Tournament is over. My thoughts on the missions

After a very nice tournament I think it is nice to review the missions. As well as the results. Really there is no meta with only 6 people but I think it is worthwhile anyway.

Tournament Results

The end results was (Tournament points/Kill points);
1. Resistance feral (62/3692)
2. Shaltari (61/2186)
3. Scourge (55/3913)
4. PHR (42/2334)
5. PHR (40/2589)
6. Shaltari (40/2465)

So we see that the tournament was pretty close. Whenever I have seen 40k tournaments this small someone is usually at the rock bottom. But in DZC it is hard to get those massive wins. In fact in the 15 games we had the following results:

Game results:

10-10: 1 game.
11-9: 2 games
12-8: 6 games
13-7: 2 games
14-6: 0 games
15-5: 1 game
16-4: 1 game
17-3: 2 games

So it is pretty hard to win those games with a big win. Also as I will note below as well bunker assault gave a 15-5, 17-3 and a 17-3. So it really shows how much more “killy” focal points is.

For the missions I thought to go through it all. Since no player really is that extremely much better or not so competitive this tournament (the winner have won the Swedish champ but used a fun resistance army for the first time. I used a really bad Scourge army) I think that we were pretty equal in all games anyway. So the results are kind of representative for a larger result as well though averages will spill out more.

The missions

Game 1 had Swedish Recon. That is Recon with objectives, roll of a 1 is a bomb (D2 damage outright on the infantry base searching) and a point. 2-5 a point. 6 an objective. Game 2 Military complex, 3 Bunker assault, 4 Swedish search (look for it elsewhere on the blog) and last Command and Control (three objectives along the center-line and 2 critical locations.

I think there are two data interesting here. First is the average win as it kind of shows how easy it is to win large. Second is the average amount of more KP the winner had than the looser. This shows how much a winner need to focus on the mission objectives and/or how connected to winning the mission killing the opponent is. Ignoring the single draw we had.

Mission/Average VP to winner/Average more KP the winner had

Swedish Recon: 14/107
Military complex: 12/-125
Bunker assault: 16,3/490
Swedish Search: 11,7/98
Command and Control: 12,3/-241

I think it is worth noting that generally we get much more VP and Kill points in Recon with focal points. I really like that the one with objectives are much tighter in points (the one we used). It is pretty clear that missions with objectives are much tighter in points overall. Also you can see that Military complex and Command and Control both have very low KP (to the negative, even) meaning that to win those missions you need to be prepared to kill the opponent.

Bunker assault is kind of boring in my opinion. It gives to much points and is much more killing than other missions. It is the focal points talking. We had it to further balance drive on.

A fun part is that the Swedish search is still one of the tournamnet favorites among the participants. It is hard to win and you really get the feeling you need to focus to get it right. Also very hard to win big meaning it is a tough game.

Command and control works really well as well. I didn’t think it was so similar as normal objective-missions are but it really adds it all.

I think that it is worth doing something more with Bunker assault. Making it a mixed mission with both objectives and a focal point in the center could help it a bit more, perhaps. Searching objectives is kind of fun with a bunker mixed in. Perhaps have 4 objectives on the edges and a focal point in the center? I will test and see. The more I play DZC the less interest I see in focal points or ground control.

Which 5 missions would you take to a tournament and why?

2 Responses to Tournament is over. My thoughts on the missions

  1. Totally agree that focal points add little to the game, I play them as critical locations now, much to everyone’s appreciation .

    • I think it is a good ide. though I still think that the critical locations are also quite “Killy” in the sense that it is usually good to kill the opponent and doing that will give you points kind of automatically. I think it works best used sparsely. For instance a recon mission with a critical location in the center. Also we have some ideas with objectives and bunkers.

      One thing that is cool to mix in are bunker with objectives in normal missions. Not all bunkers but just a few.