|
Post by hivemindbob on Jan 21, 2013 21:50:20 GMT -5
So I love Warmachine Hordes. Really, I do. I know some of you guys do too. You're just hiding it like a dirty magizine. ;D I think it's about time that we take em out. Our WARMACHINE HORDES... Not your dirty magizines... keep hiding those. Anyway, I was thinking, "What kind of event do we want to see in the Warmachine Hordes future?" I figured, why not ask the people. I've had my own ideas, each a varying level of difficulty and fun. I want your opinions!
|
|
|
Post by crow2006007 on Jan 21, 2013 22:10:25 GMT -5
Played a demo for the first time this weekend (thanks Matt) I would be up for playing more when I am free and not in a big flames game.
|
|
|
Post by dante on Jan 21, 2013 22:50:58 GMT -5
I'm down. I think tournaments in general are a much easier commitment and a great way for people who can't meet regularly to get some game in. The average guy gets a month of games done in one or two days.
|
|
|
Post by whitestar333 on Jan 21, 2013 22:53:50 GMT -5
I think that SR 2013 will make tournaments much more fun. I've already played in one and I loved the new rules. They're fun, clearly written, and they allow lots of different warcasters avenues of victory.
I'd love to see a tournament with the new rules (once they're officially out). I don't think we'd get enough interest in a campaign until more people started playing. Even then, I agree that it's hard for some people to make it in regularly.
|
|
sionnach19
Full Member
Web-Team Editor/Writer
Posts: 2,709
|
Post by sionnach19 on Jan 21, 2013 23:56:34 GMT -5
You should have let us vote for more than one thing, Bobby! I dug all my WM stuff out to paint up at school, Eric and I got a few fun battlebox games in right before I left... it's a welcome distraction from 40k for the time being I think a tournament would be awesome, and I'd do my best to make it up for the day. However, last year we had the escalation league that I thought went pretty well... I think it'd be cool to have an escalation league (or just a regular league/campaign) culminate in a larger tournament. Or vice versa! I also think this is a good plug for Vassal... obviously I'm a big fan since it's the only way for me to play at school, but the WM/H Vassal system is actually pretty smooth once you learn how to navigate it. Games take no longer than they do in real life, and they give you a great chance to experiment with models that you don't yet own. I know some people are resistant to the technology and the unconventional medium, but I strongly recommend that you give it a try. When real life gets busy, and it's hard to get down to the club and find time to make a game work; it's easy to take a few hours out of video game/internet/tv and instead invest it in wargaming time. I'm hoping for a game or two a week, to slowly relearn WM/H.
|
|
|
Post by whitestar333 on Jan 22, 2013 8:18:59 GMT -5
I don't like using Vassal just because it throws off your perception of distances when actually playing a game on the table and I have to keep myself fresh for tournament play I agree that I like the idea of an escalation league leading up to a tournament. My biggest problem with the escalation league last year was that there were too many games played on vassal and so that meant that other people didn't get games in. I love the social face-to-face aspect of miniatures games too much. If we were to do it again I think the league would need to happen over a longer period of time to accommodate those who can only play so often. One store that I played at had an ongoing tiered league with a prize pool ($10 buy in, winner took the pot). There were 5 tiers and everyone started at tier 5. You could advance to the next tier by either challenging someone on the next higher tier (and if you won, you got to swap spots) or if you challenged someone on your own tier (winner advanced). It was great because it lasted for a long time but people could schedule their games for whatever times worked for both players. Also, people could join the challenge league at any time, so it allowed for some occasional fresh blood and might work well at the club for those who play multiple game systems. Just some food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by hivemindbob on Jan 22, 2013 10:54:28 GMT -5
I like that Brian! Somthing else that came to mind last night. I've always liked how team Flames of War has been able to do team play. I've always thought that would be fun. I was thinking about somthing like a faction vs faction escelation league or campaign. We set up a standard points system (X points for a win Y points for a loss, ect.) Then to balance it for team Troolbloods (Tim) against Team Cryx (Rod, Bobby, Tom, Dante) we take each player's points and take an average to get a statistic on who beat who's face. I love campaigns, but as noted, there's always a high drop out rate. Any opinions on a buy in that pays for prizes and a big game at the end of it?
|
|
sionnach19
Full Member
Web-Team Editor/Writer
Posts: 2,709
|
Post by sionnach19 on Jan 22, 2013 12:25:21 GMT -5
Yeah, Vassal can do weird things to distance perception... I always find myself wishing I had a "show control zone" button on my metal warcasters but I disagree that Vassal takes away from the face-to-face social interaction -- it can, if you're sitting surfing the web and watching TV while you absent-mindedly type to the other player. But the best Vassal games are when you can call the other guy up on Skype, and you guys chat through what's happening. You don't have the bustle of the game store, you don't have to rush to get out before closing; it's a really comfortable pace, and the banter is lots of fun. Still, your point is a really important one -- we want to accommodate everyone, not just Vassal users, so making sure the rounds have enough time for people to get out to the store is important. I like the idea of a tier system (we had a similar idea a looong time, a couple of years ago... a permanent ranked ladder for people to compete over with their pickup games), as well as stealing some ideas from the Flames of War guys: perhaps instead of multiple, smaller rounds; we focus on bigger, month-long rounds where you just try to get as many games/points in as you can to benefit your team (thinking more along your lines, Bobby). This gives tons of flexibility, and the chance for people to play when they can (or join/drop out when they need to). I think leveraging the fluff of a campaign, the system of league play, and a competitive tournament or fun mega-battle at the end would be a really cool balance (again, I'm stealing all this from the Flames guys). I'm fine with a buy in, if there are prizes at the end of it -- maybe allow the initial buy-in to let you play in the final tournament for free? If you want to do teams, I think it'd be best to set up alliances, so we only have two competing teams (for the sake of simplicity). Just have to find a way to justify the tenuous alliances!
|
|
|
Post by hivemindbob on Jan 22, 2013 16:22:16 GMT -5
Ahh the challenge tier. I think we tried that. Only issue was people not challenging upper tiers.
|
|
|
Post by whitestar333 on Jan 22, 2013 17:48:03 GMT -5
I think we had an actual board that was pyramidal so you could only have so many people on a level. That way it forced people to challenge higher-level people eventually. I think we also had a tournament to start the league, so the entry fee to the tournament also counted as admission into the challenge league.
I really do love the idea of having alliances! If we had a more balanced representation of factions we could divide along certain lines, but fortunately in the Iron Kingdoms there are few "not in hell" alliances (except for Cryx and Legion). It'd be cool to pair that up with a tournament using the "team tournament" rules that are seen at a lot of major events (like Templecon and the New England Team Tournament).
|
|
|
Post by gretchinmike on Jan 22, 2013 18:40:53 GMT -5
A team tournament could be fun. also that was the type of pyramid we had, I believe it was 3 people on the bottom, 2 on the middle, and 1 at the top. After that everyone was off the pyramid. On a side note I think that could be fun to establish for all the game systems, even if it isn't used as often as we would like, it's still nice to know where you stand in the club if you're competitive.
Anyway I think that a escalation league would be nice, more of the way the flames crew does it, with longer rounds than 2 weeks, as sometimes people can't get down during those weeks.
|
|
captainecho
Full Member
Web-Team Editor/Writer and Usurper
Posts: 1,901
|
Post by captainecho on Jan 22, 2013 19:08:51 GMT -5
I still want a chance to play on a team with Bobby, After our glorious partnership was destroyed by overzelous 40k signups. I have some Cygnar battlebox stuff, and enjoyed the game I demoed with Brian not so long ago.
|
|
sionnach19
Full Member
Web-Team Editor/Writer
Posts: 2,709
|
Post by sionnach19 on Jan 22, 2013 21:13:08 GMT -5
According to the poll, some kind of league play is the most popular. I think a more flexible system (month long rounds, play as many games as you want per round) would be the best way to balance everyone's interests.
|
|
|
Post by hivemindbob on Jan 22, 2013 23:40:06 GMT -5
Ok so, going off of the idea of league play, how do we want to do it? There seems to have been some excitment in team play games, but that might be harder to coordinate between four players. Solo tier system sounds like a lot of fun, easy to do, easy to manage. I'm very fond of starting with a tournament. That gives a starting tier system, and a difinitive, I'm in, I'm not. Now as this is all still in the formulating idea stage, what are the ideas on things like an escelation of tiers? At the lowest tier, one on one games are 15 points, to 20, to 25 to 35? That gives people a reason to buy new things and expand, however, it also discourages those without financial freedom (Mikey). Now I really like the idea of team play. The issue is generating enough interest in the game to promote enough teams to participate. It's completly possible to do a teams tournament, with loose team play in league, if that makes sense, but the issue right here right now is interest. As I said, I know a lot of people who have their WM/H hidden in their closet in a dusty shoebox in the back hiding in shame. Let's whip up the excitment! Spread the word to those slinking in the shadows. We have a few months until the next Warmachine Hordes event kicks off, but lets generate the interest we need now so we can hammer down some ideas.
|
|
|
Post by whitestar333 on Jan 23, 2013 9:38:48 GMT -5
I think that if we try to do too much, that it could backfire. I propose that we hold off on the challenge board idea until we drum up enough interest. There seems to be a desire in the club to do more campaign-type stuff and we could probably snag some of the Mordheim players since their campaign might be coming to a close soon. I've also seen a map-style campaign done for WM/H before and it was pretty cool, but again I think that should wait until we've collected more interest.
Anyway, what I think we should do is set up something casual and fun, without too many restrictions so that we can get everyone to join in. Here's just a draft of what I'm thinking:
- 2 Alliances (names TBD) - Everyone interested signs up on forums or at the club (sign-up sheet) and ranks their availability on a scale of 1-5 (5 being readily available and willing to schedule games and 1 meaning only a game or two per month). Players can sign-up for the event for $10. Players should be allowed to sign-up mid-event as well and they will just be assigned to an alliance based on relevant criteria (see below). - Someone (event organizer?) then organizes people into each alliance so that the availabilities are roughly equal on each side - Alliance members can play against the opposing alliance to earn points according to the game size: 15 point (or battlegroup box) game - Win: 3 Loss: 2 - fully painted list: +1 25 point game - Win: 5 Loss: 3 - fully painted list: +2 35 point game - Win: 7 Loss: 4 - fully painted list: +3 50 point game - Win: 10 Loss: 5 - fully painted list: +5 this way everyone can participate yet encouraging bigger games to swing the win/loss ratio in your favor, as well as encouraging people to play with fully painted lists. - The alliance with the greatest score at the end of the event (maybe 2 months?) will win a prize, with the highest-scoring alliance member earning a little than everyone else.
Thoughts?
|
|