 |
| Big Events such as Lock and Load feature Divide and Conquer |
My idea for a variant tournament style is called Interdiction.
An Interdiction delays or disrupts an enemy. In Star Wars, the Interdictors had this tech that pulled ships flying past them out of hyperspace. In a Steamroller environment, an Interdiction is when your opponent tells you you CAN'T play with a list.
Imagine this. You and your opponent each brings three lists. The lists are character restricted, so each feature a different warcaster/warlock and the lists feature different support characters. You will only see Epic Eiryss in one of three of their lists. They will only see Gormand di Wulfe in only one of your lists.
Menite players will only have the Covenant of Menoth in one of their lists.
Here's where the Interdiction comes in.
Each player denies their opponent from playing one of their lists, leaving them with two lists to choose from to play.
The idea is that the end result creates a scenario where players are trying to build three lists they can play with in a variety of situations rather than just using certain lists to create hard counters that they use when playing specific factions.
I think a necessary restriction is to limit the number of times a list can be denied. So say in a four round event, any one list can only be struck twice.
What do you think? Would you enjoy this style of event?
It sounds cool enough, but do you really think
ReplyDelete"other people telling me I'm not aloud to play XYZ"
can ever get off the ground?
- Went Aqwer
I would totally play that type of event!
ReplyDeleteAny particular reason, Jestor?
ReplyDeleteAnd to the anonymous poster whose post was eaten by the ether, I'm asking for feedback because I'm wondering what people feel and think about the variant. The idea is to encourage more versatile list building while still allowing for power builds. If you can build a set of three lists where people can identify different threats in different places, then you'll be more likely to be able to choose what you like in later rounds.
I like the idea. I am undecided on how the limit on striking would work best - part of me thinks that all lists must be struck at least once before any can be struck twice, but you version sounds like it should work fine.
ReplyDeleteFWIW - I would definitely play in an event like that. I think it would force people to explore something other than their normal force selection.
Garou's point is a good first start. Forcing people out of thier comfort zone is very important. It really helps build the community of players that wants to better thier game.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things I hate about certain armies is there are certain things you just can not handle. For instance, if you are playing Gators, facing off against a high armor army is a much bigger uphill challenge then against something that is shooting heavy, or magic heavy or what have you.
This type of format creates less terrible match ups, I think. Now, that's all assumption. I'm for it!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey Felix! How about this for an idea:
ReplyDeleteAll players must build a list for each of the match ups during the tournament. 4 games = 4 different lists.
Each opponent can "interdict" one list for each match up, and once a list is played it's removed from rotation, giving everyone a diminishing pool of available lists.
Now you've created an event where everyone will get to play their favorite list once, and is forced to consider whether to "interdict" their opponents scary list early, or leave it until later. I think it adds a level of meta-gaming, escalation, and risk management to the tournament that doesn't exist normally.
Eventually, everyone gets to play their favorite list (just like in your thoughts above), but it also demands players to to move outside their comfort zone for almost every game.
And it will probably drive some folks to add some new stuff to their forces as well.
I think my point in the third paragraph is a bit unclear. I think players will consider all sorts of options with regard to which list to interdict.
DeleteIf you know a player has a particular style you can interdict a list that complements that style now, and make it someone else's problem...
Unfortunately, if you both play well and are matched up again, that someone could be you...
Cliff, your way adds a level of complexity. It sounds like players will know their pairings in advance and will make those decisions based on pairings. I mean, why should I save interdicting someone's list for later? Players never play the same people twice in a Steamroller unless something wonky happens with the matchups.
ReplyDeleteInterdiction is just going to happen on a player v. player matchup, I think.
I guess I was thinking Swiss-style tournament, where the winners play winners and there is a chance of facing the same opponent a second time.
DeleteMore than anything I do like your idea for the "interdiction" rule, and within the framework of what you set out in your blog above, I like the limitations you put forward (lists can only be interdicted twice and then are always eligible for play.)