Hordes Eval 2015 P2




After a short intermezzo related to a certain event in Nottingham (Horus Heresy Weekender) we’re back with part 2 of our evaluation of the evaluation forms. In the first part, we mostly talked about the scores we received for different topics. In this part we want to focus on additional comments that were added to the form. For the sake of simplicity we’ll start with WHFB. However, some of these might cross the boundaries to WH40K.






A first comment we received is the request for bread without butter. We aim to please. So if you guys want this, please tell us during registration. The same is still valid for another comment that requested veggie food.

Next we have a couple of time related comments: 2 persons tell us that they did not have enough time to properly finish battles. Another one told us to cut the lunch & afternoon breaks a little shorter. And another’s advice was to not rush the timetable in case of a late start (due to the snow) but move back the “closing” ceremony. Although we’d like to enable you to play a bit longer, there are a couple of things to think about. As an organization we need the lunch & afternoon break to generate the new pairing, to nominate the armies for best painted and to eat a bit. Most of the time these are under pressure anyway due to late scores. (Which is exactly the reason, why we start to press for scores as soon as the round is finished). So without extending the timetable we find it hard to allocate more playing time. And when we take into account that a lot of players are already leaving before the awards ceremony, we prefer not to prolong the tournament. This brings us to the difficult dilemma: “Should we tone down the points limitations or not?” We’ll discuss this internally. However, your opinions are valued.

The next couple of comments are linked to the painting, wysiwyg and roster evaluation. A comment states that we shouldn’t evaluate the wysiwig and roster so strictly. However, we believe that a strict but just judging of these things are necessary. It’s a part of being fair. Your opponent should be able to judge what he’s facing in a fair way. We invest quite some time in these rulespacks. Please read them carefully and adhere to them.

We were also asked not to allow “End Times” armylists. In general we try to change as few rules, restrictions, etc from the Games workshop rules. The “End Times” are a bit difficult in that respect. We see them more as alternative rules with some of these rules added to the official FAQ’s.. So we are actually considering some restrictions.

To end this paragraph, there are some final remarks about our scenario’s and rulespack: The rulespack is deemed too chaotic by one player, the deployment in scenario 1 was too far apart & some scenario special rules should be worded better. These are all pretty straight forward points and will most certainly be taken into consideration. About the “chaotic” rulespack we’d like to elaborate a bit. We’ve undertaken the mission to make it printer friendly & to make it clear that some rules we see as “standard” for all Saints tournaments. We’ll try to make this even more straightforward and a little bit more uniform across the different tournament formats. We hope you’ll enjoy our updated format.



Now let us switch to the Sci-fi side and tackle the comments of the WH40K players. Again, there might be some crossover between the remarks on general topics. Let’s kick off with the catering again: 2 players requested a second bottle of water. And though we would not mind doing this at all, we are contractually prohibited to do this. It’s a way to sustain the cooperation with the owner of the bar, the venue and our organization.

Then we have some rather general remarks like: things might be a little unclear for first timers and a little too complicated, too many things to track. We talked about the first point last time. And indeed, we may need to work a bit on welcoming new players. The second point, we assume, is about the amount of book keeping required for 7th edition WH40K. Actually some of us really detest that as well but, alas, that is WH40k 7th edition.

Related to that comment is the next: “Somebody asked for no imperial knights”. But : they have their own codex, they are a part of WH40k. It would be kind of strange that we choose to not allow, for instance, Tau or Necrons.

We were also asked to provide more scenery on the lower tables. As mentioned in the first part we are revamping the complete terrain stock. And a part of this revamp is to provide the WH40K tables with higher line of sight blocking terrain. This should also partially level the playing field against large models (like knights). However, there hasn’t been made a specific choice in terrain sets for “lower” or “higher” tables.

Furthermore we received some comment on the painting judging. Painting was looked at too fast and no extra points were awarded for freehand checkers. As we’ve had quite some experience with judging the armies according our painting judging system, we are able to do this pretty quickly. Almost immediately the judges will have a score in their mind and they then double check this against the rules as presented in the rulespack. Please feel free to interrupt or ask for clarification at any time. However, the rulespack doesn’t state that you should automatically get extra points for freehands. To get the full score for painting the keyfactor is the phrase “to a high standard”. But again, when not in agreement with the score or in search of some explanation, feel free to ask the judge.

Finally we have had some remarks about the scenarios. We’ll consider these carefully in the preparation of our new scenarios for the next tournament. The comments were: three missions with objectives is too much, there was too much randomness involved with the warp portal scenario and scenario 2 was depending on a game mechanic that doesn’t happen a lot.


Thanks for reading our ramblings and if you have anything to add. Feel free to send us an e-mail.