40k Team Tournament 2010 - Command Counter system

[Brian]

Hi everyone. We've reached the time of year when the specifics of the Team Tournament are starting to take shape. For the 2009 TT I was responsible for the drafting of the scenarios and the addition of the command counter system which, if you recall, replaced mulligans.

The purpose of this thread is to discuss only the future (or lack thereof) of the command counter system. This is not the place to discuss other aspects of the TT such as paint/theme judging, FAQ issues, etc.

I have an "upgraded" command counter system in mind which I will post about later this week. The upgraded system is a little easier to score and ties into team themes much better.

Before I post about that in greater detail I'd like to hear what the 2009 TT players thought about the command counter system. ( http://www.adepticon.org/09rules/0940Kteam.html )

As for my opinion: I thought it was a little clunky. It was hard to deal with at the judges' table because a decent number of sheets were coming back with command counters not adding up right. I thought it succeeded in making the games a little more fun by adding an extra tactical element that wasn't "game breaking" when used properly. It allowed players' uber-units to truly be uber-units by making them scoring or worth zero kill points or something. Everyone wants their uber-units to be completely bad-ass, right? Overall, my verdict at the end of the day was that the system worked fine and nobody had a huge problem with it.

As for the scoring it was pretty even right across the board. Out of a possible 32 points:

The average score was 16
The median score was 16
the most common score was....16

Those numbers are pretty much the same for teams finishing 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, and so on. In other words the teams at the bottom of the pile, on average, scored just as many points off command counters as the top-tier teams.

Nobody scored higher than 23 and nobody scored lower than 9.

So get your two cents in now. I'll talk more about what I have in mind for 2010 after reading some of the responses.

[muwhe]

Brian,

Feedback that I got from the weekend was the command counter system worked pretty well overall.

-Hank

[Ed]

I thought the command counter system was a welcome replacement to mulligans. My team had a specific approach to them (use them if they let out terms/LRs become scoring units, keep them otherwise), and I think it worked out well. I'm intrigued by your updated system and look forward to reading about it.

Ed

[Brian]

The updated system is still sort of forming in my head. I don't have anything written up for the TT staff to discuss yet.

My idea in a nutshell:

Instead of being given "command counters" as a tournament giveaway item each team receives 4 acrylic "special agent" tokens.

Each player brings a model that they will use as a special agent. I figure this is a good chance for teams to add to their theme because they will get to bring models that don't have to represent anything in the codex. Eldar players can bring bonesingers. Tyranids can bring Zoats. Orks can bring Goff Rokkerz. Alternatively players can bring models from other miniature lines or original scupts or conversions. If it fits your theme then bring John, Paul, George, and Ringo as agents. It doesn't matter as long as it fits on a 28mm base since it's essentially just serving as a marker.

On the tabletop (to avoid confusion) your special agent is identified by having the token next to it. Unimaginative or unprepared teams can simply use the token by itself if they don't have an appropriate model.

The agent is placed with a unit just like the command counters were. It imparts a perk to that unit just like the command counters did.

I haven't decided how I want to change the scoring. It can either be the same as last year or...

I'm even thinking about cutting the scoring altogether and making it more objective-based (bonus points for using units including agents to complete mission objectives.) If this is the case then agent death would be permanent. By "permanent" I mean if your agent dies you turn in your token to the judges and you don't get to use him anymore all day. It would be risky to put your agent on the table in round 1 so round 1 would have extra bonus points or something.

[WhiteRaven]

The command counter system I think gives a lot more flexibility to help lists be themed while providing an opportunity to become more competitive with that list in area's where it needed it.

For example, the scenarios where the command counter could be used to create an Extra Scoring unit, lists who don't have really rock hard units to be vanguard scoring options but still had solid units, could compete in objective based games a little better, yet still have a flexible list in other situations.

I like the special agent idea. But rather than Agent, perhaps Envoy is a better term. Someone who doesn't fight but inspires through presence. And the whole concept of getting creativity flowing for the Markers is a brilliant idea. (maybe even a shout out for best "Special Ops team" for the team that has the best markers)

The immediate downside I see to "killing" an agent would be management of who's is killed and who isn't. And then the enforcement of the lost asset so people aren't fudging that they have an agent when they don't. This could put a certain amount of strain on the organizer's time.

I think the risk/reward ratio can be tweaked to achieve the same seeming result though. Offer a smaller bonus effect with a bigger point penalty early rounds, with a bigger bonus effect and a smaller point penalty later rounds. Encourage people to play ballzy early and reward them for that fact (also creates better score seperation in the field for pairing).

Later,
WR

[YeezyMozart]

I think this is a awesome idea. I already have great Ideas for my agent and for the whole team. I also like Raven's idea for an award to best "Special Opps team". It is just another incentive to get more into the game and the modeling aspect.

As for the effects that these "Agents" could do I think the council should decide to make them even better. Instead of making a unit scoring or making it worth no VP's/ Kill points.

How about + 2 to it's reserve roll ? Or maybe even mess with a units stat line like: " If the agent is attached to a troop choice this game the unit benifits with move through cover and +1 to it's in Attacks. The unit acompanied by the agent this turn is unaffected by psychic powers!!!"

My theory behind this is I don't like to force people to be ballzy they should read the rules and think it would be crazy to not use these agents. They can be a real curve ball in a game so only the best players will know how to use them and fight them.

I don't agree with the agents being able to die. I love the idea I am going to put many hours into my agent and my army I might get tabled one game. It is a wide spread tourney the best come to play I wouldn't want to get tabled round one and have my agent just sit on a display board the rest of the day that defeats the whole purpose. The purpose is for it to be fun and challenging a curve ball the day of the event. If my agent's unit dies in a round I would think it would even be more interesting to see him come back game 2 with a vengence for my new opponent and effect more then just one unit but all units in 12 inches with some cool ability. I just would make sure that people can use the agent every game regardless of how previous games went. But you can add agent kills to head hunters if you wanted? Thats a shiny head.


What will these agents do come tis March? How will they effect the game? How should I model mine? All stimulating questions?

[Brian]

How about + 2 to it's reserve roll ? Or maybe even mess with a units stat line like: " If the agent is attached to a troop choice this game the unit benifits with move through cover and +1 to it's in Attacks. The unit acompanied by the agent this turn is unaffected by psychic powers!!!"

Stat line effects can come dangerously close to being game-breakers. The psychic power thing is closer to something I'd put in but I'd probably limit it to only "troops" units or something.

I prefer to think of the command counter/agent effects as being perks as opposed to buffs or bonuses. A "perk" is just something that you could live without but is nice to have whereas a buff legitimately makes something more powerful.

When planning for a system like this it's important to maintain the integrity of the game system as much as possible. After all, we're running a 40k tournament and the units and rules should have as few tournament-specific exceptions as possible. If a unit of, say, plaguebearers all of a sudden gets a buff that gives them +1 to their invulnerable save it makes them a whole bunch harder to kill. They've in effect become "Adepticon Plaguebearers" instead of "GW Plaguebearers." Situations like that are undesirable, in my opinion.

[n00bzilla99]

I liked the command counter system, but I would prefer to have it explained more in depth, because I never got when to use them.

Seems pretty far.

[YeezyMozart]

Brian I totally get what your saying and I would hate to fight a unit of plague bearers with an even better save. I was just thinking it would be cool to make the agents more mouth watering on there own instead of giving incentives to use them. Looking back at my earlier post I was assuming that you guys could find a way to play with the core of the game but I realize that playing with stat-line and manipulating the foundation could lead to horrible effects if not foreseen beforehand, and we wouldn't be playing 40k at that point anymore.

You could make the use of the agents required in every game and they could even be incorporated into the mission objectives or bonuses.

Trying to think of some perks that you couldn't pass up.

[Brian]

You could make the use of the agents required in every game and they could even be incorporated into the mission objectives or bonuses.

Trying to think of some perks that you couldn't pass up.

I like the idea of command counters being required to claim bonus objectives. We did that in, I think, one mission in 2009.

The problem with bonus objectives is that they play too much like tertiary objectives, point-wise and the easiest way to make sure you claim them is to play for the wipeout (more on that in another thread.)

[Turtle]

i think the invention of command counters is incredibly awesome, i loved the idea of them last year, the only concern i had with them, was that you need people to want to risk them, i think the only mission that did that well was the one where you needed the counters on the board to get the objective.

the reason the scores for them were so uniform last year is because almost everyone just "banked" them people need to want to use them, almost because they have to use them for the mission.

I really hate the idea of an agent model for it. I like that its an extra guy that people will model up and bring to the tourney, i dont like that only about 5% will make neat things, the other 95% will just take another tactical marine and give him an auspex or something just like that.

that being said i do love the idea of people modelling up something for use as a command counter (i.e. like an agent or something else cool) maybe some bonus points for theme??

if they are members of the unit I really dont like that it effectively adds another wound to units and can potentially abuse the wound allocation rules. and it makes it more difficult to saturate a unit causing 1 wound to everybody. I dont think we need to reinvent the wheel with what you did brian, I think that it was an awesome idea last year.

I think that we just need to come up with some more creative uses of the command counter as just a marker giving the unit something, but we dont want to drastically change the game mechanics or unit stats, that leads to some really unfair combinations (like plague marines with better saves)

Maybe the using command counters to take objectives would be a good one to bring back, I liked the one that made any unit that had a counter a scoring unit.

maybe the best way to use them would be to mandate that everyone has to use their counters every mission. you can't just sit on head tokens, those are at risk every mission, why not the command counters too? If they were I think you'd see some good variation in scores for that category across the board.

[lixulan]

i didnt get to play in the last one but maybe a interesting thought for an objective mission.

your agent while in squad coherancy with an enemy unit stops it from being a "scoring unit". the agent is other wise invulnerable, and insubstanstial, and can move 6" per turn, and can not run.

this doesnt stop the unit from contesting, just counting as scoring. as each person has one it is a tactical change as to how you apply it.

[Inquisitor_Malice]

I think the command counters was a good addition last year. I agree with previous posters on:

1. Having them on the board in order to take an objective forced the risk/reward aspect of them.

2. It allows more themed armies to become more competitive with the tooled out lists. Based on this, it actually adds to the overall variety in army composition that you will see at the event?

[CaptKaruthors]

Since I wasn't there last year, what were the options did the command tokens provide? I think that if you use them there should be some sort of reward if the use is successful (bonus battle points) and a lesser reward if they are only banked (1pt).

[Brian]

Since I wasn't there last year, what were the options did the command tokens provide? I think that if you use them there should be some sort of reward if the use is successful (bonus battle points) and a lesser reward if they are only banked (1pt).

I think in half the missions they let you make a non-scoring unit able to score. In one of those missions I think I said vehicles could not carry them and in the other monstrous creatures and IC's couldn't carry them. In one mission it made a unit worth 0 KP and in another it did nothing but all of the bonus objectives required a counter-carrying unit to score it.

The reward, therefore, was not automatic. If you used one to make an Elites unit scoring and that unit went on to capture the tie-breaking objective, well, that's one hell of a good reward.

If you put it on a heavy support unit that sat in the backfield for the whole game then you might as well have banked it.

After reading all the feedback and thinking about it for a few weeks I'm leaning toward making it the same as last year with the possible addition of the agent/specialist models to represent the counters. The in-game effects will be a little different, of course, depending on the missions.