The Scenarios we Love and Love to Hate

So after a week of gathering feedback on the Scenarios you Love/hate, the people have spoken and spoken loud.

There was a lot of Hate for various Scenarios and none came out unscathed.

The majority of the comments were undying proclamations of hate

All da Hate:

The results are in and Kill leads the pack of the most hated Scenario, followed by Pillage.

The smack talk on the hate

Some of the comments that relate to the hate.

Kill/Eliminate

• I dislike Kill because unit-strength win conditions are just faster to tally and easier to track late in the game. Kill tallying is also error-prone, while I can easily tally both player's remaining u.s.
• Eliminate was a bit iffy for scenarios though I didn't play it often. 
• Fuck kill, fuck Eliminate. why make the units I need to most the ones who lose me the game? Fuck that
• Kill points=boring
• Kill is boring
• Games are infinitely more interesting when more are at stakes than just kill. I played Warhammer competitively with only Kill basically for 10 years. Never again.
• Kill just isn't a scenario. Its fun to play to learn how the game works but it should end there. 

Bluff/Objective Scenarios

• Take way 2 long to set up
• No brain hard.
• Bluff makes the scenario too complicated 
• I was always a fan of the original 6. The others are just versions, some pretty dumb, of those 6. 
• I'm rubbish at object scenarios, esp Raze
• I'm rubbish at the hold and score scenarios, I'm better at area control scenarios. 
• Some scenarios can just be dull to play against certain armies

Raze Hate

• Scenarios that allow for games to be won early are bad in the scope of kings of war. I think it detracts greatly from the enjoyment of the game at a competitive level if you draw eliminate against a triple dragon list, or raze vs a list that all vanguard/scout. These situations ruin part of what makes kow great in always having a chance at winning even when it all goes wrong. Scenarios with middle of game scoring can remove that possibility which kills the game imo. 

Push

• Essentially kill ultimately.
• I hate Push and Kill because they're the least dynamic of scenarios.

Area Scenarios

• All the Area Scenarios are essentially kill, they favour some armies (ie invade favours smash armies) however they are all kill ultimately.

Invade

• Love the variety of scenarios, but dislike invade, seems too simplistic for some reason even though I like dominate.

Whole lot of Loving:

Where there's hate there's love, and the community did not fail to show their love.

Control was the winner of the lovefest, with Dominate and Pillage in 2nd and 3rd.

Some of the new scenarios gained a good chunk of love.

And the hearts sang out their love

Some of the undying love comments.

Salt the Earth

• Salt the Earth feels unique among the scenarios, and is a lot of fun
• Dynamic game play

Raze

• Raze, more than any other missions, rewards the player best prepared to play the scenario. Almost every other missions can be "solved" by simply killing your opponent's stuff and then figuring out who to score points in the last 2 turns.

Objective Scenarios

• The scenarios I like tend to be about sacrificing troops etc to score objectives not exclusively beating up opponents
• Loot and Objective games just feel so much more tactical and enjoyable

Area Scenarios

• I like area scenarios because the "objectives" (areas of the table) are not picked by the players, and they feel more natural than objective scenarios.
• Brain easy good.
• Area is easier.

Bounty Scenarios

• I like Bounty because it's an interesting twist and in fantasy has the feel of a purposeful battle.

Bluff Scenarios

• Dynamic game play.
• Harder to play bluff scenarios. 

Conclusions

Well by taking the love minus the hate, you get the difference of the feelings, some shifted positions, but Control still takes the win. Dominate and this time Invade in 2nd and 3rd.

Kill and Bounty Scenarios are still dragging the bottom.

Pillage is an odd one with a large amount of Love an Hate,

Looking at the Scenario types paints a wider picture.

Area Type Scenarios rank higher than all the rest and have the least amount of hate with them.

Objective Type scenarios although came in 2nd have the largest amount of hate for them

Bluff and Token type scenarios have limited love and low hate.

Kill/Bounty Type Scenarios are almost universally hated

So what does this mean to Tourney Organisers?

1. Avoid including Kill/Bounty type scenarios - they are hated, why have a hated scenario in your tournament
2. Include at least one of the three Area Type Scenarios
3. If including an Objective Scenario, pillage had the most love, but Salt the Earth has less hate, or kick it old school with Occupy
4. Chose Token over Bluff Scenarios as there is less hatred of them