Speaking about composition and all such matter recently I have been thinking about ways of implementing a system of composition for tournament play simply dealing with the meta game. I really think that the Fortitude mechanism is quite an elegant fix as it combines a number of factors and gives a nice risk versus reward mechanism. Fortitude if I remember correctly is basically a score taken from the number of banners within your army. It is only used in one of the scenarios and I propose extending it to all tournament battles. I think this could be trialed by a few players even in just designing lists rather than having to fight actual battles. There will obviously be a few holes here and there but I don’t currently see any that are glaringly obvious.
Firstly there should be a basic Fortitude number each army should have, lets take seven as an example. An army therefore has to have seven banners within it to count as a tournament legal army. This causes a number of things to happen. Essentially characters, warmachines and monsters can’t contribute to this number. There are exceptions but at the moment this doesn’t pose a problem. So infantry and cavalry are the main contributors to this number therefore a certain section of the army has to be dedicated to fulfilling the requirement. This can come from any section and not just core so the restriction is not too severe. This will eat into the points available for the more exotic selections and characters, hopefully reducing the spend on magic and warmachines or at least forcing more of a choice between the two.
Secondly victory conditions should be set on reducing your opponents Fortitude number below a set level. Using seven as above the level should be four. Reducing the number below this first means your opponent loses. Reducing both below this in the same turn results in a draw. A margin of victory can be established by comparing what one player has left versus the losing player. These victory conditions can replace victory points and still provide as accurate a system.
The result of this could be good. It isn’t tested but it might be worth doing. The player takes a risk by not investing in more Fortitude. If they invest more heavily in Fortitude they are unable to invest in game breaking elements as easily. It is easier to win and lose by not investing in Fortitude is essence. The player needs to balance the risk versus the reward. It is also not as easy to score a massive margin of victory as the player doesn’t have enough Fortitude to create a big difference. Against this the player that invests in Fortitude has an easier time in holding their points and staying above the level needed for a loss. They also have a better chance of scoring a high margin of victory as they have more points and so can create a bigger margin.
This should balance across the armies easily. Expensive armies have regiments that are harder to defeat and hold their fortitude more easily. Cheap armies are the opposite and can more easily invest in Fortitude but would expect to lose it more quickly. If they invest in banners on poor units they are more quickly lost. On shooting regiments while effective are more likely to give up their banners and as such also present a risk in taking them in large numbers.
With this system gunlines should be reduced or at least if not reduced more easily defeated. The same goes for very magic heavy armies. The less spent on Fortitude the more likely you will lose. Also the gunlines won’t be able to score a big margin of victory as their Fortitude will have been too low to start! So any thoughts?