Barnaberible

There already is one, its called winning the GT, no problem for a man of your caliber

OK so maybe I think I dont quite understand it properly. I did google it but got put off by the number of y's, x's and brackets so lets say at tournament a a player ranker 10 beats a player ranked 1 and at tournament b a player ranked 100 beats a player ranked 90 the ranking points they achieve would be the same, or not?

Oshova I don't disagree with your system, it has many merits but the existing geographical spread of ranked players may have an effect on this At the minute the largest number of high ranked players are based in the North of England (excluding the squigs who are nice and central) Now these guys, quite understandably, don't get down to many (if any) Southern tournaments so surely this system would have a detrimental (and increasing) effect on the Southern tournaments that don't, through no fault of their own, attract the top ranked players. The North would get stronger and stronger as their players are continually playing high ranked players in tournaments and the South would get weaker as they cant attract high ranked players. Re minimum numbers Everyone loves the rankings (right?) and it would seem a shame to exclude tournaments completely. Would there be a way of making smaller tournaments still ranked but making them worth less ranking points that they are now?

I think its hard to answer what your asking, I think the real quandary is you are in a position where you want to get to the next level of play, and if it isn't then its a hell of a good discussion anyway! So, I am friends with Pete along with Mike (@oldmanmyke), Lee (Henchman Lee), Spooner (!) & Mark (@Gorillawizard) and we have some newer players in the groups as well, and apart from tournaments we generally play each other. Now out of this group I think myself, Lee and Mike could, on our day, beat any other player in the UK tournament scene. I also think that you have have a shot at because, on your day, you are as good as any of us. So what you are asking is how to make 'your day' more frequent? So what do you do to get past this level? Change crews? Take different schemes? Read the rules over and over again until you are blind to find combos that no one knows about? The answer is, I don't know because I don't do any of the above, although they all sound awesome. What I can do is tell you how I play and see if it of any help (although it might be better in a blog post as it might rattle on a bit) Now there are far more knowledgeable and far better players out there than me, and hopefully this thread will generate loads of ideas as this is a topic that I also want to keep an eye on, so when I've picked through all the ideas you'll be as good as I am now, and I'll still be able to beat ya

I'll take outcast Tara, cheers

Add me to the list please

As a (mainly) resser Tara player and having played a bit of Jack Daw here are my 5 1. Void wretches - apart from the quite high walk and incorporeal the hectic glow is super useful and I love the DF mechanism as you tend to find people target them first (and often leave themselves open) or wait too long and simply can't kill them. 2. Johan - I take him a lot as a merc so to get him one stone cheaper is a no brainier, a tough utility piece. 3. Lazarus - make him fast, focus then let fly with the shooting and see what happens. Is also tough and can hold ground well 4. Bishop - with Tara I find him to be the ultimate surgical strike model. The DF trigger, extra AP and his four ML triggers make him the best all round badass in his role Again no 5 is tough for me as there are many models I havnt used yet, Alyce, Ashes, Desi Engine, Strongam so I am going to have to give it to 5. Trapper - what he does for 6 stones is awesome and since I've been using him I've seen people put off by the threat of him alone. It's also interesting to see that all my 5 I often take out of faction and pay the extra stone, goes to show how strong the outcast faction is I think.

Yup, I don't even play a summoner and still love him, with a summoner on the table..... Also big up to Bette who's probably my favourite model, I find she can be a bit swingy sometimes though

1. Necropunks - make it into most of my lists. Leap with the suit built in is golden, easy to hit but hard to put down due to reattach, they punch like a wet paper bag but that's now what they're brought for, right? To me the have the edge over crooligans as pure scheme runners as the little buggers are so hard to pin down and once they get free they're pretty tough to catch up with. 2. Nurses - the ultimate support piece, makes use of those low cards for the suits and a buff / de-buff for every occasion. 3. Belles - what more needs to be said about belles, they're also tough and undress can be very useful as aa alternative to lure. 4. Fresh Constructs - i useusally need models to hold ground and there isn't much better at it than these meat bags. Can be vulnerable to obeys and the like but for 6 stones they can cause a lot of problems for people. 5 is difficult, the list lacks a hitter but if I need one I usually go for a merc to do the job. For me it's a toss up between chiaki, dead rider, crooligans, izamu, bette noire or Mortimer. While the others all have their merits I think no 5 is.... 5. Mortimer - tough, high melee, can add some movement to things and chatty. Well, let's face it, basically chatty is the reason you bring him

In tournament play I think I am played 11, won 9, lost 2 with Tara (resser) and have placed 1st and 2nd with her, so yes I would say she can hold her own. If you include the vassal leagues that were running that goes up to P16, W14, L2. (2 of those as outcast) Razhem is pretty spot on with his assessment but it's worth bearing in mind then the 0 action to stop interacts is just as / if not more useful than the reactivate. She does die quickly if she gets into combat however!

now paid, cheers Lee

Thats the point I was trying to make when I said I believe it should take the damage that was dealt before Hard to Kill is taken into account.

Indeed, although we are back to the age old debate of RAW vs RAI. As I say this is my own personal reading of the rule and how I would play it simply because, in my mind, damage is decided after amour etc (thus the model receives this amount of damage) and then this damage is prevented by SS or hard to kill but yes, as written, Dumb Luck states that it takes half the damage the model suffers we will see what the FAQ says (hopefully it will be in it)

Anyway I would play it as it dose half the damage after armour / incorporeal etc (these reduce damage) but before ss for prevention / hard to kill (these prevent damage)

sounds good

Heres a brief write up of my games on my blog if anyone is interested in reading it http://barneysstable.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/canterfaux-aka-de-cantiacorum-ludi-magna.html

Thanks guys, great day, liking my trips to Kent. Is therea list of the full results anywhere?

I will more than likely be ressers but not sure which master yet

now paid, looking forward to it. do we have to declare masters in advance or on the day?

Can I stick my name down for this, I can pay probably Tuesday next week, ta

Yes that makes sense

I wouldn't like to see anything that sees a 2 day event score more than a 1 day event, all this does is penalise people who can't get to 2 day events. So we are saying that 4 rounds is harder to win than 3 rounds. Maybe so as you will end up (theoretically) playing 2 top players, but I think a 4 round is also easier to place higher in than a 3 round if you are an above average player as if you lose to a top player round 3 you get to pull it back round 4. One of the problems I see is that the 3 round event if usually decided on VP diff so if 2 top players draw each other round 1 it's putting them both at a disadvantage as the game is likely to be tight. So with this in mind has anyone considered seeding with the top ranked player playing the lowest ranked R1 etc, this would: 1. Ensure that top ranked players aren't drawn together round 1 2. Give low ranked players the opportunity to play the top guys and hopefully pick up some tips (I know I benefit from playing people better than me) Another option would be to tighten round times but with many schemes suffering from not scoring early rounds could it be guaranteed to get a sufficient number of turns in? Probably not which would punish people who play against slow players and also put pressure on newer players which would be a shame as the community is very welcoming to new players. If its a must that 3 round events should be penalised because they are so easy to win then I would suggest its a nominal reduction in points, say 5. I also wouldnt agree with messing around too much with the SS value of games, the game deffinately become skewed at lower levels.

Thanks for organising dave, great event and thanks to my opponents

Interested for the Saturday but won't know until closer to the time

If you need me to bring my graveyard or swamp terrain let me know, don't have any boards though I'm afraid