Orbital Bombardment’s tournament pack is up!

Posted: 21 June, 2014 by egges in Discussion, Dropzone commander, For tournament organizers, Missions, tactics, Tournaments

The guys on Orbital Bombardment has released their tournament pack. As they are highly placed in the Invasion tournaments (technically that can very well mean the best players in the world) their vision of a DZC tournament is very interesting and well worth investigating.

Let’s do that, shall we? This is my feedback on Orbital Bombardment’s tournament pack.

Kick ass tournament guys

Rules pack

The Rules pack in it self is pretty straight forward. Don’t be a dick and bring everything you need. In contrast we swedes are very bad at doing these kind of written rules but instead just write the basics and then use a single forum to update any information. A rule-pack does make it seem much more serious and give the impression of a TO care that it will be a great tournament. There is really no surprise in it. One day tournament, 1500pts, Hawk is sponsering and so on…

I would only like to comment on a few things:

  • Sportsmanship when tied should always be the lowest tiered player. This is a small matter though and highly debatable as it goes about 50-50 on opinions on this. TO should always go with their own preference instead of changing opinions of other in such small matters. So no one should care about what I say.
  • 2 hours and 15 minutes per game? That is very different on how Swedes do it. We prefer to have 3 hours and let the tournament run for an entire day. 2 hours and 15 minutes is very little in my opinion. I have seen the same thing in 40k. Adepticon has a very small window of time and hence a lot of games doesn’t finish in time. I can see this kind of limit if you have to leave the place very early but otherwise? I have always felt that more time gives more time to chat with your opponent which to me is half the fun.
  • I might have missed it but it would be great if they had a deadline on when new rules could be added. It can be risk that Hawk changes the rules a week prior to the tournament…
The missions: Mission 1

By far the most interesting part is the missions. Me and Snolb will test some missions soon and then I can give more feedback. Right now everything is subjectively opinion based. Some reservation that things changes very often if you test something.

Mission 1; Back Breaker is basically 5 objectives as in “targets of opportunity”. The objectives closest to you are in bunkers (indestructible and small buildings as well as being in contact with another building). These objectives can be extracted into the opponent’s side and are worth more if so done. The objectives are in the center-line buildings works as normal.

It is an interesting aspect with extracting objectives through the opponent’s side. And idea well worth looking into. I am a bit skeptical if so many will succeed though. I think it can be a better idea with the kind of set-up as used in “Land Grab” and force the players to exit on the neutral corners. It means you have two directions to escape which might add a bit to the spice.

All in all it is a very interesting concept with escaping through the opponent’s side. I’m a bit cautious as PHR seems to be doing worse on tournaments and speed might be a factor on this mission. All in all I think it is easy enough to block the dropships but as that goes two ways it should not matter much. The center objectives will still be the deciding factor.

A good mission that might have been better with two exit points instead of just one.

The Missions: Mission 2

Critical engagement is a mixture of Recon and Target’s of opportunity. You need to find two victory points of information before entering any of the large structures. Extracting objectives are worth more than usual.

This is a really cool mission with some great ideas! I really like the information search to open the buildings. This could be expanded even more with that the information makes you able to enter the center-line buildings with underground rails from the buildings on your half of the table as well as with dropships. It would mean an easy exit point with objectives.

I think I like this mission the best.

The Missions: Mission 3

The third missions is basically a “Land Grab” but the focal points are like the quarter mission from 40k in the third ed days. It might be a sensible change but I’m not sure. One thing I feel here is that the possibility to destroy objectives are a thing that the TOs moving away from and I feel that is one of the basic parts of DZC. Focal points should be possible to destroy if inside buildings. I think I like this mission the least (but still a good mission). There really should be a way to destroy the objectives for the players. I think this mission is also a bit strange in the fact that not all quarters are worth equal. the basis of DZC is that you have something easy to get and then you battle for the neutral objectives.


When I read the missions I think the TOs are aiming for this.

  • You should not as easy destroy objectives in this tournament. This I feel is a bit sad. It is a critical part of the game.
  • It should be very hard to get the maximum win. that is a win in these missions. It should be nearly impossible which should make for a close call tournament.
  • The missions have some cool variations of the basic missions.
  • You should not have the “targets of opportunity is worth very little in the tournament and Land grab is hugely important for the tournament points”. I think they succeed on that.

Overall I really like the second mission, are neutral for the first (that is – I think it will result in the exact same type of game as normal target’s of opportunity but a slightly bash at PHR) and think that the last mission doesn’t really add that much so it could really be a normal land grab.

I think that there is a danger (I’m doing this myself) and that is that the players might have a bit harder to destroy buildings when they know they will loose the chance to win more. Perhaps the maximum win should be a little bit easier. But just a little.  I think it is really cool versions and particular like the second mission’s idea of doing something first to enable to do something later. It gives a bit of the vibes that comes from new 40k’s mission cards which I really have taken a liking to (although GW sucks at it).

  1. Ken Natt says:

    Hi Egge – interesting assessment. I think the timing issue is just down to venue and travel time for players. I like longer time windows but squeezing anything more then 2:15- 2:30 is hard unless as you say you play into the evening. Other than that I think you may have summed it up pretty well. I like the sound of the second mission the most. Will be interesting to see how it plays

    • egges says:

      Hi, Ken. Thanks for reading.If the goals is to make people being able to go home the same day I can see the point. In sweden most tournaments offer sleeping quarters (on the floor on whatever you bring) as well as free parking. Even for one day events. In London my guess is that you really can’t do that. I think this might be related to why we really don’t have a big convention or tournament in Stockholm but instead at the nearest about 30 min away from Stockholm.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s