So I'm thinking that since I have...a lot...of minis for each faction at this point I'm going to set aside teaching the game to new people with the basic L2P scenario and work on a few standard lists to teach the game because honestly I feel the basic starter vs starter can be better done at point increase. I feel it misses a few key mechanics, and really doesn't do any kind of justice to the upgrade cards, since well they are not used.

So here are my questions to you all, for teaching purposes what would be a good point value, I'm trying to decide between 125 or 150, I think at 125 with upgrades I can run possibly 8 plays at once with my own things...at 150 less but there would be more models, but also this may become too much for the new players...

What are some good lists, I mean I can throw CI on the Archers so they actually seem to be more involved, as I have always found CI-less archers to be not overly useful...

So just give me your thoughts and such and experiences, I'm going to be heavily pushing more learn to play events at my local store as they try to get my into dropzone commander...*** for tat!

Personally I think if you're going to learn the game, learn the game at 200. If you don't have 200, build your lists and see what you can get up to. For simplicity maybe instead of worrying about point limit put a unit limit. Fewer components to control. I think ultimately it depends on what they new players have. Are we talking about one starter split between two people and that's the whole game? If so you're talking very limited game play. I think if possible always run a 200 game. I learned in a 200 game, I wasn't the best but it was easier for me to understand different components. 125 or 150 you're going to have to relearn a couple things. Thinking about more units, means more flank possibilities, etc.

I think instead of focusing on lists, focus on great synergy. Like you talked about CI on Archers is great. This way a new person understands I have archers, I read in that Lists for Learning that CI is a good upgrade for that, and it was explained why... (dial in surge, boom... blight guaranteed).

I think scenario based learning will be a key factor... "If this, then that..." type situations. Short concise and helpful.

I actually quite like 100 pts on a 3x3 for an absolute first time learning scenario.

I would say though that those 100 pts are best spent on units and NOT on heroes.

Heroes in general are a bit wild at 100 pts and eat up too much of a list to make sense, but only having 2-4 units max and a small board to play on helps a lot for picking up basic mechanics and interactions.

I would also caution against certain synergy upgrades like Combat Ingenuity. General upgrades or neutrals are good to help learn how upgrades work (trumpets are a good example) but if you put Combat Ingenuity on Reanimate Archers when you start, you aren't REALLY going to get a good feel for spending surges. Play the Archer ability as-is, then when the player steps up to a full size game or starts making their own list, they will look at Combat Ingenuity and realize how good it is, because they've used Reanimate Archers without it already.

I can see both sides of it. The idea of contrast. Understanding how great something is because you've played it without. I think that really strengthens why you should use CI on Archers, but I would say learning to use it right off the bat gives you the right mindset for what you need to roll (or reroll) to be successful. I guess I'm personally the type of guy who likes to play right the first time instead of ease into it, so it depends on how the person paying attention learns best.

At these elevated point levels, are you planning on running 3x3 games or 3x6 games? If you make it 3x6, I think you're better off jumping straight to 200 points.

Here's the dilemma as I see it. When someone is learning the basics of the game for the first time, you want to make it a simple enough game that they can pick it up and get going. The trouble is that a lot of people seemed to be underwhelmed by the core set box experience. That's why I agree with Curlycross that it's probably better to go straight to 200. That lets people see what a real game is all about.

Another consideration is that in these demo games, you probably don't want to just let people play. You want to be explaining some basic strategy and narrating possible choices and potential outcomes so that they see the intricacies of the system. If you just let them play out the game, they may form false first-impressions (e.g. Kari is OP! Once things get engaged, it's just a dice fest! I felt like there was no point to moving!)

If you do play 200-points, I think another important consideration is choosing fun and engaging setup and objective cards. I think you want different setup for each team so that the newcomers see that setup plays a big role. You also want an objective that is interesting, isn't too difficult, and which will influence the final score so that people can see that objectives are important.

These are my unfounded opinions as one who owns a single core and has played only one 200-point match.

Best way ive seen it done is to have two players play a 200 pt full game, and have the 3rd party, in this case the new player, pilot 1 unit. This will allow them to 1) see a full game and 2) learn the rules/functions of the game without being overwhelmed

9 hours ago, oda204 said:

Best way ive seen it done is to have two players play a 200 pt full game, and have the 3rd party, in this case the new player, pilot 1 unit. This will allow them to 1) see a full game and 2) learn the rules/functions of the game without being overwhelmed

If this is an option. I like this. Simply because you can see how it's going, if they get more comfortable after a round or two they can take over a second unit, etc.