archived broadcasts after the event. We would greatly appreciate it if you shared the above information on your blog/podcast/forums or shared with your friends.