Astronomi-con to allow Lords of War.... probably.

astro devs wrote:Mike Major 3:29pm Jan 17
As regards Escalation...

WE NEED YOU – See the bold text below the explanation…

Well, Escalation is out and both Xian and I have read it thoroughly.

A module like this presents us with some decided quandaries and I’ll explain why.

1) At Astronomi-con our philosophy from the very earliest days was to ‘allow as much as possible’. Even at the start we allowed things NO ONE else would even consider. Forgeworld was standard when pretty much no other tournament allowed it. So were flyers. I don’t think I have even ever heard of another tournament that allowed VDR.

Strangely, despite a vast quantity of alarums and excursions – none of these things destroyed the event and, by and large, most players really found themselves glad that they were at the event. Where else would you find things like Malanthropes, Lightning Fighters, or even four legged sentinels or Imperial Guard riding elephants! (Yes it happened, I’m looking at you Peter Carlson ;-)

But the one thing we’ve never allowed has been Super Heavies. Up until escalation it has always been clear that these were out of scope of a ‘regular’ 40k game and were really the province of Big Frakkin Games, Floorhammer and what have you. We love stuff like that and have done it even longer than we’ve been doing Astro tournaments, but it has always had a separate and distinct home.

But now we have a fairly ‘official’ game expansion which pretty much says, “These things now ARE in scope”. It’s hard to argue with to say the least. So – there’s the first Quandry. It goes both with one of our core philosophies but against another – and does it ‘officially.’ Tough one.

2) Now, the second quandary. At Astro, we want people to have fun games. Can a game with a presence of one of these things in a player’s army be fun? We’ve had a Baneblade out there in the ‘Sink the Baneblade’ scenario since the very first Astro ever, but this is an entirely different kettle of fish. I’m sure some people can, and will, have these either in their armies or face them and still have fun. For others it will be a ‘deal breaker’. We’ve had emails from both sides of that fence – some eagerly asking when they can field their cool ‘Lords of War’ which, let’s face it, probably spend far too much time collecting dust on a shelf and others basically saying – “You allow those things, I ain’t coming.”

So – can games including a Lord of War BE fun? Obviously fun is different things to different people, but even so – can it happen? And will it happen enough? That’s Quandary 2.

3) Finally- Army comp, tournament points and other rules items. All thorny issues. It seems to me that taking even a single Lord of War would definitely involve a comp hit. I mean, it’s basically a whole mess of Heavy Support choices all rolled into one model and we penalize for those. What about the fact that a player facing one can get extra tournament points – something we don’t allow because it breaks our scoring format? Finally what about those Warlord traits? So – all the rules mess. That’s Quandary 3.

Now – how to solve these things…

Xian and I read the Escalation rules very carefully. We have answers for some of our questions – if we decide to allow these things. That decision hasn’t been made yet. And that’s why I’m writing, we’d like your help.

Xian sai d it perfectly – “You can’t math-hammer fun.” Great quote that. Oh we can sit and run numbers and percentages all day, but the real test is on the tabletop. Is playing with one of these monsters on a small table fun? Or is it just an exercise in utter pain and frustration?

So – here is what I am proposing – and as Organizer I’m asking a favor of all of you folks who have a stake in this – either for or against.

Xian and I are going to do some playtesting. He’s going to bring his newly completed Shadowsword out and I’m going to take a ‘standard’ army. We’ll play and see what transpires.

Then we’re going to flip and I’m going to bring a Baneblade against his non-Lord of War force. We’ll see how that goes.

Finally we’re going to hammer and tongs it with each of us bringing a superheavy.

We will be testing using Astro missions (they’re available on our website) and we will be adding in the following caveats:

a) The Lord of War will SUBTRACT a VP from its owner’s total for each 3 Hull Points it loses. This is essentially the flip side of the rule in the Escalation book where the player who does 3 Hull Points to an enemy LoW gains a VP. The reason for the subtraction is that it doesn’t break our metric of a maximum of 15 VPs per mission/player, we alr eady use this protocol for a couple other similar rules and, finally, it fits very well with the written fluff over the value of Lords of War in the Escalation book.

b) A Player FACING a Lord of War will get a single roll on the ‘Anti Lord of War Warlord table’. This is in ADDITION to his usual warlord trait. It is quite possible for both sides to have these rolls if each side has a LoW.

c) Other than that, Lords of War are played exactly as usual, D weapons and all etc. Note that each side may only ever have one Lord of War.

Note that if we allow these there will almost certainly be a comp hit as well, probably a significant one. But that is outside the scope of playtesting and having fun games.

Once Xian and I have played these games we will put up Battle Reports of them on the website.

Now the: WE NEED YOU! part.

Xian and I recognize that we are just two people with our own biases etc. We also have limited selection when it comes to armies and Lords of War. We also have jobs, lives etc. and limited time resources.

So – i f you feel strongly about Lords of War, either positively or negatively – we’d like to encourage you to help out here. Please play an Astro scenario (available on our website) with a Lord of War on one or both sides. Use 1500 point armies and the rules I mention above (the Lord of War costing VPs for losing hull points and the Opposing Warlord(s) getting rolls on the anti LoW Warlord traits in addition to their usual traits).

Play the game, see what happens. Remember that Lords of War are their own Force Org and aren’t scoring units (ever) although they are probably denial units in almost all circumstances. Most do not have ‘hands’ to pick up boxes etc. Report who won, who lost, what effect the large blasts and D weapons had etc.

And, most importantly – tell us if the game was FUN or not.

Because you can’t math-hammer fun.

Thanks folks!
Mike Major

Aegwymourn wrote:>.>

Honestly if they allow Escalation I won't be attending. I don't see how allowing D weapons into 1500 games is a good idea.

Rhaevyn wrote:well, the tranny you are forced to buy two upgrades, but yeah, i see where your going.  the Revenant though, has guns instead of hands IIRC.

astronomi_con wrote:
Mike Major 9:39am Feb 5
Hi folks,

At this point in time we're getting ready to open registration for Winnipeg and will follow shortly with some of the other events.

As such, we felt a final decision on this was needed. So here it is.

Short answer is - No Superheavy Vehicles (Lords of War) at regular Astronomi-con tournament events. Basically - the Escalation books is disallowed in its entirety.

Note that we are considering whether or not to run an event or two specifically to include Escalation type units - but it will be a separate event with different rules, assumptions etc.

The why at this point for those who have been following the various threads, should be pretty obvious. Basically, Lords of War result in very short and un-fun games. The one common factor in EVERY battle report thus far sent to us, publicly or privately, has been 'yeah, it can be done, but it sure as hell isn't very much fun'.

Lore Weaver wrote:I'm glad they made the correct choice.

All-in-all, it's easy for TO's to say, "No Lord of War" slot | Then specifically setup events that explicitly allow it.

Rhaevyn wrote:everyone bought into these... give us rules that actually work in a game and we will spend the money.