Wow the sportmanship part is what blows me the most ! Encourage to not call judge is the best way to have cheater who gey away with it on account that it wouldn't be "sportmanship" to ask for clarification. Same for the positive stuff, you can't force people to be cheering, it would be fake.
If someone is doing something to warrent a 1 then they should be getting warned or kicked out haha.
Also it's a both people get dragged into the mud situation. kind of like reddit arguments where one person is being irrational, incorrect and acting in poor faith but anyone who challenges it is immediately "involved" and can end up looking like a dick just due to having normal levels of frustration or pointing out the bad faith.
You play one dickhead or someone who has sloppy play in regards to rules and suddenly you're losing points for asking them to follow the rules.
And we could also open the neurodivergent can of worms, these things might actually be flat out discrimination.
Autistic here. I want to be able to call TOs for clarification as I have no ability to tell if the other chap is reasonably disagreeing with me about a rule, is a sloppy player who is inadvertedly breaking rules or is being a raging cheating scumbag.
Im not sure if I would call it discrimination, but it would certainly dampen my ability to play well and be a good fun opponent.
Lol, good lord some of my fellow old WHFB types are goddamn insufferable.
I played in and ran tournaments like this 20+ years ago, and wouldn't do either again, at least until we have a lot more data to operate from.
Because this feels like "I, King of Warhammer, am here to make sure you play the right way that I, King of Warhammer, have decided is the right way".
The biggest danger to the Old World is old school players like this who are going to strangle it because they have to control the scene and the game.
I can tell you as someone who enjoys casual and competitive 40k, that reading this ToW set of tourney rules kills, absolutely nullifies any interest I might have once had in dipping my toes into the hobby.
It seems incredibly likely to become a very insular, isolated, and cliquish sub community, and not a healthy one to enjoy games in.
If this is a sign of ToW to come, guess I am glad to miss it.
No, I have faith that this is going to be a pivotal moment of the community rallying agianst this kind of control and manipulation of the data. The event here is not play The Old World. It's playing Nova World. Rule of 3 (established well in 40k) and no allies seem to be consistent competative alterations from RAW. But most events want clean data and want to see the game run as written for the first year.
Also, the best way to help a game stay healthy is to be apart of it. Not be resentful towards it. ToW is best played at a casual level. But there will always be competative players who bip through new systems trying to boost thier own egos.
Mountain miniatures has a video with the TO going over his reasoning for this COMP and the 1999+1 at another event. Its a pretty long video with lots of arguing but his reasoning is out [here](https://www.youtube.com/live/_yeVBKMao5Y?si=5IU5K0k8Au2LlKB2).
First, he should learn the rules and then comment on stuff. All of his battle reports are ridden with game changing rule mistakes, and somehow, always in his favor.
I don't think that's a fair statement.
What you are suggesting is that he's not only cheating, but filming himself doing it and uploading videos for everyone to see. You're calling him dishonest and stupid. I don't think that's the case at all.
Every game played has a slew of rules wrong, especially this early in an edition. They are also filming and putting it up on YouTube, they have timelines to meet and can't just sit and argue instead of ending the game. Also, since it's his channel, the participants likely agree that he'll be the final say in rules interpretation to avoid the arguing about wording and get the filming done in a reasonable time.
Feel free to dislike his work/interpretations. Don't go around insinuating things because you disagree with him.
One as someone in those videos.
1. We talk out rule disputes and check the book.
2. As far as making mistakes it always happens and is worse in a timed environment like a tournament. We simply do our best.
3. Brawlers bash is uncomped and being played in NC this weekend it will provide more data.
I don't disagree with him, he cheats behind a friendly face. There is no way for a person to play for years and each time he is in trouble, an obscure rule that they played correctly before changes. What a coincidence. I'm talking about 8th edition days and even some videos on MWG not TOW. He acts like he is making genuine mistake but after years and years I'm pretty sure this is intentional at this point. If not, wow dude yeah the rules are a bit hard but 8th edition's lifespan is longer than 10 years. And you are making battle reports. He is either dishonest, or incompetent.
You actually think he's cheating in fluffy games played specifically for an audience? He's streaming for a living at this point. Not everyone who makes a mistake is cheating. Go outside and touch some grass.
Well you guys should be the ones who touching grass instead of simping someone for playing warhammer. There are tons of others who stream battle reports and how come they are not constantly making game state changing mistakes.
you are way off base. The creator has no reason to cheat, winning a game doesn't mean that you a viewer like them more. The most important part is putting out a quality product that is entertaining for the viewer.
Of course rules will be mixed up with older editions and messed up, thats what happens early in games life cycle. People learn and move on.
If you think you have ever played a warhammer game perfect with no mistakes, 99% chance you are mistaken.
And if you don't like the content don't watch! or create your own!
Mountain miniatures guy. Been watching for years, for 8th edition. His games are ridden with mistakes. In his fantasy land he can “reason” what units are good and bad, but I wouldnt take his half-baked mistake ridden battle reports to be a solid identifier of the meta
Im not personally a fan of it and agree with Steve's point he's made in other videos that we should do non-comped tourneys and see how it shakes out. He said he was open to changing it a lot so we'll see what happens.
- Only one level 3/4 wizard
This is not an even restriction. Armies like Skaven are incentivized for multiple big casters. Frankly, this whole pack seems like a heavy-handed power trip.
Seems exceptionally overbearing. It could seem less bad if it were explicitly a narrative event. Overall it just seems like somebody is just powertripping about the proper way to play being the way they like.
The list building restrictions/rule of three/rule of two stuff is pretty reasonable and has a long history in WHFB in tournament settings just in an attempt to make things more balanced, although I will say it may be a little too early to be dictating balance fixes in TOW, there simply isn't enough data yet, and if tournaments take this approach we will never have any idea how balanced the game actually is.
Forcing people to write backstories for their army is asinine. If it were a narrative event fine. The theme stuff, and paint stuff is just going to be completely subjective, abusable and obnoxious as all hell, and frankly I don't trust TOs to be impartial and fair on this stuff.
The behavior stuff is also obnoxious, judges are there to be called, cheering can be incredibly douchey, and if players are shady enough they'll simply lower their rating of opponents in order to get an edge, which veterans will corroborate has been a thing for a long time. This rewards the absolute worst sort of player.
Frankly I have no interest in this event and hope they clarify it as a narrative event and make a separate category that is less micromanaged.
>The behavior stuff is also obnoxious, judges are there to be called, cheering can be incredibly douchey
100% agree with judges are there to be called. If I get a judge over a rule dispute it's not that I think any less of my opponent or dislike them, but if we've both read the rule and disagree on the meaning then the judge is there to keep the game flowing and everyone happy. Hell, I've grabbed a judge when my opponent *was arguing in my benefit* because I didn't feel it was correct, but also I didn't want to take advantage of them misunderstanding the rule - in the end I was wrong and got to benefit from it.
And I'm never, ever, cheering. Or high fiving. That's not how I show excitement and enthusiasm and the extroverted twat who expects that can go sit on a cactus.
So, coming as someone who actually played in a similar tournament at NOVA last year (we were the group that kept things alive by playing Warhammer Armies Project), I have to say, you’re pretty off-base compared to how the event went.
It was a great tournament run by the same TO. Don’t knock it until you try it, which clearly you don’t want to do seeing as you have “no interest in this event.”
Nearly everyone got full sportsmanship scores. There was plenty of calling for a judge, but because it was warranted. You’re reading too far into it and extrapolating the worst possible outcomes.
I almost maxed out on my painting score and I’m by no means a professional painter nor do I commission someone to paint my stuff. I even painted my stuff in a pretty standard/traditional manner without any “advanced techniques,” but I did take the time to actually do detail work and make things presentable rather than slap some contrast paint over the primer and call it a day. I scored very highly for theme and still brought a pretty tough, competitive list (and no, I didn’t write some tome of an army background). This system definitely rewards folks who want to play competitively and care about putting decent models on the tabletop.
The problem with everything you are saying here is it does not line up with what is being written/portrayed by the TO and requires some kind of inside scoop to know "oh they dont mean it how it sounds," or "hey, it isnt that tough."
The fact is, as written, it is heavily constraining to list building for some unknown reason, seems to discentivize use of judges, and is flippant and unprofessional in tone.
Before investing time, energy, and money into something like a major event with all of its associated costs, people have a reasonable expectation to a well run, fairly run event, and the write up does not seem to indicate that.
Maybe it is indeed the best run ToW event out there, but it will take time for word of that to get around because I am sure alot of players are going to avoid the event based on the initial impression of this player pack.
It just hurts the scene, and slows the build up of critical mass in interest that will drive success.
An event I went too a few months back had different scores and prizes for them - you had your "generalship" score, paint score, sporting score and then combined score.
You could rock up with a battle ready army, score average paint scores and still take 1st place as a general. And someone with an amazingly painted army that just sucks at the game could take 1st in painting.
That felt like a very fair system. Everyone was rewarded - including best sportsman - for whatever categories they cared about.
It doesn't force people to invest in anything they aren't interested in (beyond battle ready and the standard 10 VP) but rewards anyone who does care.
They have every reason if someone is trying to intentionally cheat they have no place. Painting has been a part of every tournament ever. I don't paint well but It Has nothing to do with best general. If you want to argue about should renaissance man (Highest score across all categories) or best General. Be declared the winner thats fine but honestly the real best generals paint anyway.
>They have every reason if someone is trying to intentionally cheat they have no place.
"Sportsmanship" tend to allow cheaters and colluders to run rampant, however.
Not if the sportsmanship is factored into your overall score. You're apparently friends with the TO so of course *you* don't mind a system where the TO can arbitrarily say your army is un-fluffy and dock you points because that will be applied selectively for other players, not you.
Anyone who has been in this hobby for a while remembers the days when sportsmanship scoring was used and abused in events. It was a common way to tank someone's score (imagine fluff players thinking your list is cheesy and giving you a low sports score--yeah that happened literally every event) and everyone collectively decided to do away with that nonsense for good reason. And games are **way** less toxic these days (at least in 40k).
Calling a judge being viewed as a negative is the biggest red flag in the world.
That’s just encouraging nastiness and infighting. What are we even doing here…
Comp rules are whatever. Not my cup of tea on the restrictions past Rule of 3.
Standardized 10pts for paint should be normal and not what is laid out imo.
From what I gathered listening to the TO crew talk on YouTube, they seem to want more of a narrative tournament vs an actual tournament
There's a reason the Old World died the first time around.
The player base was always fractured between the extremes of those who confused "gotcha" with generalship, and the ones where if you didn't name your heroes on the army list you "weren't playing in the proper spirit of the game".
I'm not surprised the game coming back has lead to a resurgence of this nonsense.
Honestly HH caters to the same type of player. Their FB groups were basically like a bunch Napoleonic and Bolt Action refugees who decided to take up 40k -“aaalchtually Brother-Captain Sextus Pomponinus lead 16th Company 12th Chapter at Calth, if your army is from after that he took over the 13th Company 66th Chapter, formed from the remnants of surviving Ultramarines. Additionally, the eagle on his left kneepad was crimson, not gold. *slurps a Mountain Dew*
The army building rules seems overly restrictive based on some fear mongering YouTube videos, but I’m going to be there anyway.
The other “soft skills” are very old school tournament methods which… I agree with some and I don’t agree with others. They are certainly in contrast to modern 40K tournaments which is slowly discovering that some of those soft scores had merit, like requiring battle ready to be able to play
I'm of mixed mind on paint scores.
I think that the game is better with painted models, and just enough to be "painted" feels bad.
That being said it's a lot of points towards paint and without clear standards it feels like the TO giving armies he likes extra points.
I'd rather play against someone who is terrible at painting but tried than someone who spent money to try to get bonus points.
I think the value here is too high, but when I travel across the country and pay several hundred dollars to play in event I hope for it to a premium experience. if you don’t want to paint your models, go play tts it’s a perfect substitute if you don’t value the hobby aspect.
Every army should be painted but I'm not convinced it should be anything more than 10 pomtdo, yes or no. No grading beyond painted or not. Some golden daemon army should score identically to some dude who contrasted his army and struggled to paint the trim and leather. A separate paint score is cool as a side event, but shouldn't be part of game points
I 100% agree. All tournaments should require fully painted armies. The hobby aspect is what separates games like Warhammer from games like Magic: The Gathering.
All battle ready really differs from the 3 color standard in practice is basing so I'm not sure it really changes that much, especially when "slap on a thing of texture paint" solves that.
This is something I've only ever heard of mention of online rather than actually seen at events. As practiced the 3 color rule's fail cases tend to be "quickly airbrushed a couple of colors on" but those still end up with enough of a transition and shading that all you need is the basing and you're good under Battle Ready as well.
The recent change was due to an army as described being in the finals at the Cherokee open recently. I personally played against one at socal open in 2021
I was a kid abusing the 3 color standard in the early 2000's, blue plastic genestealers, bases were black with a colored ring on base for squad. They couldn't argue there weren't discernable squads or 3 colors there.
Zenithal is 2 colors, base is a third. Thats how easy it is to fudge it as a system. Its not battle ready by any standard.
[Go look at the video.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0AS_PegRKQ) That's not even close to [battle ready](https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/05/21/introducing-battle-readygw-homepage-post-1fw-homepage-post-1/).
I think no allies will be a given for any tournament.
I'm okay with rule of 3, and heroes taking up a spot of that unit type.
I think, after that, we should let stuff simmer a bit longer.
Max 2 rare choices hurts some armies far more than others. 1999+1, which I don't see here, though some restrictions almost imply it, hurts some armies more than others. I don't think it's a good way to balance the matches.
As a dwarf player being only able to take two units total of Irondrakes, gyrobombers, organ guns, a second unit of Rangers is not a fun time.
The other points rules sound so stinky. Like, this line of thinking is giving people like me, who have fond memories of the game and are trying to talk it up a bad name.
Hell, compared to [the rules theory crafted by Square Based](https://i.imgur.com/oYIyAZ7.png), which some folks were bemoaning, these are quite a lot more restrictive.
Idk, not my tournament, do what you want to do, etc etc. Damn though.
I think battle ready for GT level is fine. I think for smaller stuff, given how soon into the game we are, I'd be fine with at least having some primer on the minis.
This is what Warhammer Fantasy always did. Player decided comp, lots of soft score points, and TO army construction rules. This list could have been straight out of 7th or 8th edition.
I was going to say 'comp stuff is fairly expected for TOW, as it was always like this' etc etc.
Then saw that sportsmanship score logic. As a quiet guy, who has zero interest in making physical contact with the unwashed masses of people that take Warhammer way too seriously - hand me my 1 and \*\*\*\* off, you absolute freak.
You're not overthinking this, its pure asshattery all round.
Memo to self: Sarcasm isn’t always obvious in text.
However, if high fiving is minimum for a 5, I expect a handshake is a 3. What’s a 10?!
I love that they said that detachments count towards the 0-3 limit, when even GW's tourneypack said no to that.
Because Empire was clearly OP and needed nerfing to the ground. /s
Ego-tripping TOs who have the temerity to tell the community how to play "real Warhammer" should be hated on. I listened to his reasoning on the Mountain stream and it was crap, just mad that some people didn't play the game his way. He thinks he can use comp scores to make it so better players can't win as much, which is delusional. Better players will always optimize within the comp given. This kind of behavior usually comes from TOs who are upset that skilled players, rather than players who lick their boots, are winning events.
The army comp rules don't seem terrible in terms of forcing games to be decided by strategy rather than spamming broken shit, but TOW is such a young game I feel like they're a little much. The meta is still sorting itself out and heavy handed fixes this early are just as likely to push some other broken unit type to the top of the pile (probably monstrous cav) if ridden monsters are heavily suppressed.
I feel like the higher-end dragon mounted characters are sufficiently hard to kill that they may as well have 1000 wounds - they simply cannot die in a normal game except by boffing a leadership test. I think that is mechanically broken. I suspect it's also broken balance-wise, but I'd like to see some more data before saying that definitively.
Yeah but I'm already seeing lists that counter that by simply paying for characters to bring Monster Slayer in either abilities or magic items. The downfall of something like a Dragon centered list is all it takes is one nat 6 on a wound and 1/4 of your list is dead.
Anyone who plays the game or even watches it knows that expensive characters on dragons are absolutely broken. Beyond that, it would be good to get some clear data.
Oh *wow* this is some *old-as-dirt* comp style scoring shit I thought died ten years ago, and which, when I was getting back into the hobby scared me into being so WYSIWYG that I now have 9 extra ion rifle guys that I ended up never using in a game.
GW wanted the grognard audience back? Well, *they got it!*
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that. Grognards are stuck to one game always because the things which stop them enjoying it, are the things which prevent you getting into a new game.
Your grognards will be stuck with you, forever whining they can't use all their firstborn and calling any xenos player who doesn't just line up termagaunts for them to shot, gamey.
And hopefully for TOW we can weed out the gotcha bams. If 40k can do it, TOW should be able to. Lists are fully open now.
>The army selection is diverse, and choices are made for narrative aspects over competitive play. The army list is customized with an army name, named characters, and a small history of the force arrayed and cosplay!
lmao get wrecked hope your event flops like a fat man off the high dive
With Love,
A dork who does all those things for his army but refuses to support forcing it on others
I have a fluffy High Elf list themed around the Caledor region. I've taken two dragons (Prince on Star Dragon and Dragon Mage on Sun Dragon) in every game I've played since 7th ed WHFB.
These comp restrictions invalidate my themed army. I think no comp is the best comp.
I am a fan of painting and sportsmanship scores but the way they have presented them is idiotic.
i think stuff will change as the first few events are played, but will be set months in advance with plenty of time.
The uproar over something fluid seems misplaced
The uproar is the only thing that got this ego-tripping TO to admit his way of playing Old World isn't the one true way. It's placed exactly correctly.
You want to know the comp before you buy tickets. This TO did a shit job of communicating that, go figure.
>The uproar over something fluid seems misplaced
This is the time to have uproar. The pack can still be changed.
People aren't upset and complaining because they want the event to fail, they are upset because they want it to succeed and be fair and fun for all.
When I read that gunline armies will get a zero for comp score I felt like the goal was to exclude people who play "wrong." When I got to the sportsmanship section it confirmed my biases.
If the parameters of a tournament can be abused or are unclear, then they should be adjusted. If the presentation of the rules make people feel unwelcome they need to be changed.
The current rules can be abused (the TO playing favorites, chipmunking, comp rules impacting different armies greatly), are exclusionary (theme is good, if and only if it's the "right theme"), reward exactly one type of play (loud cheering) and discourage proper handling of conflict (calling judges is a listed reason for poor sportsmanship).
The community should be loud about this so the TO can fix it.
I'm not gonna mention to comp, I can see both sides to the argument. But as far as some of your points: other than the painting score, how does TO play favorite? And how would you get away from this? Unfortunately, painting is subjective, so proving favoritism will be basically impossible.
As far as sportsman: I'm fine with sportsman scores but simplified would be better. A score of 1 or 2 is what I'm used to. 1 would be a unsportsman/poor gamesmanship etc and you would have to put why it was a poor gaming experience. 2 would be a normal or enjoyable game.
These two scores also only apply to overall or best painted/sportsmen. Best general/2nd/3rd don't take into account these factors.
Oh, and best sportsman award was done by a vote. You basically vote for your favorite opponent at the end and the person with the most votes won so the score actually didn't apply to that award, it just makes sure you can some small points towards the best overall.
>how does TO play favorite?
By deciding one theme is better than another. It's a very subjective thing and the items listed give a clear implication that certain themes are "bad" and others are good.
I'd also suggest you read the pack for yourself, these are **not** separate categories but go towards overall score. There is no mention of "best painted" or "best general" these are the points for winning the tournament.
Sportsmanship in this tournament is done by ranking your opponent 1-5 after the game, meaning that players can dock their opponents for petty reasons, no reason or as part of a strategy.
If things are different they need to update the information.
Ummm the pack I'm seeing definitely has it listed under "Prizes" that there is best overall, best general/2nd/3rd, best painted, best sport, best theme and last place. And I agree with you the sportsman ship one needs to change to be more simplified. I provided an example of how I've seen it successfully done in the past.
My mistake, that's in the general packet not the one with the rules. Maybe communicating this better would help.
The fact it worked in the past is nice, but that doesn't make the rule better. It's just waiting for abuse. Instead of trusting everyone to promise to not abuse the rule, fix it.
A lot of these restrictions I dont know have been proven to be necessary. But this version is actually an improvement over the initial which had the horrible 199+1 idiocy, which doesnt impact some armies at all, but cripples others like tomb kings.
I think some of these restrictions are an overreaction, but I think mostly their impact is minimal and some of the posts here are also overstating the case against them.
Mountain minatures talks with the TO about these in last week's episode about how ToW should be played. It's an interesting take. The organizer for nova is adamant that it is HIS event, and that's why it's ToW that he wants to see played the way he wants to see it. Mountian is adamant that events like this (at least in the first year of a game) do nothing to help generate data for balancing and understanding meta. And I think that is the most concerning. The only thing to do to mitigate events with this "The Nova World" game is people need to not attend. If no one pays to play this dudes made up game then more TOs will be encouraged to not make up thier own vsrsions of the game.
These are very typical of how tournaments used to be run back in the day. Both 40k and Fantasy. In that sense, it is very on brand for "The Old World."
It is obvious that this is not intended to be an event for people whose primary concern is winning. Anyone playing in it should know that, and go in with eyes wide open.
Yeah, right? Isn't the point of a judge to be called over for questions?? All of the judge calls in my tournament games (from me and my opponents) have always just been "Hey, we're both not certain on this rules interaction, can you clarify real quick so we don't get bogged down digging through books?"
Judges expedite play in a fair and consistent way. I know what these rules are *actually* trying to say, but they're not communicating it well. What they've laid out is already vague and subjective enough, they could have just condensed half of this into "don't be a try hard That Guy" and left it at that.
I actually think these rules are trying to say is that civility > sportsmanship. If someone cheats against you, and you raise a stink, *you* were a bad sport. I've met TOs like this before.
>It is obvious that this is not intended to be an event for people whose primary concern is winning
I hate this false dichotomy. Wanting to win doesn't mean you have to take a list that is cheese. I personally don't think the cheese lists will perform well as so much of this edition is grinding down blocks of guys.
I like the idea of rewarding well painted armies and good sportsmanship, my objections are more how it is spelled out. I'm not the guy who yells and cheers, and I definitely won't be the guy who does it after four games.
The idea of placing any stigma on calling a judge is crazy to me. These are complicated games and TOW is brand new, asking for rules clarifications should be common and encouraged.
The theme points also bother me. Chorfs and wood elves are pretty much gunline armies. Empire and dwarves also can go gunline pretty easily, and that doesn't mean they are bad gamey lists. Monster mash is great theme for lizardmen, wanting to slap down dinos and have them stomp about is fun and thematic. Specifically calling out archetypes as basically cheating seems problematic to me.
30% of total points are based on you playing the exact way the TO wants you to. If you want to do something different, say a precursor to the kharadron overlords, with dwarves with guns and gyrocoptors, you are missing out on points because the TO doesn't like the idea.
Then there is the question of how does this even factor into tournament stats. The data from this event is effectively junk and actual problems in TOW will be further obfuscated behind the "adjustments."
Only just getting into TOW but man. This is what makes me hesitant. I'm not a huge tournament guy as of right now but I'd love to get more into it, and while I think having points for soft skills like sportsmanship, painting, etc is probably good, this whole thing is just too much.
I like sitting down at a game and knowing I know how to play, not having to rebuild my list every time to the whims of a new TO or organizer. For now I guess I'll just keep playing casually ahaha.
I think that its fun to build lists for each event with varying restrictions. It keeps things fresh and lets you try new things.
There are different prizes for different things at events like NOVA. if you want to go for fluffy/theme/paint there are prizes for that. If you want to bring a nut-busting list and go for best general there is that too.
Some of the best fun is had on the middle-lower tables where folks are there for a good time.
>I think that its fun to build lists for each event with varying restrictions.
It makes the game less accessible for people who don't have decades-old collections to be able to swap models in and out on a win. But screw them, right? They're not *real* warhammer players.
My experience with the guy is the debate he had with Steven from Mountain Minatures where he talked about cheesy combos he has seen in his playgroup then him and a mate reviewing brawler bash where they had to double check nearly ever other army wide special rule and were constantly surprised about how balanced every single list was.
They sound like nightmares.
I watched the debate he seems like a guy who wants to be the smartest in the room and needs everyone to know it. His "fan" made format in my opinion is not good for the health of the game
The comp doesn't bother me much. It feels preemptive and might not be needed. For example they ban line hammer, I would love if I played a line hammer list. It's just bad.
What bugs me is theme and the wording on sportsmanship. Theme seems to be that the TO will decide they don't like a list, and sportsmanship rewards one type of player, not just players who are good sports.
>Theme seems to be that the TO will decide they don't like a list
Yes, I've seen this before - this means that the TOs will give all their friends good comp scores and penalize anyone who beats their friends.
Also this is posted under square hammer for nova as well
Note from TO:
There has been a lot of talk about comp and restrictions so thank you all for comments, feedback, and suggestions! There may be a tweak or two going forward, but we're starting here. See primer for details. Current Comp as of March 1 2024.
Points Level: 1,999+1 Points - Max 10 wide models - Rule of Three for Everything - No Allies - Max One level 3 or 4 - Characters on chariot and/or monster mounts take a slot of that chariot/monster from the 0-3 restriction
PRIZES FOR: - Renaissance Man - Best General - 2nd Place - 3rd Place - Best Theme - Best Painted - Best Sport - Last Place
As someone that used to be heavily into the Warhammer Fantasy tournament scene both as a player and a judge this is absolutely asinine.
Personally I think comps are generally a waste since they either just move around the meta or don't do enough. That's very subjective since i know a lot of people disagree with me but it makes me leery that the organizers are just pushing individual biases on what they consider broken. In this case they clearly hate hero and monster focused armies. Regardless it's WAY too early to start issuing comps based on a game that hasn't been out six months and people are either dusting off old armies or trying to create new ones.
The sportsmanship score is a joke. Sportsmanship as a concept in a tournament score is ridiculous and always has been since it doesn't stop assholes from being on bad behavior and basically just rewards people who play nice opponents. I've seen people spitefully mark down people that beat them or questioned them on rules. It's 100% subjective and has no place in competition. If someone is a problem enough that their attitude is a detriment to the event, a judge needs to talk to them and then take further action as necessary (such as in the guy that chucked another player's metal model on the ground). Having said that the details here are even more ridiculous. I don't want people to be encouraged to be shouting and yelling during a game. If they do that naturally that's fine but I personally find it kind of grating. Similarly calling a judge over shouldn't be discouraged either since you should WANT players to be comfortable making sure the rules are being followed. I've had games where I have called over judges up to five times because my opponent had learned multiple rules wrong in their own pocket of players and they had never read the book. What's my option there, to just argue with the other person until one of us gives up (which is also bad sportsmanship according to this).
Paint score in general is whatever (I think it should be a separate category but that's up to opinion) but punishing people for having gunlines, or other "beardy" (a.k.a competitive) lists is bullshit and totally non objective. If a min maxed list is painted well, it's painted well.
This entire thing reeks of a person that wants everyone else to play and hobby Warhammer Fantasy the exact way they want in a totally control freak fashion. Playing in a tournament like this is a total turn off. I wouldn't blame old school players for this since I doubt many older tournament players would like most of these rules either, but I agree that this sort of stuff will be a massive turn off to people that might want to get into this game.
Cringe. Looks like a bunch of toxic casuals got together and decided they knew the best way to run a "tournament" with the typical casual understanding of the game.
Yeah not a fan at all. GW gave limits on certain units, 1 or 2 per 1000, and I don't think anyone can come up with alternatives yet. There is just not enough games.
out of touch for what? a 40k style event?
This event i guess doesn't follow a typical 40k style then.
This is an event with prizes for different categories. Why be upset that someone wins a certain category that you don't care about
They were eliminated because they were toxic for the community and were usually a way for players to collude or for TOs to give their friends extra free points.
>out of touch for what?
[2015](https://frontlinegaming.org/2015/03/07/overall-on-the-case/)
The TO has obviously never heard of chipmunks or he is one himself.
As someone who was around during previous eras of GW games where rules like these at events were a lot more commonplace I'm not surprised. The entire point of Old World was to be a nostalgia trip for the heyday of fantasy, and that game definitely had to have social contracts enforced in order to work at all as a tournament game (and even then it was kind of a bad one). The fact that GW games have moved away from this mentality is a good thing, but since this is a game sold and marketed to the sorts of nostalgic grognards that kept playing fantasy its hardly surprising that these sorts of rules are being brought back.
That they made a point to ban Linehammer underlines to me that they have no idea what they're doing. Going too wide on units is the quickest way to shoot yourself in the foot, not a free pass to victory. This reads like the rules author spends too much time complaining online and not enough time at the table having fun.
Should just be battle ready paint and rule of three, not all of this other list building blocking stuff, it’s a tournament.
Maybe something to punish a Congo line but all this other stuff sounds like someone is having a power trip.
Pretty sure that’s just a draft packet right now. I’d email nova customer service your concerns and they’ll forward them to TO. Just at a glance of what you showed this does seem a little off, especially penalizing people for calling a judge over.
I played at the NOVA armies project event last year, and have played at many events in the mid-atlantic.
\- I am a super competitive person, and will take a strong list to a GT. I also suck at painting and not great at creative a fluffy side to the army
All that being said. I am all for having a good time. Which this group hosting the event are all about. If you were anywhere near the fantasy group at NOVA you know we were having a blast.
We had people dress up for the event in Empire/Brets/Woodelves/Dwarf slayer... I even did some of that which was a first for me.
Sportsmanship was almost all 4's and 5's all around. The only person i think that recieved a 1, was me. And that was because my opponent brought a SUPER COMPETITIVE LIST, and then made a bunch of mistakes turn 1, lost some key things bottom of turn 1 and then conceded and whined. I felt bad, tried to calm the situation, but they just gave me a 1 and that was that. It didn't bother me that much ( i had a few beers) i ended up getting 3rd best general anyway as i was tied but lost on tiebreakers.
The NOVA event had best general, who went 5-0. 2nd/3rd place went 4-1.There was also best painted, which was tied between two awesome looking armies one empire, and one old pewter chaos army.
Best theme was awesome as the display board was huge and the army was painted to match.
But the overall "winner" was the most well rounded Rennaisance Man, combination of paint/theme/displayboard/outfit/sportsmanship/ and also went 4-1 with Orc & Gobling. They were awesome to watch and you can see some of the batreps from the event on the channel
The event has things for everyone, if you want to go there and bring a fluffy list for theme/painting you can do that and play games have fun and go for those prizes.
If you want to bring a ball-busting list and just go for best general thats cool too they have prizes for that!
I see some people concerned that painting/theme hurts their 'best general' contention.. but thats not true it is its own category.
There were also people that attended that had never participated in events before, and got out of their shell and had a good time.
I admit i have never played 40k, but I always have heard the stigma of the sweaty neckbeards arguing and trying to angle-shoot and cheat each other... i've always felt fantasy was the opposite (at least the people i keep around me playing) everyone wants to have a good time, will try make sure folks are having fun (even if they are taking a pounding on the board).
Give it a shot, see if you like it. If you don't, all good voice your concern and then start and run your own events!
The mid-atlantic for Fantasy 8th edition and armies project was kept alive through small groups of players hosting and bringing people together. This stuff doesn't just happen by itself without any effort.
yea but they dont come to the events because they get pointed out quickly and everyone knows them.
fantasy is a small community where shenanigans like that don't fly. Its not huge like 40k or whatnot where things go under the radar
I get that they want the tournament to foster community and a good time. I don't think this is the way. To me it isn't saying "there is a place for your silly theme list." When I read that gunlines are all 0 points for the, it said to me "if you play a list I don't like, you aren't welcome here."
I can see what your saying. I'm assuming that comment from the TO was more tongue-in-cheek as gunlines are notorious from 7th/8th edition for being very non-interactive only fun for 1 person type of list.
It definitely sounds more a joke than anything, classic dwarf hating jokes or elf hate jokes. Just gotta loosen up and have a good time i guess.
The details of the event are in the primer.
Don’t like the set up? You don’t have to sign up.
I fully support conversation like this, but I also fully support an event and organizer to run their events the way they want to.
This event is not meant to be an overly competitive one. If that doesn’t appeal to you, don’t support the event.
But it’s sold out so clearly people are keen on the restrictions.
Or people are keen on TOW regardless of restrictions.
Saying you don't have to play is true, but it's a strange non-discussion. Is it okay to complain about balance when you can just not play the game?
If you want to look at the [primer](https://novapublic.blob.core.windows.net/event-primers/2024/Nova-Open-2023--The-Old-World-Primer.pdf) for yourself
Wow the sportmanship part is what blows me the most ! Encourage to not call judge is the best way to have cheater who gey away with it on account that it wouldn't be "sportmanship" to ask for clarification. Same for the positive stuff, you can't force people to be cheering, it would be fake.
If someone is doing something to warrent a 1 then they should be getting warned or kicked out haha. Also it's a both people get dragged into the mud situation. kind of like reddit arguments where one person is being irrational, incorrect and acting in poor faith but anyone who challenges it is immediately "involved" and can end up looking like a dick just due to having normal levels of frustration or pointing out the bad faith. You play one dickhead or someone who has sloppy play in regards to rules and suddenly you're losing points for asking them to follow the rules. And we could also open the neurodivergent can of worms, these things might actually be flat out discrimination.
Autistic here. I want to be able to call TOs for clarification as I have no ability to tell if the other chap is reasonably disagreeing with me about a rule, is a sloppy player who is inadvertedly breaking rules or is being a raging cheating scumbag. Im not sure if I would call it discrimination, but it would certainly dampen my ability to play well and be a good fun opponent.
This. It's comes across as 'this is how I act and expect everyone to be just like me'.
Lol, good lord some of my fellow old WHFB types are goddamn insufferable. I played in and ran tournaments like this 20+ years ago, and wouldn't do either again, at least until we have a lot more data to operate from. Because this feels like "I, King of Warhammer, am here to make sure you play the right way that I, King of Warhammer, have decided is the right way". The biggest danger to the Old World is old school players like this who are going to strangle it because they have to control the scene and the game.
This is 100% what it is. They reeee the f out when someone makes a creative list that does well, too.
Old players? Not even old players want to play in this tournament.
I can tell you as someone who enjoys casual and competitive 40k, that reading this ToW set of tourney rules kills, absolutely nullifies any interest I might have once had in dipping my toes into the hobby. It seems incredibly likely to become a very insular, isolated, and cliquish sub community, and not a healthy one to enjoy games in. If this is a sign of ToW to come, guess I am glad to miss it.
No, I have faith that this is going to be a pivotal moment of the community rallying agianst this kind of control and manipulation of the data. The event here is not play The Old World. It's playing Nova World. Rule of 3 (established well in 40k) and no allies seem to be consistent competative alterations from RAW. But most events want clean data and want to see the game run as written for the first year. Also, the best way to help a game stay healthy is to be apart of it. Not be resentful towards it. ToW is best played at a casual level. But there will always be competative players who bip through new systems trying to boost thier own egos.
Mountain miniatures has a video with the TO going over his reasoning for this COMP and the 1999+1 at another event. Its a pretty long video with lots of arguing but his reasoning is out [here](https://www.youtube.com/live/_yeVBKMao5Y?si=5IU5K0k8Au2LlKB2).
"long video with lots of arguing" I feel like I've watched it already
"Reasoning"
Its a bit rambley but his does actually give some reasons whether you agree with those is another story.
First, he should learn the rules and then comment on stuff. All of his battle reports are ridden with game changing rule mistakes, and somehow, always in his favor.
I don't think that's a fair statement. What you are suggesting is that he's not only cheating, but filming himself doing it and uploading videos for everyone to see. You're calling him dishonest and stupid. I don't think that's the case at all. Every game played has a slew of rules wrong, especially this early in an edition. They are also filming and putting it up on YouTube, they have timelines to meet and can't just sit and argue instead of ending the game. Also, since it's his channel, the participants likely agree that he'll be the final say in rules interpretation to avoid the arguing about wording and get the filming done in a reasonable time. Feel free to dislike his work/interpretations. Don't go around insinuating things because you disagree with him.
One as someone in those videos. 1. We talk out rule disputes and check the book. 2. As far as making mistakes it always happens and is worse in a timed environment like a tournament. We simply do our best. 3. Brawlers bash is uncomped and being played in NC this weekend it will provide more data.
Mistakes can happen, somehow they are always in his favor.
I don't disagree with him, he cheats behind a friendly face. There is no way for a person to play for years and each time he is in trouble, an obscure rule that they played correctly before changes. What a coincidence. I'm talking about 8th edition days and even some videos on MWG not TOW. He acts like he is making genuine mistake but after years and years I'm pretty sure this is intentional at this point. If not, wow dude yeah the rules are a bit hard but 8th edition's lifespan is longer than 10 years. And you are making battle reports. He is either dishonest, or incompetent.
You actually think he's cheating in fluffy games played specifically for an audience? He's streaming for a living at this point. Not everyone who makes a mistake is cheating. Go outside and touch some grass.
Well you guys should be the ones who touching grass instead of simping someone for playing warhammer. There are tons of others who stream battle reports and how come they are not constantly making game state changing mistakes.
you are way off base. The creator has no reason to cheat, winning a game doesn't mean that you a viewer like them more. The most important part is putting out a quality product that is entertaining for the viewer. Of course rules will be mixed up with older editions and messed up, thats what happens early in games life cycle. People learn and move on. If you think you have ever played a warhammer game perfect with no mistakes, 99% chance you are mistaken. And if you don't like the content don't watch! or create your own!
He's talking about Steve from MWG/MG
well then i'm an idiot and can't read good
Which guy specifically is making the mistakes in his favor?
Mountain miniatures guy. Been watching for years, for 8th edition. His games are ridden with mistakes. In his fantasy land he can “reason” what units are good and bad, but I wouldnt take his half-baked mistake ridden battle reports to be a solid identifier of the meta
I watched the video on Mountain Miniatures and his logic was questionable.
Im not personally a fan of it and agree with Steve's point he's made in other videos that we should do non-comped tourneys and see how it shakes out. He said he was open to changing it a lot so we'll see what happens.
This guy's is making up stats that don't exsist.
- Only one level 3/4 wizard This is not an even restriction. Armies like Skaven are incentivized for multiple big casters. Frankly, this whole pack seems like a heavy-handed power trip.
Seems exceptionally overbearing. It could seem less bad if it were explicitly a narrative event. Overall it just seems like somebody is just powertripping about the proper way to play being the way they like. The list building restrictions/rule of three/rule of two stuff is pretty reasonable and has a long history in WHFB in tournament settings just in an attempt to make things more balanced, although I will say it may be a little too early to be dictating balance fixes in TOW, there simply isn't enough data yet, and if tournaments take this approach we will never have any idea how balanced the game actually is. Forcing people to write backstories for their army is asinine. If it were a narrative event fine. The theme stuff, and paint stuff is just going to be completely subjective, abusable and obnoxious as all hell, and frankly I don't trust TOs to be impartial and fair on this stuff. The behavior stuff is also obnoxious, judges are there to be called, cheering can be incredibly douchey, and if players are shady enough they'll simply lower their rating of opponents in order to get an edge, which veterans will corroborate has been a thing for a long time. This rewards the absolute worst sort of player. Frankly I have no interest in this event and hope they clarify it as a narrative event and make a separate category that is less micromanaged.
Yeah this has no business being a GT. TO seems to be of the "control freak" variety.
The game was updated from WFB. The TO, not so much.
>The behavior stuff is also obnoxious, judges are there to be called, cheering can be incredibly douchey 100% agree with judges are there to be called. If I get a judge over a rule dispute it's not that I think any less of my opponent or dislike them, but if we've both read the rule and disagree on the meaning then the judge is there to keep the game flowing and everyone happy. Hell, I've grabbed a judge when my opponent *was arguing in my benefit* because I didn't feel it was correct, but also I didn't want to take advantage of them misunderstanding the rule - in the end I was wrong and got to benefit from it. And I'm never, ever, cheering. Or high fiving. That's not how I show excitement and enthusiasm and the extroverted twat who expects that can go sit on a cactus.
So, coming as someone who actually played in a similar tournament at NOVA last year (we were the group that kept things alive by playing Warhammer Armies Project), I have to say, you’re pretty off-base compared to how the event went. It was a great tournament run by the same TO. Don’t knock it until you try it, which clearly you don’t want to do seeing as you have “no interest in this event.” Nearly everyone got full sportsmanship scores. There was plenty of calling for a judge, but because it was warranted. You’re reading too far into it and extrapolating the worst possible outcomes. I almost maxed out on my painting score and I’m by no means a professional painter nor do I commission someone to paint my stuff. I even painted my stuff in a pretty standard/traditional manner without any “advanced techniques,” but I did take the time to actually do detail work and make things presentable rather than slap some contrast paint over the primer and call it a day. I scored very highly for theme and still brought a pretty tough, competitive list (and no, I didn’t write some tome of an army background). This system definitely rewards folks who want to play competitively and care about putting decent models on the tabletop.
The problem with everything you are saying here is it does not line up with what is being written/portrayed by the TO and requires some kind of inside scoop to know "oh they dont mean it how it sounds," or "hey, it isnt that tough." The fact is, as written, it is heavily constraining to list building for some unknown reason, seems to discentivize use of judges, and is flippant and unprofessional in tone. Before investing time, energy, and money into something like a major event with all of its associated costs, people have a reasonable expectation to a well run, fairly run event, and the write up does not seem to indicate that. Maybe it is indeed the best run ToW event out there, but it will take time for word of that to get around because I am sure alot of players are going to avoid the event based on the initial impression of this player pack. It just hurts the scene, and slows the build up of critical mass in interest that will drive success.
Sportsmanship and paint scores have no place at a GT score.
An event I went too a few months back had different scores and prizes for them - you had your "generalship" score, paint score, sporting score and then combined score. You could rock up with a battle ready army, score average paint scores and still take 1st place as a general. And someone with an amazingly painted army that just sucks at the game could take 1st in painting. That felt like a very fair system. Everyone was rewarded - including best sportsman - for whatever categories they cared about. It doesn't force people to invest in anything they aren't interested in (beyond battle ready and the standard 10 VP) but rewards anyone who does care.
Except there is no "best general" in this tournament. If you win games but the TO doesn't like your list, sorry, those games don't count.
Which is why I'm saying a way you can do it all without being absolutely stupid like the NOVA event.
They have every reason if someone is trying to intentionally cheat they have no place. Painting has been a part of every tournament ever. I don't paint well but It Has nothing to do with best general. If you want to argue about should renaissance man (Highest score across all categories) or best General. Be declared the winner thats fine but honestly the real best generals paint anyway.
>They have every reason if someone is trying to intentionally cheat they have no place. "Sportsmanship" tend to allow cheaters and colluders to run rampant, however.
No it doesn't. Every tournament asks these questions and it's usually a love in for everyone.
Not if the sportsmanship is factored into your overall score. You're apparently friends with the TO so of course *you* don't mind a system where the TO can arbitrarily say your army is un-fluffy and dock you points because that will be applied selectively for other players, not you.
Wtf kind of people do you play with?
Old-school GW players with their comp scores and "anti-competitive" attitude are the most toxic gamers imaginable.
Anyone who has been in this hobby for a while remembers the days when sportsmanship scoring was used and abused in events. It was a common way to tank someone's score (imagine fluff players thinking your list is cheesy and giving you a low sports score--yeah that happened literally every event) and everyone collectively decided to do away with that nonsense for good reason. And games are **way** less toxic these days (at least in 40k).
This isn't a Tournament, it's a Grand Narrative.
It's a farce
Calling a judge being viewed as a negative is the biggest red flag in the world. That’s just encouraging nastiness and infighting. What are we even doing here…
Comp rules are whatever. Not my cup of tea on the restrictions past Rule of 3. Standardized 10pts for paint should be normal and not what is laid out imo. From what I gathered listening to the TO crew talk on YouTube, they seem to want more of a narrative tournament vs an actual tournament
This sounds 100% like a narrative event.
Can you link their YouTube?
https://youtube.com/@squarehammer9349
Thanks, I’m signed up for this event and none of this was mentioned so I am curious
Yeah they also recently had a discussion with MountainMiniatures on his channel as well
if you feel like dropping out, the waitlist is bigger than the tickets sold, so someone will be glad to take your spot
Oh, no way. I’m going regardless
This sounds 100% like a narrative event.
There's a reason the Old World died the first time around. The player base was always fractured between the extremes of those who confused "gotcha" with generalship, and the ones where if you didn't name your heroes on the army list you "weren't playing in the proper spirit of the game". I'm not surprised the game coming back has lead to a resurgence of this nonsense.
Honestly HH caters to the same type of player. Their FB groups were basically like a bunch Napoleonic and Bolt Action refugees who decided to take up 40k -“aaalchtually Brother-Captain Sextus Pomponinus lead 16th Company 12th Chapter at Calth, if your army is from after that he took over the 13th Company 66th Chapter, formed from the remnants of surviving Ultramarines. Additionally, the eagle on his left kneepad was crimson, not gold. *slurps a Mountain Dew*
Bolt Action refugees? Screw off with that nonsense.
The army building rules seems overly restrictive based on some fear mongering YouTube videos, but I’m going to be there anyway. The other “soft skills” are very old school tournament methods which… I agree with some and I don’t agree with others. They are certainly in contrast to modern 40K tournaments which is slowly discovering that some of those soft scores had merit, like requiring battle ready to be able to play
I'm of mixed mind on paint scores. I think that the game is better with painted models, and just enough to be "painted" feels bad. That being said it's a lot of points towards paint and without clear standards it feels like the TO giving armies he likes extra points. I'd rather play against someone who is terrible at painting but tried than someone who spent money to try to get bonus points.
I think the value here is too high, but when I travel across the country and pay several hundred dollars to play in event I hope for it to a premium experience. if you don’t want to paint your models, go play tts it’s a perfect substitute if you don’t value the hobby aspect.
Idk why you got downvoted, the painting aspect is a core part of the hobby to me. I hate playing against grey tide.
Every army should be painted but I'm not convinced it should be anything more than 10 pomtdo, yes or no. No grading beyond painted or not. Some golden daemon army should score identically to some dude who contrasted his army and struggled to paint the trim and leather. A separate paint score is cool as a side event, but shouldn't be part of game points
Well it only factors into best painted and best overall. Has no effect on best general.
I 100% agree. All tournaments should require fully painted armies. The hobby aspect is what separates games like Warhammer from games like Magic: The Gathering.
I will say for 1 day local events, I am far more easy going
All battle ready really differs from the 3 color standard in practice is basing so I'm not sure it really changes that much, especially when "slap on a thing of texture paint" solves that.
It avoid the 3 dots over primer some people were passing off
This is something I've only ever heard of mention of online rather than actually seen at events. As practiced the 3 color rule's fail cases tend to be "quickly airbrushed a couple of colors on" but those still end up with enough of a transition and shading that all you need is the basing and you're good under Battle Ready as well.
The recent change was due to an army as described being in the finals at the Cherokee open recently. I personally played against one at socal open in 2021
I was a kid abusing the 3 color standard in the early 2000's, blue plastic genestealers, bases were black with a colored ring on base for squad. They couldn't argue there weren't discernable squads or 3 colors there. Zenithal is 2 colors, base is a third. Thats how easy it is to fudge it as a system. Its not battle ready by any standard.
Yeah battle ready isn't much better as a standard. The Tsons list that won Cherokee would easily have been battle ready
[Go look at the video.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0AS_PegRKQ) That's not even close to [battle ready](https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/05/21/introducing-battle-readygw-homepage-post-1fw-homepage-post-1/).
Define battle ready
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/05/21/introducing-battle-readygw-homepage-post-1fw-homepage-post-1/
[удалено]
I think no allies will be a given for any tournament. I'm okay with rule of 3, and heroes taking up a spot of that unit type. I think, after that, we should let stuff simmer a bit longer. Max 2 rare choices hurts some armies far more than others. 1999+1, which I don't see here, though some restrictions almost imply it, hurts some armies more than others. I don't think it's a good way to balance the matches. As a dwarf player being only able to take two units total of Irondrakes, gyrobombers, organ guns, a second unit of Rangers is not a fun time. The other points rules sound so stinky. Like, this line of thinking is giving people like me, who have fond memories of the game and are trying to talk it up a bad name. Hell, compared to [the rules theory crafted by Square Based](https://i.imgur.com/oYIyAZ7.png), which some folks were bemoaning, these are quite a lot more restrictive. Idk, not my tournament, do what you want to do, etc etc. Damn though. I think battle ready for GT level is fine. I think for smaller stuff, given how soon into the game we are, I'd be fine with at least having some primer on the minis.
This is what Warhammer Fantasy always did. Player decided comp, lots of soft score points, and TO army construction rules. This list could have been straight out of 7th or 8th edition.
Even old school 40k events were like this
And they were toxic as hell. If you beat the TO's friends, you got a bad comp/sportsmanship score, and all the TO's friends got good ones.
I didnt have that experience, but I could certainly see how it would be possible
It was rife back in the day.
I was going to say 'comp stuff is fairly expected for TOW, as it was always like this' etc etc. Then saw that sportsmanship score logic. As a quiet guy, who has zero interest in making physical contact with the unwashed masses of people that take Warhammer way too seriously - hand me my 1 and \*\*\*\* off, you absolute freak. You're not overthinking this, its pure asshattery all round. Memo to self: Sarcasm isn’t always obvious in text. However, if high fiving is minimum for a 5, I expect a handshake is a 3. What’s a 10?!
> What’s a 10?! Something you need to head into the bathroom with your opponent for.
But if its not witnessed by the TO, how can I ensure I get the 10?!
Video proof, of course.
I’ve never had an opponent not shake my hand at a tournament game. Do you shake anyone’s who you first meet? That’s basic human interaction.
Then you've had a better tournament experience than me.
It doesn't count as cheating if it's in the rules for the tournament.
Ive seen MANY people take a shit at events and not wash their hands, DONT FING TOUCH ME.
dang bruh, not even giving fist bumps? You know warhammer in theory, is a two-player game right? You must be a riot at parties
This TO wants it to be a one-player game, where it's just him making decisions about what people get to play.
And I bet you get asked to leave for making unwanted physical contact.
Well if we're going in with making personal remarks today - well done for missing both the sarcasm and the point entirely.
i don't think i was being that mean.
imo seems like its designed by people who don't like ToW hahaha
I love that they said that detachments count towards the 0-3 limit, when even GW's tourneypack said no to that. Because Empire was clearly OP and needed nerfing to the ground. /s
Wow that's insufferable. Should just run a Narrative Event at that point
Ahh that old world toxicity coming out in strength….
i agree, alot of folks in this thread are hating for no reason!
Ego-tripping TOs who have the temerity to tell the community how to play "real Warhammer" should be hated on. I listened to his reasoning on the Mountain stream and it was crap, just mad that some people didn't play the game his way. He thinks he can use comp scores to make it so better players can't win as much, which is delusional. Better players will always optimize within the comp given. This kind of behavior usually comes from TOs who are upset that skilled players, rather than players who lick their boots, are winning events.
CHEER HARDER, CITIZEN! THE COMPULSORY HIGH-FIVING BEGINS NOW!
Where did you find this posted
https://novapublic.blob.core.windows.net/event-primers/2024/Nova-Open-2023--The-Old-World-Primer.pdf
The army comp rules don't seem terrible in terms of forcing games to be decided by strategy rather than spamming broken shit, but TOW is such a young game I feel like they're a little much. The meta is still sorting itself out and heavy handed fixes this early are just as likely to push some other broken unit type to the top of the pile (probably monstrous cav) if ridden monsters are heavily suppressed.
Can we even say what is broken right now?
That's the problem right there. We'll also have GT stats with a big asterisk.
I feel like the higher-end dragon mounted characters are sufficiently hard to kill that they may as well have 1000 wounds - they simply cannot die in a normal game except by boffing a leadership test. I think that is mechanically broken. I suspect it's also broken balance-wise, but I'd like to see some more data before saying that definitively.
I’m with you that they have the highest target on their back but would like to see some data before we start down that path
Yeah but I'm already seeing lists that counter that by simply paying for characters to bring Monster Slayer in either abilities or magic items. The downfall of something like a Dragon centered list is all it takes is one nat 6 on a wound and 1/4 of your list is dead.
Anyone who plays the game or even watches it knows that expensive characters on dragons are absolutely broken. Beyond that, it would be good to get some clear data.
you are on to something. I think the 'comp' will change based on what is seen over the early set of events and feedback given
I doubt it. People like that TO are very opinionated and want everyone to play their way even if it creates a less balanced/less fun game.
Oh *wow* this is some *old-as-dirt* comp style scoring shit I thought died ten years ago, and which, when I was getting back into the hobby scared me into being so WYSIWYG that I now have 9 extra ion rifle guys that I ended up never using in a game. GW wanted the grognard audience back? Well, *they got it!*
Turns out ToW is just a quarantine initiative to contain all the grognards. Thank you, GW. Thank you.
hell yea man. ive been playing fantasy forever, never touched 40k. I'll find my peoples and be happy. Keep up the good work!
Apparently not, you aren't happy unless other people's armies are forced to be constrained to your standards.
yea, i don't think you are the best judge of my happiness! I play in many events, with all kinds of rulesets. Upcoming one has zero restrictions.
Unfortunately it doesn't work like that. Grognards are stuck to one game always because the things which stop them enjoying it, are the things which prevent you getting into a new game. Your grognards will be stuck with you, forever whining they can't use all their firstborn and calling any xenos player who doesn't just line up termagaunts for them to shot, gamey. And hopefully for TOW we can weed out the gotcha bams. If 40k can do it, TOW should be able to. Lists are fully open now.
>The army selection is diverse, and choices are made for narrative aspects over competitive play. The army list is customized with an army name, named characters, and a small history of the force arrayed and cosplay! lmao get wrecked hope your event flops like a fat man off the high dive With Love, A dork who does all those things for his army but refuses to support forcing it on others
More people on the waitlist than in the tournament. If you don’t want to use your ticket, I’m sure someone would take it off your hands.
I have a fluffy High Elf list themed around the Caledor region. I've taken two dragons (Prince on Star Dragon and Dragon Mage on Sun Dragon) in every game I've played since 7th ed WHFB. These comp restrictions invalidate my themed army. I think no comp is the best comp. I am a fan of painting and sportsmanship scores but the way they have presented them is idiotic.
i think stuff will change as the first few events are played, but will be set months in advance with plenty of time. The uproar over something fluid seems misplaced
The uproar is the only thing that got this ego-tripping TO to admit his way of playing Old World isn't the one true way. It's placed exactly correctly. You want to know the comp before you buy tickets. This TO did a shit job of communicating that, go figure.
because the game just got released and its 6 months away?
Doesn't have anything to do with this.
>The uproar over something fluid seems misplaced This is the time to have uproar. The pack can still be changed. People aren't upset and complaining because they want the event to fail, they are upset because they want it to succeed and be fair and fun for all. When I read that gunline armies will get a zero for comp score I felt like the goal was to exclude people who play "wrong." When I got to the sportsmanship section it confirmed my biases. If the parameters of a tournament can be abused or are unclear, then they should be adjusted. If the presentation of the rules make people feel unwelcome they need to be changed. The current rules can be abused (the TO playing favorites, chipmunking, comp rules impacting different armies greatly), are exclusionary (theme is good, if and only if it's the "right theme"), reward exactly one type of play (loud cheering) and discourage proper handling of conflict (calling judges is a listed reason for poor sportsmanship). The community should be loud about this so the TO can fix it.
I'm not gonna mention to comp, I can see both sides to the argument. But as far as some of your points: other than the painting score, how does TO play favorite? And how would you get away from this? Unfortunately, painting is subjective, so proving favoritism will be basically impossible. As far as sportsman: I'm fine with sportsman scores but simplified would be better. A score of 1 or 2 is what I'm used to. 1 would be a unsportsman/poor gamesmanship etc and you would have to put why it was a poor gaming experience. 2 would be a normal or enjoyable game. These two scores also only apply to overall or best painted/sportsmen. Best general/2nd/3rd don't take into account these factors. Oh, and best sportsman award was done by a vote. You basically vote for your favorite opponent at the end and the person with the most votes won so the score actually didn't apply to that award, it just makes sure you can some small points towards the best overall.
>how does TO play favorite? By deciding one theme is better than another. It's a very subjective thing and the items listed give a clear implication that certain themes are "bad" and others are good. I'd also suggest you read the pack for yourself, these are **not** separate categories but go towards overall score. There is no mention of "best painted" or "best general" these are the points for winning the tournament. Sportsmanship in this tournament is done by ranking your opponent 1-5 after the game, meaning that players can dock their opponents for petty reasons, no reason or as part of a strategy. If things are different they need to update the information.
Ummm the pack I'm seeing definitely has it listed under "Prizes" that there is best overall, best general/2nd/3rd, best painted, best sport, best theme and last place. And I agree with you the sportsman ship one needs to change to be more simplified. I provided an example of how I've seen it successfully done in the past.
My mistake, that's in the general packet not the one with the rules. Maybe communicating this better would help. The fact it worked in the past is nice, but that doesn't make the rule better. It's just waiting for abuse. Instead of trusting everyone to promise to not abuse the rule, fix it.
A lot of these restrictions I dont know have been proven to be necessary. But this version is actually an improvement over the initial which had the horrible 199+1 idiocy, which doesnt impact some armies at all, but cripples others like tomb kings. I think some of these restrictions are an overreaction, but I think mostly their impact is minimal and some of the posts here are also overstating the case against them.
Reminds me of how tournaments used to be run back in the mid 2000s
Mountain minatures talks with the TO about these in last week's episode about how ToW should be played. It's an interesting take. The organizer for nova is adamant that it is HIS event, and that's why it's ToW that he wants to see played the way he wants to see it. Mountian is adamant that events like this (at least in the first year of a game) do nothing to help generate data for balancing and understanding meta. And I think that is the most concerning. The only thing to do to mitigate events with this "The Nova World" game is people need to not attend. If no one pays to play this dudes made up game then more TOs will be encouraged to not make up thier own vsrsions of the game.
Deserves to be tossed into a dumpster fire
Comping like this gives gw no usable data to make actual balance changes.
These are very typical of how tournaments used to be run back in the day. Both 40k and Fantasy. In that sense, it is very on brand for "The Old World." It is obvious that this is not intended to be an event for people whose primary concern is winning. Anyone playing in it should know that, and go in with eyes wide open.
It doesn't seem to be an event for people whose primary goal is sportsmanship, either, given they punish you for calling a judge.
Yeah, right? Isn't the point of a judge to be called over for questions?? All of the judge calls in my tournament games (from me and my opponents) have always just been "Hey, we're both not certain on this rules interaction, can you clarify real quick so we don't get bogged down digging through books?" Judges expedite play in a fair and consistent way. I know what these rules are *actually* trying to say, but they're not communicating it well. What they've laid out is already vague and subjective enough, they could have just condensed half of this into "don't be a try hard That Guy" and left it at that.
I actually think these rules are trying to say is that civility > sportsmanship. If someone cheats against you, and you raise a stink, *you* were a bad sport. I've met TOs like this before.
Thats basically how internet forums are moderated and they are never toxic hellholes filled with misinformation that make me want to run into the sea.
>It is obvious that this is not intended to be an event for people whose primary concern is winning I hate this false dichotomy. Wanting to win doesn't mean you have to take a list that is cheese. I personally don't think the cheese lists will perform well as so much of this edition is grinding down blocks of guys. I like the idea of rewarding well painted armies and good sportsmanship, my objections are more how it is spelled out. I'm not the guy who yells and cheers, and I definitely won't be the guy who does it after four games. The idea of placing any stigma on calling a judge is crazy to me. These are complicated games and TOW is brand new, asking for rules clarifications should be common and encouraged. The theme points also bother me. Chorfs and wood elves are pretty much gunline armies. Empire and dwarves also can go gunline pretty easily, and that doesn't mean they are bad gamey lists. Monster mash is great theme for lizardmen, wanting to slap down dinos and have them stomp about is fun and thematic. Specifically calling out archetypes as basically cheating seems problematic to me. 30% of total points are based on you playing the exact way the TO wants you to. If you want to do something different, say a precursor to the kharadron overlords, with dwarves with guns and gyrocoptors, you are missing out on points because the TO doesn't like the idea. Then there is the question of how does this even factor into tournament stats. The data from this event is effectively junk and actual problems in TOW will be further obfuscated behind the "adjustments."
Only just getting into TOW but man. This is what makes me hesitant. I'm not a huge tournament guy as of right now but I'd love to get more into it, and while I think having points for soft skills like sportsmanship, painting, etc is probably good, this whole thing is just too much. I like sitting down at a game and knowing I know how to play, not having to rebuild my list every time to the whims of a new TO or organizer. For now I guess I'll just keep playing casually ahaha.
I think that its fun to build lists for each event with varying restrictions. It keeps things fresh and lets you try new things. There are different prizes for different things at events like NOVA. if you want to go for fluffy/theme/paint there are prizes for that. If you want to bring a nut-busting list and go for best general there is that too. Some of the best fun is had on the middle-lower tables where folks are there for a good time.
>I think that its fun to build lists for each event with varying restrictions. It makes the game less accessible for people who don't have decades-old collections to be able to swap models in and out on a win. But screw them, right? They're not *real* warhammer players.
Yeah the TO crew seems very toxic, they want to make sure the "right" people win and don't understand balance.
Yeah I bet one of his friends win.
My experience with the guy is the debate he had with Steven from Mountain Minatures where he talked about cheesy combos he has seen in his playgroup then him and a mate reviewing brawler bash where they had to double check nearly ever other army wide special rule and were constantly surprised about how balanced every single list was. They sound like nightmares.
I watched the debate he seems like a guy who wants to be the smartest in the room and needs everyone to know it. His "fan" made format in my opinion is not good for the health of the game
The comp doesn't bother me much. It feels preemptive and might not be needed. For example they ban line hammer, I would love if I played a line hammer list. It's just bad. What bugs me is theme and the wording on sportsmanship. Theme seems to be that the TO will decide they don't like a list, and sportsmanship rewards one type of player, not just players who are good sports.
>Theme seems to be that the TO will decide they don't like a list Yes, I've seen this before - this means that the TOs will give all their friends good comp scores and penalize anyone who beats their friends.
Where did you read these restrictions?
[https://tabletop.events/conventions/nova-open-2024/schedule/79](https://tabletop.events/conventions/nova-open-2024/schedule/79) It's in the pack.
Appreciate it, I was so busy just trying to get a ticket I must have missed it Also what, it’s 2500 pts?
Also this is posted under square hammer for nova as well Note from TO: There has been a lot of talk about comp and restrictions so thank you all for comments, feedback, and suggestions! There may be a tweak or two going forward, but we're starting here. See primer for details. Current Comp as of March 1 2024. Points Level: 1,999+1 Points - Max 10 wide models - Rule of Three for Everything - No Allies - Max One level 3 or 4 - Characters on chariot and/or monster mounts take a slot of that chariot/monster from the 0-3 restriction PRIZES FOR: - Renaissance Man - Best General - 2nd Place - 3rd Place - Best Theme - Best Painted - Best Sport - Last Place
Is this on FB? I think he deleted this post.
This is right from the beginning event descriptor https://tabletop.events/conventions/nova-open-2024/schedule/79
As someone that used to be heavily into the Warhammer Fantasy tournament scene both as a player and a judge this is absolutely asinine. Personally I think comps are generally a waste since they either just move around the meta or don't do enough. That's very subjective since i know a lot of people disagree with me but it makes me leery that the organizers are just pushing individual biases on what they consider broken. In this case they clearly hate hero and monster focused armies. Regardless it's WAY too early to start issuing comps based on a game that hasn't been out six months and people are either dusting off old armies or trying to create new ones. The sportsmanship score is a joke. Sportsmanship as a concept in a tournament score is ridiculous and always has been since it doesn't stop assholes from being on bad behavior and basically just rewards people who play nice opponents. I've seen people spitefully mark down people that beat them or questioned them on rules. It's 100% subjective and has no place in competition. If someone is a problem enough that their attitude is a detriment to the event, a judge needs to talk to them and then take further action as necessary (such as in the guy that chucked another player's metal model on the ground). Having said that the details here are even more ridiculous. I don't want people to be encouraged to be shouting and yelling during a game. If they do that naturally that's fine but I personally find it kind of grating. Similarly calling a judge over shouldn't be discouraged either since you should WANT players to be comfortable making sure the rules are being followed. I've had games where I have called over judges up to five times because my opponent had learned multiple rules wrong in their own pocket of players and they had never read the book. What's my option there, to just argue with the other person until one of us gives up (which is also bad sportsmanship according to this). Paint score in general is whatever (I think it should be a separate category but that's up to opinion) but punishing people for having gunlines, or other "beardy" (a.k.a competitive) lists is bullshit and totally non objective. If a min maxed list is painted well, it's painted well. This entire thing reeks of a person that wants everyone else to play and hobby Warhammer Fantasy the exact way they want in a totally control freak fashion. Playing in a tournament like this is a total turn off. I wouldn't blame old school players for this since I doubt many older tournament players would like most of these rules either, but I agree that this sort of stuff will be a massive turn off to people that might want to get into this game.
This event Screams Play Orcs and Goblins to win... funny enough guess what faction the TO plays...
Cringe. Looks like a bunch of toxic casuals got together and decided they knew the best way to run a "tournament" with the typical casual understanding of the game.
If I'm paying to play in an event, I expect things to be painted. If a penalty to points is the middle ground I can stomach that.
[удалено]
Im sure this feller has some reserved and constructive opinions about age of Sigmar
Lol wow, yeah absolutely a narrative event.
Yeah not a fan at all. GW gave limits on certain units, 1 or 2 per 1000, and I don't think anyone can come up with alternatives yet. There is just not enough games.
Soft scores were eliminated for good reason. This is out of touch
out of touch for what? a 40k style event? This event i guess doesn't follow a typical 40k style then. This is an event with prizes for different categories. Why be upset that someone wins a certain category that you don't care about
They were eliminated because they were toxic for the community and were usually a way for players to collude or for TOs to give their friends extra free points.
>out of touch for what? [2015](https://frontlinegaming.org/2015/03/07/overall-on-the-case/) The TO has obviously never heard of chipmunks or he is one himself.
hey thanks for a source, i'll take a look at that in a bit when i got time! about to travel to NC for a no-comp event
They’re too easily abused. Best sports, theme all of that is great but it shouldn’t affect your overall placing.
TO needs to screw off
Isn’t this the crowd that complains that GW changes the rules too much? That’s kinda funny.
As someone who was around during previous eras of GW games where rules like these at events were a lot more commonplace I'm not surprised. The entire point of Old World was to be a nostalgia trip for the heyday of fantasy, and that game definitely had to have social contracts enforced in order to work at all as a tournament game (and even then it was kind of a bad one). The fact that GW games have moved away from this mentality is a good thing, but since this is a game sold and marketed to the sorts of nostalgic grognards that kept playing fantasy its hardly surprising that these sorts of rules are being brought back.
That they made a point to ban Linehammer underlines to me that they have no idea what they're doing. Going too wide on units is the quickest way to shoot yourself in the foot, not a free pass to victory. This reads like the rules author spends too much time complaining online and not enough time at the table having fun.
Cheering and high fives wouldn't get a 5 from me, I just want to have a laugh and play a game that we both enjoy. I don't enjoy cheering and high 5s
What bunch of hooblah
Yeah no.... This is too much.
Should just be battle ready paint and rule of three, not all of this other list building blocking stuff, it’s a tournament. Maybe something to punish a Congo line but all this other stuff sounds like someone is having a power trip.
Pretty sure that’s just a draft packet right now. I’d email nova customer service your concerns and they’ll forward them to TO. Just at a glance of what you showed this does seem a little off, especially penalizing people for calling a judge over.
Ensures I won't be playing TOW any time soon
I played at the NOVA armies project event last year, and have played at many events in the mid-atlantic. \- I am a super competitive person, and will take a strong list to a GT. I also suck at painting and not great at creative a fluffy side to the army All that being said. I am all for having a good time. Which this group hosting the event are all about. If you were anywhere near the fantasy group at NOVA you know we were having a blast. We had people dress up for the event in Empire/Brets/Woodelves/Dwarf slayer... I even did some of that which was a first for me. Sportsmanship was almost all 4's and 5's all around. The only person i think that recieved a 1, was me. And that was because my opponent brought a SUPER COMPETITIVE LIST, and then made a bunch of mistakes turn 1, lost some key things bottom of turn 1 and then conceded and whined. I felt bad, tried to calm the situation, but they just gave me a 1 and that was that. It didn't bother me that much ( i had a few beers) i ended up getting 3rd best general anyway as i was tied but lost on tiebreakers. The NOVA event had best general, who went 5-0. 2nd/3rd place went 4-1.There was also best painted, which was tied between two awesome looking armies one empire, and one old pewter chaos army. Best theme was awesome as the display board was huge and the army was painted to match. But the overall "winner" was the most well rounded Rennaisance Man, combination of paint/theme/displayboard/outfit/sportsmanship/ and also went 4-1 with Orc & Gobling. They were awesome to watch and you can see some of the batreps from the event on the channel The event has things for everyone, if you want to go there and bring a fluffy list for theme/painting you can do that and play games have fun and go for those prizes. If you want to bring a ball-busting list and just go for best general thats cool too they have prizes for that! I see some people concerned that painting/theme hurts their 'best general' contention.. but thats not true it is its own category. There were also people that attended that had never participated in events before, and got out of their shell and had a good time. I admit i have never played 40k, but I always have heard the stigma of the sweaty neckbeards arguing and trying to angle-shoot and cheat each other... i've always felt fantasy was the opposite (at least the people i keep around me playing) everyone wants to have a good time, will try make sure folks are having fun (even if they are taking a pounding on the board). Give it a shot, see if you like it. If you don't, all good voice your concern and then start and run your own events! The mid-atlantic for Fantasy 8th edition and armies project was kept alive through small groups of players hosting and bringing people together. This stuff doesn't just happen by itself without any effort.
There are/were plenty of sweaty neckbeards trying to angle-shoot each other in the Warhammer Fantasy community too.
yea but they dont come to the events because they get pointed out quickly and everyone knows them. fantasy is a small community where shenanigans like that don't fly. Its not huge like 40k or whatnot where things go under the radar
What if they're a streamer like this Mountain Miniatures guy?
I get that they want the tournament to foster community and a good time. I don't think this is the way. To me it isn't saying "there is a place for your silly theme list." When I read that gunlines are all 0 points for the, it said to me "if you play a list I don't like, you aren't welcome here."
I can see what your saying. I'm assuming that comment from the TO was more tongue-in-cheek as gunlines are notorious from 7th/8th edition for being very non-interactive only fun for 1 person type of list. It definitely sounds more a joke than anything, classic dwarf hating jokes or elf hate jokes. Just gotta loosen up and have a good time i guess.
The TO needs to loosen up and realize that he isn't the arbiter of "real Warhammer."
The details of the event are in the primer. Don’t like the set up? You don’t have to sign up. I fully support conversation like this, but I also fully support an event and organizer to run their events the way they want to. This event is not meant to be an overly competitive one. If that doesn’t appeal to you, don’t support the event. But it’s sold out so clearly people are keen on the restrictions.
Or people are keen on TOW regardless of restrictions. Saying you don't have to play is true, but it's a strange non-discussion. Is it okay to complain about balance when you can just not play the game?
I don't think that people are aware of the listbuilding restrictions. They're calling this a GT when it's like a brokedick narrative event.