GW drops GT army size to 1750 points

[Mushkilla]

The Official 2018/2019 Warhammer 40,000 Grand Tournament Season drops army size to 1750 points.

 

https://warhammerworld.games-workshop.com/the-official-2018-2019-warhammer-40000-grand-tournament/

[Kisada]

I'm guessing this has to do with how long games take and whether they finish or not.  However, according to Frontline Gaming, their data shows that lower points does not equal faster games/games finishing on time ...

 

If this step is in fact to try to get games to finish ... how long before GW branded chess clocks?

[Panzer]

Could be to make games faster (tho I doubt it'll work) or to reduce alpha strikes even further.

The lower the points the harder it is to get rid of tough single models according to my experience since the extra anti-tank that's only needed against super tough targets is usually one of the first things people reduce for smaller point games.

[Mushkilla]

I think chess clocks help stop deliberate slow play to some extent. But there was another underlying problem. Games just weren't getting finished. 8th just doesn't play as fast as GW thought especially with all the stratagems and more complex rules interactions from each new codex.

 

I'd like to see any tournament with the numbers showing 90%+ games going the full 5-7 turns. LVO was apparently plagued with games going 3-4 turns and then "theory hammering" the last turns that didn't get played, so I take ITC stats with a pinch of salt. 3-4 turn games isn't 40k.

 

I'd hope reducing the points level combined with chess clocks would lead to games going the full length.

[Happy-inquisitor]

I'm guessing this has to do with how long games take and whether they finish or not.  However, according to Frontline Gaming, their data shows that lower points does not equal faster games/games finishing on time ...

 

If this step is in fact to try to get games to finish ... how long before GW branded chess clocks?

 

I heard reports of some significant slow play during the GT finals so that could be one of the reasons they are doing it. To be honest I do not think it will fix a problem that from what I have heard was down to questionable sportsmanship anyway.

 

It is the same points level as their competitive-casual Throne of Skulls events now. That consistency might also have been a factor in their decision.

[Mushkilla]

Yeah. It will be interesting to see whether other tournaments follow suit.

 

I don't think it will stop slow play, but it might make it even more obvious? If games not finishing becomes an uncommon occurance then it's much easier to single out slow play.

 

Adding slack by reducing points also makes hordes and other armies, that just by their very nature/number of models play more slowly, still viable to bring to a tournament.

[Xenith]

It was 1750? I thought it was 1500.

 

They should drop it further. 

[StraightSilver]

I'm not really a tournament player so may not be the best to comment but this seems to at least be a recognition of the issues around slow play.

It may or may not be a step in the right direction - my experience of 8th is that is best played at 2,000pts over 5 turns which in a tournament setting I appreciate is tricky.

However, as a Space Marine player, I think I'd struggle to play competitively at 1,750pts but maybe that's down to lack of experience.

It will certainly reduce the CP pool for a lot of armies but I suspect not the ones guilty of slow play. A 250pts drop has a significant impact on elite armies, but not so much horde armies who I think this was meant to be aimed at?

[Finkmilkana]

1750 shouldn’t change that much compared to 2k for most armies, but also not speed up the game much. If they really want to greatly speed up the game, they would need to go far lower. But if they do that balance becomes kinda wonky or at least completely changes, thanks to many powerful unique models (demon Primarchs etc) and certain rules that don’t scale much with points (new smite rule, AoF, shoot twice stratagems etc). Having 300 points of a 2000 army shoot twice on turn 1/2 is nice, having 300 points of a 1000 army shot twice can potentially cripple the enemy.

[Panzer]

However, as a Space Marine player, I think I'd struggle to play competitively at 1,750pts but maybe that's down to lack of experience.

 

 

To be fair, as Space Marine player you'd struggle to play competetively at 2k points currently as well. ^^

[StraightSilver]

 

However, as a Space Marine player, I think I'd struggle to play competitively at 1,750pts but maybe that's down to lack of experience.

 

 

To be fair, as Space Marine player you'd struggle to play competetively at 2k points currently as well. ^^

 

I struggle to play competitively at any points level, lol. :)

[Ishagu]

Meh that's me out.

[Xenith]

However, as a Space Marine player, I think I'd struggle to play competitively at 1,750pts but maybe that's down to lack of experience.

 

How? People are people and will be just as competitive regardless of the points. The game was always typically engineered for 1500pts . Lower point levels mean you have to make some difficult composition decisions, unlike the former US standard 2500pts, where you could take everything. 

 

Sure, some armies become more or less effective at different point levels, but that's an issue that's point level irrelevant. The super competitive players will jump to the most powerful army regardless of what the point level is. 

 

Meh that's me out.

 

Why? You can't cut 250pts from your army?

[Ishagu]

The thing is, I've run 2000 point armies with 17 model.

I've also seen 1500 point armies with 120 men and 6 tanks.

 

No, I can't cut 250 points from my Custodes. At all.

 

This is a dumb move that doesn't solve the issue of one player taking longer than the other.

 

Middle finger to GW's GT from me.

[chapter master 454]

Interesting.

 

Should shorten games by some amount due to less models to deploy. However as people are pointing out, people sandbagging is the issue and they need to be rooted out and given some serious talking to for scumbag playing. Some players legitimately do need time to think but when it gets on in turns, there is only so many moves you can make that are viable so get a move on!

 

Certainly a strong shift of stance but manageable. The loss of 250 points does hinder some armies but we will see if maybe down the line this also influences GWs global pointing of units.

[helterskelter]

The thing is, I've run 2000 point armies with 17 model.

I've also seen 1500 point armies with 120 men and 6 tanks.

 

No, I can't cut 250 points from my Custodes. At all.

 

This is a dumb move that doesn't solve the issue of one player taking longer than the other.

 

Middle finger to GW's GT from me.

It's only the 3rd shield captain on bike you'd be dropping surely not that much of a dent? ;)

[Mushkilla]

The thing is, I've run 2000 point armies with 17 model.

I've also seen 1500 point armies with 120 men and 6 tanks.

No, I can't cut 250 points from my Custodes. At all.

This is a dumb move that doesn't solve the issue of one player taking longer than the other.

Middle finger to GW's GT from me.

One of my armies is Imperial Knights so 4-5 models, I'm fine dropping 250pts. I'd even be happy to drop to 1500. So I'm not sure I see the problem for elite armies.

 

Some armies will take longer to play I don't dispute that. Reducing army size doesn't hurt elite armies, if anything they get stronger, at the same time it adds slack so the armies that are slower to play are still viable in a tournament setting.

[Ishagu]

Its not fair to have some players getting more game time.

 

Taking an Astra Militarum brigade is a choice. If you can't move your 150 models as quickly as I move my 11 Jetbikes that's your problem. No one else should be punished.

If you can't play it fast then don't take it. Simple.

[Vel'Cona]

I like this change.  I prefer to have my armies 100% painted and dropping 250 points makes this a more realistic goal.  I also feel that 2000 point games are where the game starts to get unwieldy and combat phases in particular can soak up serious time.  1750 provides just enough variety to be fun but also gives a much stronger chance that a game will end within what I feel is a reasonable period of time.  In prior editions, 1750-1850 was the norm and I feel 8th edition is not an exception to this reasoning.

 

What's really interesting is GW making this change in spite of the possible monetary impact it could have for them, as players effectively do not need to purchase as many models since they need less points to play in GTs.  And yet, they feel it's important enough to fair play in their events that they made the change anyway; I say bravo to them for not thinking purely of the bottom line :)

[Kisada]

I like this change.  I prefer to have my armies 100% painted and dropping 250 points makes this a more realistic goal.  I also feel that 2000 point games are where the game starts to get unwieldy and combat phases in particular can soak up serious time.  1750 provides just enough variety to be fun but also gives a much stronger chance that a game will end within what I feel is a reasonable period of time.  In prior editions, 1750-1850 was the norm and I feel 8th edition is not an exception to this reasoning.

 

What's really interesting is GW making this change in spite of the possible monetary impact it could have for them, as players effectively do not need to purchase as many models since they need less points to play in GTs.  And yet, they feel it's important enough to fair play in their events that they made the change anyway; I say bravo to them for not thinking purely of the bottom line

 

Well they've solved the "do not need to purchase as many models" for an army to play in a GT by coming up with a system where they can actively adjust the meta thus encouraging more purchases lol

[Mushkilla]

Its not fair to have some players getting more game time.

Taking an Astra Militarum brigade is a choice. If you can't move your 150 models as quickly as I move my 11 Jetbikes that's your problem. No one else should be punished.

If you can't play it fast then don't take it. Simple.

Punished? That's subjective. I play elite armies and I welcome this change. I'd much rather face a variety of opponents and army types, than everything being custodes/knights mirror match ups or games not going the full 5-7 turns.

 

Ignoring deliberate slow play for a minute, fact is different armies play at different speeds, to accomodate that the system needs more slack. We can add slack in two ways, decrease points or increase time.

[Ishagu]

Chess Clocks is the best way.

[Mushkilla]

Chess Clocks is the best way.

I agree, chess clocks are the best way to stop slow play.

 

But that doesn't mean you can't have slack in a system. If each player has 1 hour 30 minutes on the clock that's great. But you can accommodate more list variety by reducing points so things like hordes and assault armies that rely on fiddly surrounds and consolidates can still be reasonably played in those 1 hour 30 minutes. Sure it means us elite army players might only use half of our allocated time, and a horde player uses their full allocated time. But I'd much rather that than see list diversity die. Also when you are having a very cerebral game the elite army players can lean on that extra time that he doesn't normally use.

 

By doing the above you eliminate slow play, and keep list diversity. That's why points need to go down, or time per player needs to go up in my opinion. Even with chess clocks.

[CommodusXIII]

The old GW RT platform from 3rd Edition was built around 1750-point limits, so it's a bit nostalgic to see this return.

 

Meh that's me out.

 

Isn't this the third or fourth time you've announced that you're quitting 40K?

[Amun Ra]

Have they said this is to combat slow play as everyone is saying goes here?

 

Maybe they just want to change up things? 2k at majority of tournaments seems stale. Forcing hard decisions seems interesting.