by Sandwyrm
Here's the info everyone's looking for on the Adepticon Championship missions for last Friday's preliminary rounds.
I don't know what the missions for Sunday's finals were, as I wasn't playing in it.
From the perspective of someone who was there, I thought that these missions were much better than those in the primer pack that was released for testing. It's obvious that many tweaks were made to try and make things less confusing for everyone.
But... the missions were still confusing. I don't think anyone in the hall fully understood every objective for every round. I had opponents mis-read objectives, and I in turn misread an objective in mission 2 that helped to cost me a game. More than once, the TO had to get on the loud speaker and correct common misunderstandings.
Verdict: Having 3 simultaneous win conditions is just an inherently flawed system. I much prefer to have one condition with 2-3 tiebreakers. The competition should be about play, not reading comprehension and memory. I don't think the tourney was a failure as a result, but I don't want to see this system used again either.
Anyway, here's the info:
Monday, April 4, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Recent Favorites
-
by SandWyrm Long-time back40K readers may remember the set-back Chimeras I converted last July for the 'Ard Boyz Semi-Finals. I ...
-
by SandWyrm It's called 'Armored Warfare', and it concentrates on modern armor . Including MBTs, IFVs, etc. Looks as thoug...
-
by: CaulynDarr (This is my first time posting here as a guest author. ) I really was done talking about GW and their games. At least f...
-
by SandWyrm Wow! Has it really been a month since I last wrote a major post? Sheesh! You can blame (over)work for the hiatus. For a good ...
-
by: farmpunk I wanted to be early to spot the Inquisition PDF's. I wanted to see if my hunches were right. ok, I wanted to see WHICH...
-
by SandWyrm 40K: "Hi, my name is 40K, and I have a problem." Players: "Hi 40K!" 40K: "I'm, I'm....
All-Time Favorites
-
by SandWyrm Love your blog and I love your articles about painting and color theory. It's a unique thing your blog has to offer so giv...
-
by SandWyrm It's called 'Armored Warfare', and it concentrates on modern armor . Including MBTs, IFVs, etc. Looks as thoug...
-
by Sandwyrm Battlefront's John Paul has promised to 'think about' listened to their fans and compromised on their BF-on...
-
By Spaguatyrine So here is my shameless plug of me and Stelek at Nova. Man look at that sexy beast!!!! On the right of course!!! Want...
-
By Spaguatyrine So for years now I have read and heard about how broken Space Marines are and how GW..
-
By TheGraveMind So I decided I'm going to take a week or two off of gaming, and work on my army looks. For starters I have two drop p...
-
by SandWyrm Long-time back40K readers may remember the set-back Chimeras I converted last July for the 'Ard Boyz Semi-Finals. I ...
Thanks Sandy :).
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing these! Gonna link up to them in our forums.
ReplyDeleteAgree - the format seems overly complex. A single win condition, with layers of tie-breaker makes so much more sense.
ReplyDeleteI think that the Adepticon guys were trying their best to innovate and not just copy the NOVA format for their event. Which I can understand to a degree. But Mike's work is hard to top. :)
ReplyDeleteMike's is good, but Adepticon's system is better, IMO. The scenarios could have used just a little more editing and polish, but multiple simultaneous objectives is much more interesting. I had no issues understanding any of the objectives. I was very happy with the final ones they made, which corrected multiple issues with the primer scenarios.
ReplyDelete