Cry Havoc 2010

Ok , I like to think ahead.....A good bit ahead!

Gamers at the club are already discussing new plans and new armies for next year, yes there are gonna be new books, new (it's in the book, I can use it) units (had to put that word in cause I know it gets editted! )..

So one thing we do need to know, what do YOU want to see NEXT YEAR!

Any thoughts on point limits, board set ups, deployment set ups or otherwise?

Many topics have banded ideas for example of 4 x 1500pt games, lets hear what you have to say....

and you could call it a heads up for those who leave their painting to the last minute or are too slow / over commited, START PAINTING IT NOW!
Lets say a date near the end of APRIL! beginning of MAY again.

Thanks again to those who could be bothered actually telling us the truth about what they didn`t like at Havoc........This kind of feedback is certainly more constructive than `had a great time`, although praise is gratefully recieved too (it means we`re doing something right! )

I'd say 4 1500pt games, all varied scenarios.

This would mean people cant just keep playing their army the way they always do. They'l have to think about how to play each of the scenarios.

Obviously this'll make it important to get 4 scenarios which when put together are balanced overall for any army.

However it will make the tournament more varied than it was this year. It'll also allow more people to play an army they enjoy whereas with pitched battles a weaker army will just spend three games being beaten in pretty much the same way.

It's too late at night for me to reply to this thread!

Need more time than the 10 mins before the wife goes to bed.

Indeed myself I quite like the idea of 4 x 1500pt games, it opens up opportunititys to play a wider variety of games and players, I to like the idea of maybe some different mission type games / but would a more `random` format be better for such an idea...
You would go to a table, and then roll for mission / deployment....this way it is possible for every game to be different indeed...
Army composition would be more balanced, as it would become an `all commers `list, and although some builds would possibly favour some games, they would not others....

This kind of format has the potential to improve the gaming experience as a whole for everyone, as a well constructed army would only be a very small percentage of the game....

and there`s little excuse not to have it painted, especially with nearly a year to go

Unfortunely I also believe this low points costs would benefit `some` armies more than others, but this would happen at any level, At this cost I would expect the big 3 would still be prevalent, with tomb kings possibly unachievable?
But then this post is here to discuss these issues and ideas!

ANOTHER idea would be to try the `campaign` army set up, were maybe a game is played at 1500pts , then 2 games at 2250, this we have tried in the past, with varied success, although it did highlight some armies were better suited to some `types` of games than others., again open for discussion!

One idea I wondered would possibly work would be the deployment rules from apocalypse 40k?, the idea being an artillery dice was rolled in the centre of the board, its direction indicating the centre line of the board, deployment zones would then be set 12" each side of this line..
...yes it would give strange results, but would put a different slant on the game, setup and feel..
..it would also address any scenery problems encountered on the board (as noted from havoc 09), as deployment zones may rotate across the board, the setup will change automatically....yes you could end up with as standard game (and often do, maybe with a slight twist), but then you may end up with a condensed game (playing lengthwise) or somewere in between!
, I know what your thinkig I wouldn`t have room to deploy, but because the deployment zone is measured 12" from the centre, the deployment zone is NOW DEEPER, (furthur to flee back , could be a good thing!)

So the discussions open! Have your say on your tourney!

so how would you play comfortably in a length wise set up with tables set up against each other ?

Ok!
care would need to be taken with setup of the `actual` tables but normally games played lengthwise on a table are still played by standing on the `long` edges alex! (unless youve got arms like Mr Fantastic! ), as you maximise your reach across the table, (and `normally` games end up being fought centrally ) so does it matter which way your troops are actually going (as long as their heading towards the enemy ), `

but you would need to operate on all 4 sides of the table mr sarky multiply that by 49 a lot of milling about would be going on reducing actual gaming time also 4 games will need to be played so all the time randomising scenarios on the day and making sure everyone understood what was happening would also eat into gaming/socialising time, WHY REINVITE THE WHEEL, curent sytem works so why not just have set scenario games leading up to the final game which could be a classic pitched battle

some of us take the battle to the enemy and actually cross the middle line, in fact some of us even move

Hope your not casting nestershums there!
I know WHO you mean!

It was an idea pitched forward for discussion, time issues are always a priority, as is making setup and gameplay as quick and easy as possible, I intended only to put forward other ideas, the `wheel ` as you like to put it dosn`t need re-inventing, but can ALWAYS be IMPROVED UPON!
If gamers want scenarios then lets see some suggestions of good balanced ones (please dont quote the ones from the rulebooks!, which we are aware of already)...

and if scenarios were the way to go, why do we keep playing pitched battls at the club every night?

its easy and quick to set up

You're right.

I have to think in advance if I'm playing a scenario, otherwise its always just kill each other, whatever game system.

Saying that though, scenarios are more fun I reckon. As Richard says, makes you think a bit more.

So the 1999 pitched games for next years tourney are going to change then ? I thought this was what made the DWARF tourney different different from others at 2250 like Stirling etc?

I thought the three pitched games were ok I was just unlucky and badly deployed in my first two games . But surely this would lose the uniqueness of the tourney ?

There's no decisions made as of yet mate, not by a long shot.

Still a few tourneys coming up and I like to see how their timings and games work out, might be able to nick ideas for ours

Next one is 4x 1999 games in a day over at ELG including scenarios, looking forward to that one and how it works out.

Hey, what about making the next CR a doubles tourney?

Not even if my life depended on it mate

Doubles suck big time (well in my opinion )

Messes with game balance even more than daemons.

seems to work the way it is so why mess with it
single player, multiple games, points value changing from year to year is enough to keep it intresting

Ah well, just a thought. What about fancy dress then?

Alex your probably right, we should stick to what we know works.....

Mitch, I like it..... so we all dress as our armies generals... Lol

am not buying a suit of armour!