Reverse the Whip - Love it or Hate it?

[kolakoski]

Well met!

I like to build and play my own armies, not anybody else's. There. I said it. So I have been avoiding the whole idea of reverse the whip like the plague. However, I can't help but stumble over the occasional post containing an army built for a tournament using that format. I have asked (in the Competitive Army section) exactly how and why armies are constructed for reverse the whip, but, here, I'm thinking the discussion will be more akin (maybe more than I thought when I typed it) to that concerning the Designated Hitter in Baseball.

So . . . Love it or hate it?

P.S.: Yeah, this is a public poll. This ain't a presidential election!

[clancampbell]

I don't mind it, it's not my favorite, but it's cool.

I did play in an event that featured it. Wasn't all that bad.

I guess that doesn't help with your love or hate poll, as I'm in the middle of that scale, with a slight lean towards the love side.

[jschild]

The nice thing about Reverse the Whip is it tends to eliminate or reduce builds like all 4th Mass or Q9/Raelin/Rats.

[ROADRAGE]

I also like to build and play my own armies. I recently was in a tournament where you had a 50% chance of exchanging armies with your opponent, I ended up switching armies all 5 games and for that reason I don't like it. I'm in the camp of wanting to put strategy into my builds and get the most I can out of it for the given format.

If you only maybe had to trade one time in a given format like in some of the tournament of champions formats then that would be ok.

[machinekng]

I haven't had a chance to play it yet, but I like what it should do to the meta-game. It encourages unique, non-cookie cutter armies, and makes B and C units easier to field. It also forces one to know his army inside and out, in order to crush it when nessecary .

Then again, other people manhandling my miniatures might feel wierd.

[jschild]

@Roadrage, what you described isn't reverse the whip.

Reverse the whip - You play 3 games with your army, then 2 with your opponents.

[ROADRAGE]

Originally Posted by jschild

@Roadrage, what you described isn't reverse the whip.

Reverse the whip - You play 3 games with your army, then 2 with your opponents.

Anytime you change armies with your opponent it's reverse the whip, regardless of how many times you do it doesn't matter.

[jschild]

Originally Posted by ROADRAGE

Anytime you change armies with your opponent it's reverse the whip, regardless of how many times you do it doesn't matter.

Not if it's random the way you mentioned. The whole point of Reverse the Whip is that you do two things. Prove you can win with your army and prove that you can beat it as well. If it's completely random like yours was, then you cannot do those two things.

[ZBeeblebrox]

Reverse the Whip should in Theory encourage different builds that what you would see in a competitive Tournament. But you will always have one person bring Q9

I like it because it allows for the skillful player to win, over just a A+ Army Build.

[ROADRAGE]

Originally Posted by jschild

Not if it's random the way you mentioned. The whole point of Reverse the Whip is that you do two things. Prove you can win with your army and prove that you can beat it as well. If it's completely random like yours was, then you cannot do those two things.

Let's say then it's not as good as the one your describing(I didn't like it all) in my opinion. What does a 50% chance of switching with your opponent prove?

[vikinglad]

I am going for "yes" because I like the change from round-to-round. Sometimes I get board after 3-4 rounds with the same army. Also, as a relatively new player, this is a good chance for me to play around with figures I don't have (yet). I got to try out the MicroCorp guys at the last tourney I went to, and the dividers, and it was pretty fun. I guess the best for me would be to play 5 games, starting and ending with my chosen army, and alternating between my army and my opponents' every game. I didn't care much for the random roll at that last tourney.

As far as having different armies to play every round, I liked the attrition format we played recently better. Then I got different armies every game, but they were still my armies.

[ullarted]

I personally have never played this way. I think that it would be a good way to "mix it up" a little from the traditional format.