What are common tournament restrictions with the current 40k edition?

[Proiteus]

This edition of 40k is a lot more crazier in standard games then any before it. Lords Of War, Formations even Forgeworld units and lists are becoming common place in standard 40k, which can lead to some unbalanced games. Because of this most tournaments are being forced to put in place restrictions to keep tournaments balanced and enjoyable for all attendees. Unbound of course is always banned, even at GW's own Throne Of Skulls.

But the challenge is finding the right level of restrictions, as players can be put off by restrictions as much as the idea of fighting an Eldar Titan or 1000pt C'tan.

So what restrictions have the non-gw tournaments you've attended had in place and what did you think of them?

[Charistoph]

At my LGS, we sometimes used the Bay Area Open (http://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/bay-area-open-2014/bao-tournament-format/)'s format. We sometimes also have 1000 points tournaments that only require 3 Elites, Fast Attack, or Heavy Support. We also have doubles where both provide 1000 points each, and have 1 HQ and 1 Troop requirement.

In all cases, they usually limit them to 2 Detachment Battle-Forged for "standard"-sized games.

I haven't kept up with them in a while, and they don't post their calender, though.

[DarkLink]

The only real standard restriction is to limit you to two detachments, which generally cannot be duplicates. That's really about it.

[jeffersonian000]

The "Two Source" limit seems to be the most common, followed by specific point limits. 1500 and 1850 are still pretty standard most places.

SJ

[Denzark]

I go to one organised by a regular ToS player. His club restrict codexes allying with their parent codex. So no Chaos/Black Legion. I think this is to stop spam ie 4 Heldrakes, 4 Tau suits etc.

[jeffersonian000]

I go to one organised by a regular ToS player. His club restrict codexes allying with their parent codex. So no Chaos/Black Legion. I think this is to stop spam ie 4 Heldrakes, 4 Tau suits etc.

What about supplements that specifically state they can Allie with their faction's main codex? Kind if seems a but too arbitrary to me.

SJ

[Charistoph]

I go to one organised by a regular ToS player. His club restrict codexes allying with their parent codex. So no Chaos/Black Legion. I think this is to stop spam ie 4 Heldrakes, 4 Tau suits etc.

So, in other words, no two Detachments from the same Faction. For Ally rules affect not just those of Allied Detachments, but the relationship between any two detachments, even Formations.

So, technically, this means that Space Marines cannot take Stormwing. Very interesting...

[Cactus]

In my area, the only restrictions are points and no Forgeworld. You can use Forgeworld models as proxies for models in a Games Workshop codex but no special rules.

Our best players that usually win the tournys are battle forged armies that come straight out of the codex.

[DarkLink]

What you'll find is that the best players are the best players, and will tend to win regardless of what sort of army comp rules are in place.

[SephIOM]

My local Tournie is no limitations. 2k pts. going to be a scary cheesy year this year. :P

[Erik Setzer]

So, in other words, no two Detachments from the same Faction.

That would stop Imperial armies from allying with each other - i.e. Space Marines and Imperial Guard - because they're all in one single faction now.

[Path Walker]

That would stop Imperial armies from allying with each other - i.e. Space Marines and Imperial Guard - because they're all in one single faction now.

No they're not

[40kGamer]

In my area there have been quite a few restrictions:

1. No 30k armies and no FW army lists
2. FW LOW models have to be preapproved
3. No unbound
4. No double FOC
5. Some events limit the Warp Charge Dice pool to prevent mass summoning

If a good player decides to make a serious effort of winning they will simply choose their army list from whatever these restrictions make artificially better for that event. So IMO all these limits do is change which army performs better in that tournament meta. Short of mass limitations there will always be top tier armies.

[Erik Setzer]

Since 7th, I've been in two tournaments. One was 1000 points Unbound, it was meant to be themed armies, but a lot of people opted to get into the tournament without a themed list, meh.

The other was at a convention, it was 1850 points, one Primary Detachment and one Allied Detachment. The types of lists people were able to make were... amusing, to say the least.

There was another tournament a few weeks ago, I missed out on it, but it had a special detachment (1-2 HQ, 1-3 Elites, 2-6 Troops, 1-3 Fast Attack, 1-3 Heavy Support, 0-1 Fortification). 1750 points, did allow Forge World if you had the rules. It was a "club" tournament (but had a lot of participants), and no one had an issue with the detachment (which, yes, did have a minimum of at least one of every slot). Seemed to have worked out well. But mind you, that club has a history of coming up with unique premises for tournaments and rolling with them (and I love them for it).

Next weekend is a 1500 point Unbound tournament titled "War is Not Fair." I'm pretty sure I won't be attending, and I've already seen some of what will be out there. It's going to get insane.

So basically, I've seen all kinds of tournaments. Couple of Unbound, one with specialized rules, one with more basic rules (but still saw two Stompas, plenty of Knights, a Baneblade, and a Warhound Titan out there). People had fun with all of them. I think it's important to say what type of tournament it's meant to be ahead of time and enforce that, though. The Unbound tournament that was supposed to be themed armies saw some seriously unthemed lists tearing things up, and it wasn't as fun for those of us who assembled and painting 1000 points to be something interesting and unique.

- - - Updated - - -


No they're not

Depending on how you want to read it, they are... and people can be tricky with that. While the different types of Imperials are described as "Factions," the "Armies of the Imperium" as a whole are also referred to as a "Faction."

Better not to use the word "faction" for making army restrictions.

[Path Walker]

Depending on how you want to read it, they are... and people can be tricky with that. While the different types of Imperials are described as "Factions," the "Armies of the Imperium" as a whole are also referred to as a "Faction."

Better not to use the word "faction" for making army restrictions.


The word Faction is clearly defined to be from one Codex or Codex Supplement

[40kGamer]

The word Faction is clearly defined to be from one Codex or Codex Supplement

This is how it is interpreted in my area. Space Wolves (or whomever) are a faction and can therefore ally with IG as a separate faction. IIRC the main rulebook even provides faction symbols somewhere which depicts this. The only place I remember all Imperials lumped together was on the ally matrix for simplification. In theory it would prevent Tau from allying with Farsight Enclaves as they are the same faction. Although local tournaments are still allowing this to happen as it is specifically written into the Farsight supplement.

[Path Walker]

This is how it is interpreted in my area. Space Wolves (or whomever) are a faction and can therefore ally with IG as a separate faction. IIRC the main rulebook even provides faction symbols somewhere which depicts this. The only place I remember all Imperials lumped together was on the ally matrix for simplification. In theory it would prevent Tau from allying with Farsight Enclaves as they are the same faction. Although local tournaments are still allowing this to happen as it is specifically written into the Farsight supplement.

You can have as many Detachments as you like in an army now, the restriction for Allied Detachments is that they're from different factions, you can still include Farsight in another Detachment like CAD, with your main army being a CAD from the Tau.

[sfshilo]

Two detachments max
No LOW
FW allowed with book
1500-2000 points
For doubles the standard CAD. For singles, CAD or equivalent.

[40kGamer]

You can have as many Detachments as you like in an army now, the restriction for Allied Detachments is that they're from different factions, you can still include Farsight in another Detachment like CAD, with your main army being a CAD from the Tau.

That is a very nice feature of 7th! Local tournaments are still restricting armies to one CAD atm but still allowing the Tau/Farsight 'alliance' to stand from 6th. One thing is for sure with all of today's rules and restrictions and that is that weirdness abounds!

[Path Walker]

I love the wierdness this edition lets you use, its open to abuse, but then, the old system was too.

Abuse happens because people are people, no system worth playing will ever get rid of that.

My local tournament/league has a player using Wave Serpents and the Adamantine Lance Formation, my solution is simple, I don't play in that nonsense.

[Erik Setzer]

I love the wierdness this edition lets you use, its open to abuse, but then, the old system was too.

I'm all for the "weirdness" but I have to admit, I'm pretty firm on the Allies Matrix rules when I play against someone, whether Unbound or Battle-Forged. If you want to mix Blood Angels Death Company with Tau battlesuits, or Dark Eldar (with lances) with Imperial Guard mechanized units (tanks and Chimeras), then yeah, I'm going to hold to the rules about deployment and rolling if they get too close. You want to mix and match, that's cool, but use the restriction that's meant to somewhat balance it. I'm not a hypocrite, either, I do it when I mix Imperials with Orks (I have Blood Axes, and they used to even have IG in their army list).

[Path Walker]

Well yes, that all depends though, I know recently I played against 2 kids using Nids, Imperial Knights and Chaos Daemons, they deployed all together, but I let it slide, you know, because they were 10 years old.

[Erik Setzer]

Well yes, that all depends though, I know recently I played against 2 kids using Nids, Imperial Knights and Chaos Daemons, they deployed all together, but I let it slide, you know, because they were 10 years old.

Well, with really young kids, sure, you let it slide, and gradually over time as they play more and also show more maturity, you let them know about those things (so they don't run into issues with it over time because they've "always played it this way," which I hear as an excuse for a lot of incorrectly played stuff, i.e. people deploying 6" out of a vehicle without taking difficult terrain tests).

People 18 and up? Yeah, let's play with the rules to keep it fair. Unless we're agreeing to do some kind of special fun game. Then we can muck around with the rules.

I love tournaments, but that's the kind of stuff that reminds me why I love one-off games (or campaigns) with friendly people.

[Camden Poole]

I believe it says in the rule book that parent codices can't ally with themselves or their supplements. The store I play at allows only one detachment and just started allowing formations, but my TO is taking his time with 7th ed.

[Mr Mystery]

It's all horses for courses.

Me, I'm not terribly keen on non-rulebook restrictions on my list, so I don't play games with them (main reason I tend to go for odd armies, and seem to fall foul of such restrictions more often than not).

Which means in turn, I have to accept that by embracing anything goes, anything goes. The above example of the kids? Bring it on. As an experienced gamer, I see it as my responsibility/privilege to help keep newcomers enthused and enjoying the game. If that means slightly odd match ups, or playing several hundred points down? So be it. If it means knocking some of the spikier edges off my armies so my opponent doesn't get disheartened, or fall foul of believing it was the list rather than skill with said list that defeated them, so be it.

The good thing about Tournaments? There is no standard, and to my mind nor should there be, not for a hobby wargame. Yes it makes sense from a TO point of view to stick to a common points limit, but that's as far as I would consider standardisation to make sense. With greater variety, comes greater challenge, and a wider pool of potential players.

Some might like 'Ard Boyz type play, where it's apparently all about bringing your best. Others might prefer a weekend of narrative gaming with more restricted lists which progress in size. And there's everything in between, and more extreme settings.

It's a hobby after all, and that aspect should be embraced. For every 'no scratchbuild' rule intended to prevent modelling for advantage, there will be gamers who feel they can't take part in your event because their army comprises some really nice scratch built stuff. For every 'comp', there's someone out there who will still game that system as all you do is shift what would be considered beardy.

Best thing? The community is pretty much self-policing. Nobody enjoys regular games against a powergamer, and powergaming is fair looked down upon as a general rule (though the exact definition of powergaming is gloriously mutable!)

[Denzark]

What about supplements that specifically state they can Allie with their faction's main codex? Kind if seems a but too arbitrary to me.

SJ

Yeah, just to stop bringing in multiple units. I think this originated before 7th tbh.


So, in other words, no two Detachments from the same Faction. For Ally rules affect not just those of Allied Detachments, but the relationship between any two detachments, even Formations.

So, technically, this means that Space Marines cannot take Stormwing. Very interesting...

I can't remember about dataslates. It wasn't about factions per se. It was about were a publication relies on a main codex and only has 1 or 2 entries of its own. To stop you using them together to get 4 of one unit whereas with one codex you would only get 3. Like I said, something from 6th.

They also restricted some of the bigger stronghold assault nastiness.

[JMichael]

A local GW store did have a single elimination 2,000pt Battle-Forged, no Lords of War tournament (Knights were allowed as they are not LoW). That was the only restriction. We played Maelstrom missions and each round was the same mission for everyone.
I played Eldar and won the event, surprisingly no Knights showed up in the tournament.

[Denzark]

I played Eldar and won the event, surprisingly no Knights showed up in the tournament - I didn't think anyone knew in advance about my 6 Wave Serpents.

Here, fixed that for you.

[JMichael]

Here, fixed that for you.

Heh!

[40kGamer]

Here, fixed that for you.

lol! You really only need 3 WS + some MSU bikes to ruin the day for the majority of other builds. 6 is just overkill. :p

[Aaron S. Winberry]

Our standard is usually like 6th ed. no real restrictions save for super heavys and the allied chart. our thing is if you can afford it in your list then you're giving up somewhere else

[JMichael]

lol! You really only need 3 WS + some MSU bikes to ruin the day for the majority of other builds. 6 is just overkill. :p

What's 'need' got to do with it! heh!
I think I actually only brought 5 Wave Serpents. Mostly to deal with horde armies and flyers.

- - - Updated - - -

Back on topic a bit.
I have been bringing Fortifications in my tournament lists, mostly Vengeance Weapon Batteries as they scoring units. Deploy them within 3" of one of more objectives and let my army grab the others.
Many people have been crying foul on this, mostly because they are unaware that Buildings are scoring.
So there is talk of not allowing Buildings in future tournaments at some of our local stores.

[Charistoph]

I believe it says in the rule book that parent codices can't ally with themselves or their supplements. The store I play at allows only one detachment and just started allowing formations, but my TO is taking his time with 7th ed.

It was that in 6th. 7th is different. The Allied Detachment is a specific FOC that is not allowed to be the same Faction/Codex/Space Marine Trait as the Primary Detachment (i.e. the Warlord's, whatever their FOC is).

In 7th, you can have any number of Detachments of any type and any size (provided House Rules do not change this), and they can be from any Faction. The only exceptions to this are like the Allied Detachment, they specifically state that they cannot be the same as the Primary.

*This of course assumes that there aren't other factors in play, like tournament restrictions.



I can't remember about dataslates. It wasn't about factions per se. It was about were a publication relies on a main codex and only has 1 or 2 entries of its own. To stop you using them together to get 4 of one unit whereas with one codex you would only get 3. Like I said, something from 6th.

Formations all rely on a codex to provide their units, doesn't matter if they come from Dataslates, Supplement, or Codex. They are Detachments in their own right, and as such rely on the Ally rules to define their relationship with other Detachments, even the codex they glean their units from.

When it comes to this, the only difference between a Formation and a Role Detachment like Combined Arms or Allied, is the first is defined by the specific units it carries and the second is defined by the Roles it carries.

[jeffersonian000]

What's 'need' got to do with it! heh!
I think I actually only brought 5 Wave Serpents. Mostly to deal with horde armies and flyers.

- - - Updated - - -

Back on topic a bit.
I have been bringing Fortifications in my tournament lists, mostly Vengeance Weapon Batteries as they scoring units. Deploy them within 3" of one of more objectives and let my army grab the others.
Many people have been crying foul on this, mostly because they are unaware that Buildings are scoring.
So there is talk of not allowing Buildings in future tournaments at some of our local stores.

What makes you think Buildings score? Buildings aren't units, and can change hands simply by being occupied by an opposing unit.

SJ

[ShadowcatX]

What makes you think Buildings score? Buildings aren't units, and can change hands simply by being occupied by an opposing unit.

SJ

Probably the fact that the fortifications book says that buildings you purchase count as claimed buildings and claimed buildings score, but that's just my guess. And how do you occupy a vengeance weapon battery?

[Pssyche]

This argument has been had before and he's right.

[SnakeChisler]

We've a few different 1's

One was 1000 no allies no formations no fortifications

1500 anything that's allowed was last years area CGN format

1750 main force plus 1 ally which can be a Legion of the damned, inquisition assassins, Imperial Knight (Max 1) etc no fortifications & allies had some restrictions can't remember the exact wording but it stopped Tau Farsight Allying with Tau Empire.

The best players were on the top tables at all 3 events the main difference was the total nosedive in entries for the CGN anything goes tourney as after year before people were reluctant to enter due to the amount of non games that happened where people with average normal armies were just getting wiped out in couple of turns.

I'm unsure of whats happening in the future a load of people have moved off 40k who used to be involved and these were tail end of 6th with only the 1750 1 being in 7th.

The general feeling in our club is a lack of willingness to engage in mass spending to merely revamp their armies to not get rolled over in a mini Apocalypse style showdown and 6th ally shenanigans really killed the game for a lot of people as far as competitive play goes.

I think the future has to be in a lot more diversity in the type / scope of Tournaments that are run so that we have a full range of units allowed in 1 system running alongside restricted or escalating single codex competitions for those who aren't into the latest big toys.

The biggest change we will see tho is the adoption of escalating missions everyone I've talked to wants this incorporated into the competition scoring and are looking at the excellent work that the ForgeTheNarrative guys have done for inspiration (or just lifting and using).

[silashand]

I have heard the Highlander format (see: http://www.frontlinegaming.org/las-vegas-open-hotel-booking/las-vegas-open-2015-warhammer-40k-highlander-tournament/) seems to be catching on in places. It kinda screws some armies more than others, but seems fun in general. Marines are generally best off because of their force org tricks they can pull (combat squads, etc.) and those armies who have good basic troops are a little more advantaged, but it does limit the spam potential somewhat. Personally I haven't played it, but it might be fun to try.

[terminus]

I find it hilarious that anyone genuinely believes a bunch of local untested home-brewed house rules (which is what tournament "restrictions" amount to being) are capable of making this train-wreck of a game anything resembling "balanced".

[40kGamer]

I find it hilarious that anyone genuinely believes a bunch of local untested home-brewed house rules (which is what tournament "restrictions" amount to being) are capable of making this train-wreck of a game anything resembling "balanced".

Minus a massive rewrite they can't, but they do unbalance it in new and unusual ways which has an entertainment value all of its own!

[Cactus]

I find it hilarious that anyone genuinely believes a bunch of local untested home-brewed house rules (which is what tournament "restrictions" amount to being) are capable of making this train-wreck of a game anything resembling "balanced".

Man, you're a bit of sunshine.

The points of your argument:

1. Local - Sure.
2. Untested - The rule changes may or may not be tested. These changes likely come about because there have been a lot of games with predictable results.
3. Home-brewed - In the Internet age, it's hard to believe that most tournament rules are exclusively developed without outside influence, especially since the RTs are so influential on LGSs tournaments.
4. House-rules - Sure. Even the main rule book encourages playing how you enjoy playing the game.

5. Train-wreck - That's just one opinion. In my LGS, and every LGS I've visited, 40k is by far and away the biggest seller and most played miniature game on the shelf.
6. "Balanced" - Every game is unbalanced, even chess when black gets to go first.

[SnakeChisler]

The current rule set is just a set of tools to create the game you want

At home we play Maelstrom with a load of what would be regarded as restrictions, the games pretty close and good fun with enough randomness to get you out of your cozy chair.

If we had open season on Fortifications, Lords of War, Multiple CAD, Forge World, unlimited formations, Super Heavy's we'd have a very different game not suited to what we as group want.

The rulebook allows for all the above but if you want to play/construct a game scenario round it you need to be doing it with like minded players with the missions that suit otherwise your in to processional match ups where 1 guy throws lots of dice and the other does nothing more than remove models with little to no engagement.

The biggest issue Tournaments have is finding out who their target audience is the one size fits all just doesn't work