Kirb your enthusiasm!

WEBSITE HOSTED AT: www.3plusplus.net

"Pink isn't a color. It's a lifestyle." - Chumbalaya
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
"I buy models with my excess money" - Valkyrie whilst a waitress leans over him


Sunday, September 19, 2010

Swedish Comp: Hilarity Ensues

Photobucket

Those of you who have been hanging around in the char recently may have seen this humorous little abomination. For those not interested in clicking the link, it is a (English language) guide to what I am told is the Swedish comp system. Oh, but this is no ordinary comp system, this is something out of your darkest nightmares. At least it provides you with definitive guidelines of what comp is rather than an 'understanding' by the general community making it even more subjective than normal.Shush, you. That's for another article.

Armies start with 100-120pts (depending on the codex you use) and each force selection and wargear option adds (or, more commonly, subtracts) some number of points. According to our resident Swede Vt2, 50pts is considered "bare minimum" that is allowable in a tournament- 60 is a "hard" list, 80 is "fluffy."

So what are these penalties like? Well, a meltagun is straight -1 for every one. Almost every unit in the game is likewise a -1, although there are plenty of exceptions. (It should be noted that these numbers are theoretically balanced for 1500pts.) Some units are as high as +4 (Vespid Stingwings) or as low as -25 (The Nightbringer.) Oh, that's right- named characters of any kind are anathema to this system, as are mechanized lists. In addition to simply penalizing you for taking dedicated transports (always at least -2, and more commonly -3 or more) you are also charged a bonus amount based on the number of vehicles in the list- so your first Chimera is at normal penalty, the second and third are an extra -1 per, third and fourth another -2 each, etc. MCs likewise take a hit, as do many other "overpowered" selections.

The hate-on for 5th Edition doesn't end there, though. Drop pods or any other kind of reserve army? Get ready to lose all your comp points. Power Fists? Gonna cost you. Heavy/special weapons? Enjoy watching your score plummet. Essentially, anything you would actually want to spend points on, anything that isn't a total waste of your time, is at least -1. Some units are hilariously penalized- Broadsides, for example, will cost you -13 for a single squad of three with ASS. (Additional squads are even more pricey.) Vulkan costs you straight-up -20 (oops, -8, with an extra penalty for every weapon he affects) in addition to whatever you had to shell out for melta, flamers, and hammers. (Hint: not a small amount.) The list goes on, and on, and on, and on.


Essentially, what this imposes is a 4E-style crapfest where no one has anything special or interesting and vehicles are all but nonexistent. It can't even be called gunlines shooting each other, because of the huge penalties for taking heavy/special weapons. Every possible way you could include strategy, tactics, or movement in your list is seemingly penalized.

Ah, but "seemingly." Like all other comp systems, it is eminently breakable. Viz:

(81)
(1495)
1 Librarian (-5)
Unleash, Shield

1 Techmarine (+1)
JP, Combi-melta, PW

1 Techmarine (+1)
JP, Combi-melta, PW

1 Techmarine (+1)
JP, Combi-melta, PW

5 Assault Marines (-2)

10 Death Company (+5)
2 Power Weapon

1 DC Dread (-5)
Talons

1 DC Dread (-6)
Talons

3 Scout Bikes (+1)

3 Scout Bikes (+1)

1 Storm Raven (-8)
Typhoon, Lascannon

1 Storm Raven (-9)
Typhoon, Lascannon

(List is shown with comp value and total points at the top, with comp penalties for each unit after its name. Where necessary, cumulative vehicle penalties are applied by the unit that incurs them, in list order.)

Double-Storm Raven (with one of them admittedly fairly empty, since we can only put half of a ASM squad inside it) super-assault. Note that the list actually has five melta shots and a large number of other anti-tank (Las, Missile, Dread swings) despite being nominally "fluffy." In fact, I can more or less guarantee that any of the fluff players would cry upon seeing this list- while maybe not the hardest in the world, it should crush almost any competition it faces thanks to delivering some devastating firepower very quickly. Scout Bikers can tie up any shooting units early on (they're still T5/3+ dudes, more than enough to deal with Guardsmen and the like) and Techmarines deliver unpleasant surprises from the sky starting turn 2. The DC and DC Dreads do most of the heavy lifting; Librarian hangs out with the DC and acts as a fake Chaplain or sits in the SR keeping up his bubble.

So we can see that even the most hideously restrictive of comp systems can be easily broken with a little inventiveness; your homework assignment, should you choose to accept it, is to do likewise, shattering their crappy system as hard as you possibly can. Prepare a 1500 (or, if you really want to, 2000) point list that scores as high on comp as possible while still being as strong as you can make it. Their Army List forums (here) may be useful in knowing what to expect; obviously the comments are in moonspeak, but the lists themselves are largely in English and include comp scores for each of them. No list with a score less than 70 will be considered, and preferrably you should make it to 80 or more. I have pushed some fairly strong lists as high as 99, and most of them are 80+; try to do the same. When considering a balance of power vs. effectiveness, it is probably best to assume that your comp score and battle scores will be equal parts of your overall points. (Again, according to Vt2, this is actually very generous- much more commonly your comp score is ten times to two times as important as your battle score; yes, that is correct, comp can be a full order of magnitude more critical than your BP. But we'll be slightly more reasonable.)

94 pinkments:

VT2 said...

It's all so orks can compete.
Try taking Eldrad.

I dare anyone to put him in their list, or try and make a space wolf army.

Jonas said...

I live in Sweden and have only recently discovered the tournament scene here, but I know your guidelines for comp-scores is a bit off (it even says in the document that a "balanced" list is comp 50 @ 1500 pts). Lists at 1750 pts (the other widely used points limit here) are often in the 25-40 range, 20 or 25 often being the minimum number allowed.

Actually, there's a tournament coming up in about a month with the unusual restrictions of 1750 pts, minimum 60 comp: everyone knows such a high comp is quite restricting, but that's kind of the point, to see other styles of army lists and playstyles than you usually do.

(I'm not a 100% sure about this, but I think the usual way of using comp to influence scores at tournaments with a large comp score range allowed is to divide both players' comp score by 5, so it's in the 0-20 range like the match scores, and then adjust both players' match score by half the difference in comp. So for example, your list is comp 81 (/5~=16), I may have one with comp 30 (/5=6), so if we play 10-10 your score is increased by (16-6)/2=5 and mine decreased by the same, so in the end you won 15-5. This obviously means you can never win 20-0 with a strong list playing against a weak list, which can be a bit annoying...)

Old Shatter Hands said...

This is a joke right? It's like every choice in the army book destroys your comp score. Why would any troops choices knock your comp score? So dumb.

VT2 said...

I've never heard of anywhere that left you play lists below 50.
It used to be 40, but is now upped.

As for comp affecting your score, it varies.
The 'standard' is /5, or straight up add comp.
So 100 comp will become either 20 or 100.

Honestly, over the years, I've heard of a lot of different things, but they don't really matter one bit.

What matters is the comp itself.
Why is it such a deadly sin for me to bring the toys I have bought, and are legal by the codex?

Messanger of Death said...

I was going to give a Black Horde list a try with Assault Terminators. Got boned by the knee-jerk reaction with each being -1... WTF. That comp scoring system seems even more craptastic then when I last looked at it.

And would have to need to use Bikes for fast attack... imagine trying to manoeuvre them through 50+ Black Templars.

Messanger

Messanger of Death said...

Oppz. It should read: "And would need to use Bikes blah blah"

dzer0 said...

Wow they hate Eldar, Eldrad is bad enough but don't take a War Walker Squadron with Scatter Lasers!

VT2 said...

Buy Njal. You'll never get to use him.

Lyracian said...

Just for the fun of it...

1500 Points Space Marine Comp: 91
135 Libby (Vortex, Quickening), TDA, Combi-melta -2
470 Ten Terminators w/ ACx2, Chainfistx2 -11
200 Sternguard x7 w/ Meltagun x2L.Claw -3
183 Teckmarine w/ storm bolter, 5 Servitors, 2x Plasmacannons +1
204 Sniper Scouts x9 (Telion, Cloaks) -1
308 Nine Marines with Bolters x2 0

Squad size of NINE so we do not get negatives. Cyclones are bad, but Assault Cannons are not? Fine we will go with those for a big block of heavy infantary supported by some light infantry. Servitors are our psudo Heavy Weapon teams since Devs & Sternguard would give is -4, or more, points.

1496 Points Stealershock Comp: 97
160 Parasite -3
240 Brood of 30 Gargoyles w TS, AG -3
680 2x Broods of 20 Stealers w/ TS -4
272 Brood of 16 Stealers w/ TS -2
144 2x Broods of 6 Rippers w/ Tunnel +4
Since they hate vehicles so much Stealershock should have a good chance. Had to dump the broodlord's since they are negatives. Ripper swarms are tarpit units and give us a comp bonus!

Jonas said...

@VT2: Some upcoming tournaments I could find, they all have comp floors at 20 or 25:
http://www.svenska40k.se/forum/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=2081
http://www.svenska40k.se/forum/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=2181
http://www.svenska40k.se/forum/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=2143

I wish there were more un-comped tournaments around as well, you probably get to use and play against a greater variety of forces if you mix the two up rather than have one or the other.

VT2 said...

The first is a team tourney, where you can only have one of each 'race' on every team - and all marines count as the same race.
Really weird enforced chaos mark rules (only nurgle in a nurgle army, etc.)

Number two's not set in stone yet, but looks better than most.

Third is 25-75 - but that means very little. If you take too hard a list, you lose softscores, and can't win the tournament, even if you get max massacres.

Comp itself is just bad, and I don't like being told I can't play with the rhinos and marines I have bought.

Auretious Taak said...

Thanks for stealing my first comp article going up on YTTH AbusePuppy...but I'll look at 2,000pt levels because that's where you can break armies properly in this system.

You also got Vulkan wrong. It's not -20 or him upright.

[quote]Vulkan -8 Vulkan -1 if there is at least one Land Raider in the army or a Drop pod able to transport Vulkan -1 for each Multi-Melta Vulkan makes twin-linked that is mounted on a Land Speeder, a Land Speeder Storm, an Attack Bike or a Land Raider of any type. -0,5 for each other weapon (other than his own) Vulkan makes master-crafted or twin-linked[/quote]

-8 mate.

:D

Aleksi Lehtio said...

Hey this is fun. I don't know if this is that good but it got 97.5 comp score.

Shas'el with twin-burst cannon, fusion blaster

3x 3 stealthsuits, 1 fusion blaster, leader with marker light and 2 marker drones


3x 12 fire warriors, shasui with markerlight

7 fire warriors, shasui with markerlight

3x skyray, burst cannons

deploy skyrays in cover. Hope for first turn, and blast all seeker missiles on turn 1.

VT2 said...

That's why we don't play 2k all that often, Taak =P

Lyracian said...

@Aleksi Lehtio - You beat me by a half point! I can drop five Stealers to add a brood of 9 Rippers which pushes me up to 100 Point Comp Score. :o)

LegenMythMan said...

Well, that system has flaws and there are really huge problems with the loop-holes, it will be fun to see if you guys can break the system.

But I must say that I really see a problem with using no comp at all, and that is the monotone army lists that you will see in the tournaments. Just take a look at NOVA, probably a lot of fun for people who wants to play against the latest two or three codices all day long; otherwise I guess no thank you.
I am all for competitive tournaments, but I really want older codices to have a fighting chance, and some kind of comp or handicap system lets them.

Even thou I think the Swedish system have some strange side effects, and to make it worse they even have “relative” or “subjective” scoring so it is all in the hands of the TO and you cannot even have a clue of your score before you send in the list, as an old Magic player, I really see the merits of some kind of control over the list building; I just do not know how that system would be constructed. Would be interesting to see how a system that lets old and new codices fight at a reasonable equality would be constructed.

Dezzo said...

i used to think sweden was the most perfect country in the world

1) infinite number of blonde chicks
2) vodka
3) welfare

but they ruined it with comp.

i is sad panda. D:

Auretious Taak said...

LegenMythMan...so what you're saying is a night shielded dark eldar boat army has no chance against say a blood angels DS'ing flying circus where the majority of the ranged weapons can only glance seeing as all the inferno pistols now have 0" range against the boats? I love people like you who call the older codices crap and uncompetitive yet fail to take into account the abilities of players playing intelligently and aggressively well. Sorry, but your reasoning is bs. Competitiv play is definitely viable with older codicies aloyt of the time you see shit players running the armies is all. Sure, necrons suck thopugh, agreed there.

Dezzo, they didn't. You can walk into any of their major events an win outright without playing the game. How cool is that? You can fund entire armies through tournament play. How cool is that? Man I wish tournies were that stupid out here.

Vt2, I'll keep that in mind for my article which will look at it differently to AbusePuppy. :)

Nice article abusepuppy.

AbusePuppy said...

Thinking over the BA list I posted, you could swap one Techmarine and the Scout Bikes for a unit of Sanguinary Guard, which would give you a second "hammer" to put in a SR, but drop you by four comp. Might be worth it.

>I dare anyone to put him in their list, or try and make a space wolf army.

Oh, just you watch.

@Taak
:( Sorry, man, didn't realize.
I misremembered Vulkan, yeah. Must've conflated the extra penalty into his "actual" cost.

@Dezzo
At least those things never actually mix with Warhammer, hey?



And since Vt2 asked for it:

(87)
(1505)
Wolf Lord (-9)
FB, TW, Warrior Born

Wolf Priest (0)
Combi-Melta

Iron Priest (-1)
TW, 4 Cyberdog

Iron Priest (-1)
TW, 4 Cyberdog

Iron Priest (-1)
TW, 4 Cyberdog

15 Blood Claws (-1)
2 Meltagun

15 Blood Claws (-1)
2 Meltagun

3 Swiftclaws (+1)

3 Swiftclaws (+1)

6 Long Fangs (-6)
5 Missile

Basically, the list runs off of a couple things. Wolf Lords are penalized most for having Runic + SS + TWM; we should be able to scythe through most units with just the last of the three. (Including one of the others would be nice, but we can't afford it points-wise very easily, so...) Iron Priests are hardly penalized at all, so we can run them on TWM with four cyberdogs and have a T5 unit that delivers a Hammer at cavalry speed. Blood Claws are free to take Melta with no penalty so long as they don't have a Wolf Guard leader. We don't use them anyways- our ICs let us unleash melta fury on things without penalty, so we stick one in each squad (the Lord will, of course, detach as he reaches charge range.) Our first squad of Long Fangs isn't excessively costly, so we cram one of those in to deal with the few vehicles we'll see.

If we were running "hard" comp (i.e. comp score is 10x battle score) I'd drop the Long Fangs for some more Swiftclaws and something else, but this should be fine as is.

@LegenMythMan
>But I must say that I really see a problem with using no comp at all, and that is the monotone army lists that you will see in the tournaments.

I don't think this is true, except to the degree that people are unable to come up with lists on their own. I can make about half a dozen competitive lists each from the SW, SM, BA, and Tyranid codices; older codices are generally more limited (usually 1-3 lists, depending), but can still compete. Really, that's just a reason for GW to get off their lazy buts and finish revamping the books.

I think the comparison to M:tG is very apt. If you'll note in the post-Urza's era, the DCI only rarely had to step in and ban cards; whenever a "overpowered" deck emerged, natural counters would arise as the environment shifted to compensate and a new, different top deck would be created. Warhammer is the same way- no one army (or even selection of armies) can completely dominate the environment.

AbusePuppy said...

@Lyracian
Excellent! I think the Marine list is a bit weak, but the Tyranid list would be rather devastating. I went a little bit different route with my Tyranid 'Stealer army, but yours definitely has some merit.

@Aleshki
Interesting idea; I think you can do better with Tau, though- Kroot actually are quite good for them and you can afford Crisis without too much problem if you fiddle a bit. (I had nine Fireknives + a non-FK Commander and scored 98 on comp with my list.)

VT2 said...

There is no 'montony.'
There is 'monotony' in the old, bad books. Marines, wolves, angels, tyranids, soon dark eldar, knights, and even orks can all do lots of builds, but under the swedish comp system, we can do one build: foot.

I can't take mech marines.
I can't run massed dreads.
I can't run a combat army.
I can't run an 'elite' army.
I can't play tank battles.
I can only ever do semi-foot.

That's retarded.

The problem with netlists (razorwolves, leafblower, lash chaos, etc) is that I know what they're packing, and I know how to defeat them flawlessly.
That's what being predictable does to you.

Jon said...

Here's one: foot eldar *shudder*

1498 (107.5)

2x Autarch 260 (-2)
bike,FG,mandiblaster,power weapon

2x5 Rangers 190 (-2)

1x3 Vipers 180 (-3)
scannon/scannon

1x10 Swooping Hawks 227 (+5)
exarch w/intercept

1x5 Shining Spears 227 (+3.5)
exarch w/withdraw, star lance

2x5 Dark Reapers 414 (-4)
exarch w/crack shot, EML

No real long range firepower to speak of and leaning on the hawks' haywire grenades because we're so low on AT, still puts out a lot of shots at medium/short range and the ability to kill marines on foot is nothing to sneeze at. That and you can reserves denial! ...With your rangers and reapers.

Rofugos said...

Can't run mass dreads? Thats wierd, since I recall myself playing 5 dreads in a 1500p tournament, and place 7th out of 65.

With comp 60 btw ;)

Lyracian said...

@ApusePuppy.
Thanks! Having written the Tyranid list I would be tempted to run it myself just for fun. :o)

As for Marines; I really could not think what to do to avoid the Vehicle tax. I can just get over 80 Comp points with this:

1500 Space Marines Comp: 82.5
34 MEQ, 9 Scouts, 2 Dreads, 2 Transports
115 Libby (Vortex, Dome) Combi-melta -2
165 Captain (Relic Blade, Hellfire, Combi-melta, AGL) -2
250 Command Sqd w/ PGx4, Plasmaback -4
280 Rifleman Dread w/ EA x2 -4
170 Ten Marines (Flamer, ML) -2.5
170 Ten Marines (Flamer, MM) -2.5
146 ASM x7 w/ Flamer in Rhino -2.5
204 Sniper Scouts x9 (Telion, Cloaks) -1
Vehicle Tax -4

It has a few options. One Tactical squad can 'steal' the Rhino the other can get Force Dome from the Libby, or he can go with the ASM. Plasma Command squads & Riflemen Dreads are not bad (sadly the vehicle tax mounts up or I would take three).

JeffF said...

An eldar 5 wave serpent list looses about 30 points on mech, but not that much on what you put in them:

2x autarch - fusion gun
3x 5 fire dragon + exarch with flamer & crack shot + wave serpent with double cannons & stones
2x storm guardians with a flamer & a fusion gun + spear destructor warlock + scatter & cannon serpent
1 vyper with scatter & cannon
1 vyper with scatter

Either 76 or 70 comp, depending if that dragon entry is per unit.

Other than the vypers it is 5 mounted meltagun/flamer squads plus some str 6 spam, and reservable. Should annoy the fluffies with its similar squads, even if the list could be better without things like FD exarchs.

AbusePuppy said...

@Jon
Remember that going above 100 comp doesn't do anything for you; you could probably afford to make some compromises there and get some "good" stuff in the list.

@Rofugos
Care to elaborate a bit? As I understand things, a comp rating of 60 would make it rather hard to win the tournament if you used the "add your full comp to your score" method, and even with the one-half/one-third/one-fifth comp scoring I've seen, you would still struggle a lot.

BTW, 92.5 for five Dreads. :3

Snotman said...

Hi, as a swedish tournament organizer I wish to refute the "bare minimum" part of 50 komp.

I'd say most tournaments hold a bare minimum of around 20-30. Where 50 is considered Average (also mentioned in the document) and 60+ is considered "hugs&kisses"

AbusePuppy said...

@Lyracian

That one looks a lot better, I think. Reading over the comp document again, I think Terminators may be -1 per Termie, not -1 per squad, which could screw up some of my builds.

@JeffF
The -3 penalty is for each Fire Dragon unit in the army, so that would be rated 70 comp. Rather respectable, considering it's a pretty tough list. Maybe someone with better knowledge of Eldar can point out anything it might be missing? I'm afraid it's one of the codices I'm rather unfamiliar with. But it looks nasty as hell on the surface.

VT2 said...

Once again, I've never, ever heard of a tourney where you're allowed to play with less than 40 points.
This was before the limit became 50.

Since vehicles aren't encouraged, harlequins become much, much better than they normally are.

Brother Loring said...

Emperor's Champ - Abhor the Witch - 110 - 0
Reclusiarch - Bolt Pistol - 3 Cenobyte servitors - 126 - -2
Reclusiarch - Bolt Pistol - 3 Cenobyte servitors - 126 - -2
Dreadnought - Las/ML - 135 - -2
Dreadnought - Las/ML - 135 - -2
Dreadnought - Las/ML - 135 - -2
Crusader Squad - 10 + 6 neophytes - Meltagun, Power fist - 245 - -4.5
Crusader Squad - 10 + 6 neophytes - Meltagun, Power fist - 245 - -4.5
Crusader Squad - 10 + 6 neophytes - Meltagun, Power fist - 245 - -4.5
1502 (I can't be bothered to tinker)
Comp - 84/107

The Black Tide is BACK!
Two of the squads are fearless and get an extra D6+3" closer to you when you shoot them. Think you can down 60 guys with your wack comp list? Good luck!

The funny thing is, BT become awesome because of the FAQ that goes alongside this. 3++ SS (2 points each on assault squads), cheap transports with options. Wowzer! But then you have to pay out of your arse for almost everything, with very few options that add points.

lyracian said...

@Brother Loring
Nice list, but you forgot the Vehicle Tax on the Dreads. That is another -2 putting you at 82/107.

Chumbalaya said...

What the fuck is this I don't even?

haventheseries said...

Please also notice that to properly being able to use the SweComp document you also have to use the SweFaq as well, especially when it comes to older codices. If you look at BT for example you have alot of compscores for stuff that they actually can't take according to the codex. But SweFaq to the rescue, now they can use everything from the new SM-codex.

So to be able to use it properly you have to adapt the SweFAQ aswell? Not cool in my book.

Brother Loring said...

I didn't think dreads were vehicles... just walkers... but whatever.

Yep, it's nice to get the benefits of the FAQ, but to be honest it feels a bit like cheating to me. I prefer Warhammer 40k, Yourhammer 40k is only so fun!

Messanger of Death said...

"Marines, wolves, angels, tyranids, soon dark eldar, knights, and even orks can all do lots of builds, but under the swedish comp system, we can do one build: foot."
I tried to do Black Tide but that doesn't even work. It was EXACTLY the same as what Brother Loring tried. But it looks like he has reading failure as the list is less than 80.

Each Cenobyte is worth -1 while anything that uses the vehicle damage chart counts as a vehicle unless exempted.

The list comes to 75.5 KP... put your hand up if you think that is retarded.

Messanger

Messanger of Death said...

@ haventheseries - I've looked at the old Swedish FAQ and my beloved Mechanised Black Templar list still gets nerfed by the comp scoring. Even with 35 point Rhinos...

And the changes do not justify why Black Templars have the same 107 as the 5th Edition Space Marine codex. The BA have a KP of 106 while the SW are 105.

Messanger

Gunn Bot Mk IV said...

A walker is a type of vehicle.

-willydstyle

Brother Loring said...

KIRBY!!! MoD used the 'R' word! He's going to get mad now!

Man, I've failed so many times today... first on Vassal, then on BnH and now here.

A decent BT build and I don't mean crazy awesome gets absolutely hammered in this system. I have to agree with VT2. This system actually restricts builds, not increasing them. You may see a couple of extra codices, but everybody is taking the same rubbish. GW work so hard to make really cool codices that have numerous builds and we then get nerf-batted back to mono-build hell.

Messanger of Death said...

"The funny thing is, BT become awesome because of the FAQ that goes alongside this. 3++ SS (2 points each on assault squads), cheap transports with options. Wowzer! But then you have to pay out of your arse for almost everything, with very few options that add points."
There are two ducking options. And both of those options result in automatic KP reduction. If you take Assault Terminators without a Land Raider you get a +3... but those guys are a bare minimum of -5 and that is only with Dual Lightening Claws. And the second thing that adds points is the Land Raider Crusader/Redeemer.. but with the first LR costing -16 and the second costing -23 it doesn't even make a difference. Especially as LR count as two vehicles in their system (so add another -1 on first LR and -2 on the second LR)...

The BT codex doesn't talk about hordes of Templars charging into battle. It does talk about Mechanised Spearheads. And which of those fluffy, themed armies has been nerfed under this system?

Messanger

p.s. triple post FTW

Auretious Taak said...

Havetheseries, So where's the swedish faq then?

Also, I can do Marines with 2 Land Raiders and a score of 98 at 2,000pts. Gotta go, work today!

daniel said...

Assumptions is the mother of any fuck up....

To get everything clear in this article, I want to elaborate on the Swedish tournament scene.

First of all vt2 has either never played on a tournament, or, he is a lier or just full of bullshit.

Secondly, you usually place better in a tournament if you play a hardhitting comp 30 lista then a lame ass komp 90 list.

Thirdly, bellow is a short list of the tournaments I have visited bellow, as you might see we have several comp systems, all well presented in the tournament thread.

SSK, threshold comp 35, 1750p
Nycon, No comp, 1750p
Sydcon, 30 - 80, 1500p
Rydcon, No comp, 1750p
LBK tour 3, No comp, 1750p
Fantasia Fanatic No comp, 2000p
RTO, 25 - 80, 1750p
Vinterslaget, No comp, 1500p
Defcon, 25 - 75, 1750
Varberg dubbel, Subjective comp, 0 - 20, 2 x 1000p team
BSK, 25 - 100, 4 x 1500p team.

Basically, the reason that we havce a comp system is thata games workshops codices suffer from grave balance problems, mainly because one codex is 10 years old and 3 editions old and another is brand new. But also that several codices have over powered units and in Sweden we want to have the best players on the topp positions rather then the one that plays the press play button lists. Yes, every system has flaws, the comp system do however suffer from less flaws or rather it balances the flaws better then in games without comp.

Right now I play a list that comps roughly 35 - 40. It is a BA list with:

Librarian

Dread w talons
Dread w talons
10 terminators w 4 th&sh

5 Ass marines
1 Lasplas razorback
5 Ass marines
1 Lasplas razorback
10 Tacs w missilelauncher
1 Lasplas razorback

Stormraven w multimelta & lascannon
Stormraven w multimelta & lascannon

So far I have won 2 tournaments and ended fourth in the swedish championship.

Best regards

Papa D

Cyklown said...

See, dude, I'd be inclined to believe you, but I've read the pdf and seen what the system does.
That isn't a comp system that encourages interesting play. It's a comp system the penalizes a lot of interesting builds and then PANICs about some things that aren't actually a big deal.

Chumbalaya said...

"Basically, the reason that we havce a comp system is thata games workshops codices suffer from grave balance problems, mainly because one codex is 10 years old and 3 editions old and another is brand new. But also that several codices have over powered units and in Sweden we want to have the best players on the topp positions rather then the one that plays the press play button lists. Yes, every system has flaws, the comp system do however suffer from less flaws or rather it balances the flaws better then in games without comp."

Hahahahaha!

Kuolema said...

stormravens can carry termies now o.O?

Kirby said...

Regardless of whether or not you or Vt2 is right in terms of what comp level is appreciated, you're still changing the game of 40k and don't even understand 40k to begin with. Yes some codecies like Orks, daemons, necrons, CSM, DH (without IG allies) suck and others like Tau, Eldar, DE, Witchunters are only good through their mono-builds. Suck it up, GW is doing a bang up job in producing good books this edition to create a balanced playing field.

The minute you apply restrictions or changes to make 'over-powered' units not over-powered, you've changed what's 'over-powered.' Last time I checked as well, there were no point and click 40k armies and if they are point and click, they suck or the opponent's suck because they aren't making the list work. L2play 40k.

I'd live to see comp applied to real life. Oh look, New York Knicks have more money than Oklahoma City Thunder because New York is a bigger market, gee we should make sure they only get the same as the Thunder. Wanks.

Messanger of Death said...

Hehe... the Dark Eldar codex will be updated soon. One less reason to use Swedish Komp scoring.

And another reason: There is only five guys listed as the writers/producers. WTF!!!! What makes them think they can create a more balanced system in their free time. When the guys getting paid to do it as a living can't do it perfectly... they are improving as Kirby pointed out.

Stupid Swedish KP system is just moving the goal posts so that something new is now the over-powered unit. Ducking failure.

@ BroLo - Kirby said the W word.

Messanger

haventheseries said...

@Taak: You can find the SweFaq at http://www.svenska40k.se/forum/download/file.php?id=355

daniel said...

Hi,

I hear you guys, some people like comp, some does not. I do not participate in subjectively comped tournaments cause I don't know the rule set before a tournament.
The idea of this system is not to have 100 in comp score. It is made that a 1500p list that is medium hard should be around 50. Therefor almost everything gives you minus, this is not a penalty, it is a weigthed belief of the quality of the unit.

http://www.svenska40k.se/forum/viewforum.php?f=52&sid=f93a9f44c214fd32592ea8916972631

If you check that link, every post in it is about the comp system, the framework for this compsystem is worked out by the 40K community. It is about 100 000 posts, so every voice is heard, the list is however compiled by 5 guys, from 5 diffrent big gaming communities, from diffrent parts of the country, what they do is to listen to the community and tries to balance and compile the ideas and arguments from within the community.

Except for this, the nerd rage about this is just hilarious, why do people rage about it, your not using it... So some tournaments in sweden are comped with this systems, I have heard of similar systems in the states. Comp is used in Australia accually some sort of comp system is found world wide.

I just wanted to come in and correct the peices of false information feed to you by vt2. What ever you feel about it when you have the right information is up to you guys. It works for us and we like the varity it offers, we also believe we end up with better and more innovative players due to it, hence our placements in the ETC the last 3-4 years.

The interesting thing with it is that no matter if it is comped, subjectively comped or no comp, we always have the same ppl in the topp 10. So we have at least no changed the balance in anyway that allow worse players to sail up into top positions due to a faulty comp system.

Best regards

Papa D

L3go said...

Messanger: uhm... let me correct you.
yes, there are 5 persons responsible for writing the document.
there is HOWEVER (!!) a constant discussion within the community on how these comp scores are affecting the different codicies. this discussion involves the majority of the swedish warhamster-gaming community.

Snotman said...

Kirby, they komped NHL ;)

dhettneck said...

I think you have got the wrong information about how important comp score are in swedish tournaments.

Usually the final winner is the one who got the highest score total from the following list.

5 matches: 5*(0-20) BP
Comp (KP/5): 0-20 BP
Painting: 0-20 BP
So the total is 140 BP where the comp only gives you 20 BP if you have a comp 100 list.

In some tournaments the comp differens between you and your opponent effects each game insted of being added to the final score, but even then a comp 100 list playing against 5 comp 50 lists would only gain 25bp out of 120.

AbusePuppy said...

@Daniel
Not speaking Swedish, I can't really comment on the tournament portions of things. All I can work off of is the comp document itself, which is absolutely _hilarious_. It horribly penalizes... well, 5th edition. And also people's crappy perceptions of 5th edition. it is the epitomee of the comp ideology, which can be summed up as "We know the game and what the game should be like better than you, and will impose our version of it on you."

Almost every codex has at least one build that is strong; most have several. Necrons and DH are badly underpowered; all of the others can field _something_ respectable. The imbalances are not nearly as bad as most people make them out to be. Furthermore, as this article is intended to demonstrate, comp restrictions do NOT balance the imagined problems with the game, they simply steer things towards what the writers want the game to be like (as opposed to how it is.)

Perhaps the document was prepared with the input of many people, but that doesn't change my fundamental objection to it. I think the efforts to push comp onto the 40K community are fundamentally misguided, because they tend to punish armies that are _disliked_ rather than armies that are _overpowered_. Is mech a dominant force in 5E? Absolutely yes. Is it the only option? Absolutely not.

I would hardly call this "nerd rage," and you are right- I don't play under Swedish comp. I can't and won't force you to stop doing it, but I will _advise_ you to stop because I believe you are making a mistake in doing so. Comp is not effective, it is not necessary, and in many cases it is not wanted. You can have tournaments, you can have hobby events, and you can have fun games for all your players, all without comp, and I would argue that comp does not in any way benefit these things.

>The interesting thing with it is that no matter if it is comped, subjectively comped or no comp, we always have the same ppl in the topp 10. So we have at least no changed the balance in anyway that allow worse players to sail up into top positions due to a faulty comp system.

All this shows is that skillful players will "abuse" (if that's how you want to term it, not to put words in your mouth) the rules of the game no matter what rules you lay down. There will always be a Strongest Army (or Armies.) Comp does not and cannot change that.

AbusePuppy said...

With regards to ETC- not to deny you what you accomplished there, but that environment was also, to my eyes, skewed. The pairing system created a false dynamic that did not accurately reflect the way WH40K is played straight out of the book. If you find that enjoyable, that's fine and I won't tell you you're wrong and bad for doing so, but understand that the game works just fine without adding special rules in.

Comp does not increase innovation; there ARE solutions to the so-called "problems" of mech, Lash, Nobz, etc; all of these are eminently solvable, and in fact are no longer even considered strong by a significant fraction of the players. (I would argue the best-educated, but of course I'm biased in that regard, so...)

We "rage" at this sort of thing because it's the mentality that this blog was founded to fight. Innovative tactics don't need to change the rules of the game- an innovative player will work within the established rules to find a solution.

We already have "a weighted belief of the quality of a unit"; that is, in theory, what the point value is supposed to represent. Obviously this is not perfect and, in fact, is often quite inaccurate, hence stronger and weaker units. But the balance is a fine one- the Tyrannofex is often considered to be terrible, but we at 3++ regard it as a strong addition to the Tyranids. "Powerful" units can have drawbacks that aren't obvious. The game does not need another axis to balance things on, which is all that comp is doing- not fixing anything, or balancing things better than GW has done, merely balancing them _differently_, to suit the biases of the writer (or community, or what have you.)


Perhaps one or more of the Swedes could enlighten us more accurately- how DO you use the comp score in regards to a tournament? If I have a score of 50 (or 70, or 100), what does that _do_?

dhettneck said...

Read my post above ;)

Kirby said...

@Snotman; NHL sucks :P lol

And Puppy is spot on.

daniel said...

Hi again,

Great posts Abusepuppy, not so nerd raging and very constructive or to the point at least.

You accually point out what I think swedish tournament creators want to remedy:

Almost every codex has at least one build that is strong; most have several. Necrons and DH are badly underpowered; all of the others can field _something_ respectable.

If we have a 100 players using 10 codices, we don't want 10 x 10 equal or very similar lists represented. We allow people to play a "crappier" list because it is fun, fluffy or because it would be boring to meet the third seercouncil list for the day.

The way comp usually work, there are a few abnormalities to this and it is always a evolving process to make it as good as possible.

Treshold comp - You are allowed to have a list that range from 100 - the treshold, for example 35. After that, the comp does not affect at all during the game or the results. This is to make sure that the powerbuilds are kept to a minumum but thats the only impact.

No comp - Well no suprises here.

Normal comp - Usually between a set limit of approximatly 20 - 80. Your comp score is then divided by 5, so the accual span is 4 - 16, this is just because we usually play for 0 - 20 points. So objectives are 0 - 10 and victory points 0 - 10. So to illustrate this, I'll make an example.

I play a really tough list that ends up on a comp score of 5. In my first game I will meet someone with an equal comp score. Lets say I win this game, I win the objective, 10 - 0 but we kill roughly equal amounts of Victory points so 5 - 5. I win with a decent score of 15 - 5.

In my second game I meet another guy who got 15 - 5 but he has a sissy list with a comp score of 13.
He is obviously playing a crappier but very cool list. I beat the living crap out of him and Win the objectives 10 - 0 and score alot more VP 9 - 1. So I almost massacre the poor lad and win convincingly with 19 - 1. This was quite easy to predict since I have a very much more OP list. The comp difference is 13 - 5 = 8.
This score is divided by 2 and added to his score and reduced from my score. So it ends 15 - 5.
Now I have a convincing 30 out of 40 points after 2 games, unfortunalty another high comp player has played very stabile so I meet a comp 11 list this time, a defensive Space marine player with some massive shooting and a decent counter charge in a 2 objective mission. After 3 hours of hard combats the smoke clears, we tie on the objectives 5 - 5 but I have killed his silly marines to a grerater extent. So I score a 7 - 3 in VP. The comp difference is 11 - 5 = 6. So the game ends 11 - 9 to my opponent. I have a stronger list but he played his list better then me, I never succeded with my push and it costed me the game slightly.

So the comp has some impact, but in general it is better to play good lists rather then weak lists with high comp.

The tournament continues and after the fifth and last game I did fairly well, I end up on third place and lost in total 10 points to comp difference out of my possible 100. I got 75 battle points after comp reduction in total.

I hope it is clearly described enough to understand how it works.



Best regards

Papa D

L3go said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Henrik said...

<< "Perhaps one or more of the Swedes could enlighten us more accurately- how DO you use the comp score in regards to a tournament?" >>

I think dhettneck and daniel explained it well. Normally, the result will only be adjusted a couple of percent due to differences in comp.

What you must understand is that the comp system is -very- complex, and takes a lot of time to get used to. So you are all perfectly correct in your assumptions that players new to the system has a hard time adjusting to it.

And yes - it CREATES A DIFFERENT GAME - that's the whole point! It is different, but not much really. It gives penalty most of the well known overpowered units. So what?

One of the goals is to make it a little bit easier for players with older/worser codices (BT, DA, Necrons, CD, Tau etc.).

Another goal is to bring some variance in army choices between tournaments.

One very important thing to understand is that with this comp system, you must try to figure out if your army can play well enough for the comp score - i.e, it is no use bringing a 60+ comp army if you dont expect to be able to win against the comp 35 armies.

In my opinion, 40k is twice as complicated with
comp. But when you get the hang of it, it is quite fun to try to get the most of it.

I think that almost every tournament player in Sweden likes to have a mix between tourneys with comp and those with no restrictions.

Snotman said...

As one of the big promoters of treshold comp I'll explain this one in more detail.

We hold a few different tresholds (0,35,60) to promote different lists. And some choices are very powerful in a comp 60 tournament that would never ever be fielded in a comp 0 tournament. This brings variety and fresh tactics to the game.

Of course not everyone wants or likes this implementation of the comp system, and that's fine, there are plenty of other tournaments with different systems to accomodate these players.

Variation begets fun.

Comp is only there to solve one problem in my mind. The very small divergences in lists in an uncomped environment.

Messanger of Death said...

Haha. Someone in the discussion decided to tell us that Comp is used in Australia.

Wise up. Some of us on 3++ are living in Australia such as Kirby, Taak and myself. We are well aware of why it is used. We just don't see it doing what it was intended.

The newer codices are still over represented and hate to break it to you but the older codices can still win without the "help" of comp. Dash of Pepper managed to beat every one of his opponents in a recent tournament using Dark Eldar.

@ L3go - I think you missed my point. Even with the "Community" giving their thoughts it is still those 5 guys who make the end decision. It isn't 5 competitive players of each codex that are making the end decision. It is just 5 guys doing it in their free time.

Messanger

L3go said...

Messanger: well, i'm certainly glad you (from austrailia) can explain to us (from sweden) how our community works. lol
what your saying is that these 5 persons aren't listening to the community?
in your own words: wise up.

Chumbalaya said...

When people say that comp brings more diversity and that it prevents overpowered units and the same lists from showing up, it really speaks volumes.

Horrible lack of understanding of the game, it's a shame really. Everybody has to suffer because Scrubby McScrub, the TO without a clue, doesn't know about 40k beyond forum whining or is still playing 4th edition.

AbusePuppy said...

@dhettneck
Yeah, you posted that in between my rants. Makes me look kinda silly. >.>

@Daniel
Alright, so let's look at what each of the comp types encourage. Now, first off, I will point you to the list I wrote above and the others I'll post in my followup article- it is possible to attain a VERY high comp score while still having a "hard" list at the core. (Double Stormraven in 1500, for example, or 9x Missile/Plasma Crisis, or five Thunderwolves with Hammers and some Warrior Born mixed in.) Even the intricate comp system Sweden uses- and I must admit, someone has put a LOT of work into it- simply cannot fight the collective brains of every tournament player. Games Workshop tries to "level" each codex when they wrote it, and always fails; what makes you think you'll have more success with your balancing act?

In any case, the analysis:

Threshold Comp does... well, very little. It forces players to take a modified version of their normal army to meet the threshold. I can make even pretty monstrous lists meet a 30-40 comp threshold (although, due to the massive bias against mech, most lists fielding more than ~8 vehicles are impossible under this system.) Simply take some "bad" units, optimize them, get bonus points, run list as usual.

Normal comp: depending on the value of the comp, your "limit" will be different, but as always, it's simply a matter of balancing the most powerful play options against the best comp penalty options. Is it worth the -1 to take that meltagun? How many more vehicles can I fit in? How much does it weaken my list to include [unit x] instead of a better option if I can improve my comp score by doing so? You balance the three relative values (points, comp, effectiveness) against each other rather than the two you normally do.

If you can play a comp 80 list- and, as noted, I can easily build one of those- and wreck face with it because it's still "hard," you will blow people out of the water. Not because you're a good general, but because you abused the system when making a list. We tied our game with your 5pt list vs my 16pt one? No, I'm pretty sure I beat you soundly 14-6 thanks to comp.

AbusePuppy said...

@henrik
>And yes - it CREATES A DIFFERENT GAME - that's the whole point! It is different, but not much really. It gives penalty most of the well known overpowered units. So what?

Well, part of the point is that we like playing Warhammer 40K. It's a fine game, an interesting one, and a balanced one. You could also decide to play Warhammer 40K but remove the assault phase- you could call the results "interesting," and I must admit, I find such permutations to be an odd challenge; why do you think I went to the trouble of making so many lists to break comp? But, in the end, they're just toying with a broken and incomplete system.

Comp penalizes what are perceived (again, emphasis on _perceived_) to be overpowered lists. It does not balance the game. It does not put every list/codex/player on an equal footing. It does open up some new doors in list building, but ONLY at the cost of closing many others.

Older codices are not necessarily worse. Witch Hunters, Dark Eldar, Tau, and Eldar can create some of the most devastating lists in the game; this much should be obvious even just from looking at your own comp documents, as these armies are penalized just as heavily (or even more!) than newer lists in many ways. But when these options are removed, what do they have left? Imperial Guard has a whole BOOK full of great units and appropriately-costed options; Sisters of Battle cannot say the same. Remove book of Lucius, remove Immolaters en masse, and what you have left is just... trash, for the most part.

@snotman
>Variation begets fun.
>Comp is only there to solve one problem in my mind. The very small divergences in lists in an uncomped environment.

With the first part, I agree; it _isn't_ fun to play the same list over and over again. I think the misunderstanding is that there are only one or two good lists possible from each book- and this is patently untrue. I can probably create ~6 extremely strong lists from each of the 5E codex and ~2 from each of the older codices. That's ~40 separate lists right there, assuming that everyone brings a "good" list- and let me tell you, there is always someone who doesn't, and usually a lot of someones. That means, in a one hundred person tournament, you're only looking at perhaps two of each list present in the entire population; that even account for individual personalization of the lists. The chances that you will play two of the same thing at that point are... minimal.

Uncomped environments still see a wide variety of lists. All of the tournaments I have participated in, both locally and around the Northwest United States, have been uncomped, and I can't say I have seen excessively similar lists. I often recognize the lists, sure- "Ah, Marines with Vulkan? Oh, you allied in some Sisters of Battle? Neat. That guy's got an Armored Company over there, but he uses lots of Hellhound squads in his. And there's a Nidzilla guy with nine Carnifexes running around here somewhere." I can only realistically do this because I have read enormous numbers of different list ideas and have a good memory, and I am STILL often surprised by the things people try- and, as often as not, succeed with.

VT2 said...

Best swedish excuse for comp, ever: if you're gonna fight against Bruce Lee, make him use a pillow.

andreas said...

VT2 ... if you are going to quote someone, do it correctly at least ...

VT2 said...

I just did. Want me to paste it in swedish, too?

I know what you're trying to say with it.
If little baby seal John wants to fight Bruce Lee, Bruce Lee should use a pillow, so John doesn't automatically lose.

The thing is, why does John want to fight Bruce Lee in the first place?

daniel said...

Abuse Puppy - I don't think anyone of the swedes just recently starting to post here want to either peddle our comp system to you or try to impose it to the world. We play both comped and un-comped, it is up to each tourney creator to decide the flavour of his tourney.

But we do however unlike to be called idiots and morrons by people who base their nerd rage on an idiot that lies and obviously can't copy paste a quote. Basically everything VT2 has said in this thread is a lie. Might be nice to know as a reference for futher discussions with him.

Unfortunatly people have a hard time with the comp system we use, but there are plenty of non-comped tournaments as well in sweden... so I can't understand why any morron want to spread lies and slander other people on the internet.

This said, feel free to try the system or discard it as you see fit.

Best regards

Papa D

VT2 said...

How is me saying that every tournament I've ever heard of requiring at least 40 comp points 'a lie?'

How is me saying that sweden wants to play 4th edition forever, with no tanks, no big guns, no characters, and no monsters a lie, when the evidence is right there?

The system is idiotic, and it is moronic. Why is it such a deadly sin to play with the models I have bought and assembled? Who are you to judge how many rhinos I can bring under your arbitrary system?

Why are there so many knee-jerk reactions to 'netlists?' Why is it that you want everybody to bring footlists?

Get over yourself.

AbusePuppy said...

*shrug* Maybe what he said was a lie; maybe he just has different experiences with tournaments than you. I could hardly be less qualified to speak on what happens at Swedish 40K tournaments, so I'm not going to speculate. However, the point is irrelevant.

I realize you are not trying to bring comp to us; if you feel satisfied with the way things are run, more power to you. I am not here to _force_ anyone to change the way they play, nor to bully, embarrass, or insult anyone into doing so. My aim is only to provide you with what I feel are persuasive arguments supported by good evidence that my views are correct. If you don't find them so... well, perhaps I haven't been as clear as I like, or perhaps we have different views on how things should be, or perhaps I'm just simply wrong; these things happen. I hope you don't take my arguments as insinuations that our (or my) way of gaming is somehow inherently superior to yours.

I find, in my country at least, that the death of communication between those with different viewpoints- in fact, the _unwillingness_ to even listen to someone who might disagree- to be amazingly harmful to society on all levels. Polite discourse and sound argumentation are the best way, I think, to find common ground on issues and to try and find essential truths about the world around us.

VT2 said...

I think it's fair to say that I have 'different experiences,' since the butthurt people are saying 25 is the standard limit, but I have yet to hear about one that has less than 40.

It's true that comp always varies - but that doesn't really excuse it, now does it?
My main problem isn't with the arbitrary points level, but the system itself.

Why can't I run my rhinos, terminators, or predators?
Who decides what's 'hard,' and what's 'soft?' The mafia?

Why can't we play 40k?

daniel said...

VT2 - I don't understand where you come from.. I play an all mech list at comp 40, which is the avrage comp for 1750. It is a comp where I most likely won't lose a single battle point over a tournament... Are we from diffrent worlds? No one says your not allowed to play the models you bought, attend some uncomped tournaments if you have bought a list that is "super hard" and if your list is "more balanced, try to play it at any given tournament before you judge the system. By the way this system is only one year old so please elaborate on this, name 3 tournaments with these requirements:

"I've never heard of anywhere that left you play lists below 50.
It used to be 40, but is now upped."

The statement bellow is not true:

"Third is 25-75 - but that means very little. If you take too hard a list, you lose softscores, and can't win the tournament, even if you get max massacres."

The last three tournaments I have been at, I won 2 of them with an avrage score of 14 and the fifth was won by someone else with an avrage score of 16. This could be done with any hardcore low comp list.. Attend a tournament and you'll see.

This is a falsarium:

"That's why we don't play 2k all that often, Taak =P"

We do usually not play 2K because it takes a long time and we rather finish our games in 3 hours so we have time for more games, I would say avrage in sweden is 1500 - 1750, but we have a few 2k tourneys also. Dalcon, Varberg and fantasia for example.

Now I have to go and workout.. but I will continue in the search for truth =)

Best regards

Papa D

VT2 said...

2k usually takes less time to play than 1500, because people bring really big guns, toy units, and 'favored' units.

But what if I bring a list that comps higher than yours, because I'm gaming the system, and win thanks to my softscores?

You know, like the max comp lists people are making all over this blog right now.

Lyracian said...

Just for fun I looked at some army lists I actually play. This system just hates Monsters and massed Tanks as well as any useful equipment.

My 1750 Tyranids scores 13/105 Comp
2x Dakka Tyrant & Guard -30, Tervigan -18, T-fex -4, Genestealers -2, 4x Hivers -19, 3xZoanthropes -9 and some gaunts -2, Monster Tax -8.

1500 Ultramarines score 28/107 Comp
Libby -5, 3x Rifleman -6, 3x Pred -15, 3x MM/HF Speeders -13, 3x Tac in Plasmaback -9, Vehicle Tax on 12 Units -31. If it was not for the hideous Vehicle tax this one would not be too bad...

daniel said...

VT2 - The list with one scoring unit and some jump pack priests here is not even good at the comp it gets. It is alot of crap bunched together. But to the creators defence it was probably his first list in the new framework. Bring your high comp lists VT2 cause according to you, it is needed to win the tournements... And let us see after a hand full tournements, how it went...

Signing out.

P daddy

Thud said...

Hey, VT2, where in Sweden are you located?

You should come over to Norway (Bergen) in February/March for the annual Winter War tournament. No comp, good times, laid back. :)

Henrik said...

@AbusePuppy:

I am happy to see that there is some kind of understanding from you, even if you are not convinced our way would please you all the way.

The way many of us regards comp is perhaps different from what you have been experiencing in your area. First, our history of comp has never been a promotion of fluffy armies, but rather an ambition to increase competitiveness. It is meant as a tool to make playing skill more important and list building less important.
This is the goal, but everyone with experience will tell you that the system is not perfect, never will be, but it has some effect in the desired direction.

Another idea is to make it more fun for new players. The thought behind this is that veteran players are better than beginners at list building.
Without comp, new players will enter tournaments with both lower playing skill and also weaker army lists. Such scenario is not fun for either the beginner or the veteran. The beginner will be chrushed without being able to get any feeling of playing a game, and the veteran will get bored.
Along this philosophy, the comp system is one little tool to make it more interesting for new players to get involved in the tournament scene.

The argument "why am I not allowed to play with all the toys I have?" -can be reversed: "Wow! I can actually make a tournament-worthy army of the few crappy toys I have acqiured as a newbie!".

Final note: Sweden has quite a vital 40k community despite being 9 million inhabitants spread out across a (comparable) large country. We have almost 500 players in our ranking system and roughly 100 players who have played more than 4 tournamants during the last 12 months.

Finally, we have managed very well in the ETC, which (in my opinion) is proof that we have a lot of high quality players.

Some say our comp system have had a positive influence to the community, bringing in more new players and make players better at the game.

Regards,
Henrik

PS @Lyracian: your comp is not too bad for lists that have been designed without knowledge of the system. I am pretty sure you can make a few alterations to those lists without losing too much efficiency. We call this process "comp-optimization" and is something we spend lots and lots of time with each time the system changes (3-4 times/year). Aim for 25-30 for the Nid list and 35 for the marines, and you will be all fine!

daniel said...

Lyracian - The vehicle tax is accually just recently modified and according to many "abit" too high... Also the Landraider seems a tad over priced at this version of the framework... this has been brought up and hopefully slightly lowered to the next version, but the thesis is that the more AV you have, the harder every single unit of AV becomes, like classical strength in numbers.

But as Henrik mention, you could probably get your hive tyrant unit to comp around 17 instead of 31.

One thing that is diffrent also, is that the meta game in Sweden differs a bit, you don't need as much anti tank in a comped environment as you do in an uncomped, since the vehcles are taxed hard, people try to find other means of delivery.

/D

Lyracian said...

@Henrik -

If I play my other Tyranids list with Swarmlord and Gargoyles it jumps to Comp Score: 33.

For Marines you can replace Speeders with Attack Bikes and save 15 points and replace one Tac in Plasmaback with Sniper Scouts to save 6 points. Final Comp Score: 49.

However why would I want to? It may work for you but I would certainly not play in these sort of events. If I want to go to a tournament I will go play Blood Bowl. :o)

daniel said...

Egge tried to post this but failed so I do it for him:


This is really, really interesting discussion. Although VT2 keep talking nonsense - even after someone showed a couple of tournaments, including some without comp, he keeps insisting he's never heard of an tournament that allows a lower comp than 40 - Abusepuppy keeps it interesting by being sensible and keeps himnself away from lies (good job ).

It's three points I'd like to try to make:

1. This discussion isn't the first where people have tried to theoretically make a point by posting lists that would absolutely win a tournament in this comp-system. Practically it's not working like that. If you can make a hardcore 80 comped list - someone else can make a 60 comped list that will beat the crap out of your list. Sadly, Abusepuppy doesn't have the chance to try the system out in Sweden so it's going to be kept theoretically but I'd like to point out that it's been to practice for some while now and gives a much different result than the theoretically situations talked about here. It's not that easy to win a tournament as VT2 seems to think.

2. In practice, this compsystem provides with this basic effect: the hardest list that are available to each army is "less harder" than in the normal case. This means that it's a greater chance you to take the units you think is cool (for instans pyrovores), with any upgrades you think is cool, and still have a greater chance of winning than in any system without comp. I'd like to emphasize the "greater"-part here. High comp usually sucks - make a kick-ass army list about 50 i comp - then you might have a winner.

This is a practice that works. You can still make hard lists though, but the difference in hardness between the hardest list and the nicest (someone called it rainbowlist?) list is lower.

The no-comp and comp-absolutely has one single point that usually decides what camp you're cheering on: Should necrons have a greater chance to win or not? It's a fact that they are a weak army right now - sure they have some strong builds - but it's not enough to play at the same level as Orks, Nids or Imperial Guard.

3. The organizer decide the type of tournaments. The players decide to attend. It's all 40k. I don't buy the "it's not really 40k"-argument, it feels to much of a "if-I-loose-in-this-tournament-system-I-perfectly-know-what-to-expect-then-it's-not-really-40k"-whine. ETC is "normal" enough to prove a point - half the time you are facing whatever you want and other half exactly what you don't want to face. Of all of Abusepuppy's argument, this was extremely weak and a little out of character in this discussion(sorry, man!). I feel the same way when people say that the game is balanced - it's not. The question if, of course, if one care.

@VT2: Bring such a list and prove the system wrong. I think people on this blogg will be happy to provide with the best available army list for you with high comp. But it has been tested before.

Lyracian said...

@Daniel.
Each of my Hive Tyrants has Comp -15 with just a single guard. I could not get them any lower without making them useless to me.

daniel said...

Egge tried to post this, but I guess it is to long or something, so I post it for him in batches.

This is really, really interesting discussion. Although VT2 keep talking nonsense - even after someone showed a couple of tournaments, including some without comp, he keeps insisting he's never heard of an tournament that allows a lower comp than 40 - Abusepuppy keeps it interesting by being sensible and keeps himnself away from lies (good job ).

It's three points I'd like to try to make:

1. This discussion isn't the first where people have tried to theoretically make a point by posting lists that would absolutely win a tournament in this comp-system. Practically it's not working like that. If you can make a hardcore 80 comped list - someone else can make a 60 comped list that will beat the crap out of your list. Sadly, Abusepuppy doesn't have the chance to try the system out in Sweden so it's going to be kept theoretically but I'd like to point out that it's been to practice for some while now and gives a much different result than the theoretically situations talked about here. It's not that easy to win a tournament as VT2 seems to think.

2. In practice, this compsystem provides with this basic effect: the hardest list that are available to each army is "less harder" than in the normal case. This means that it's a greater chance you to take the units you think is cool (for instans pyrovores), with any upgrades you think is cool, and still have a greater chance of winning than in any system without comp. I'd like to emphasize the "greater"-part here. High comp usually sucks - make a kick-ass army list about 50 i comp - then you might have a winner.

tbc --

daniel said...

continued ---

This is a practice that works. You can still make hard lists though, but the difference in hardness between the hardest list and the nicest (someone called it rainbowlist?) list is lower.

The no-comp and comp-absolutely has one single point that usually decides what camp you're cheering on: Should necrons have a greater chance to win or not? It's a fact that they are a weak army right now - sure they have some strong builds - but it's not enough to play at the same level as Orks, Nids or Imperial Guard.

3. The organizer decide the type of tournaments. The players decide to attend. It's all 40k. I don't buy the "it's not really 40k"-argument, it feels to much of a "if-I-loose-in-this-tournament-system-I-perfectly-know-what-to-expect-then-it's-not-really-40k"-whine. ETC is "normal" enough to prove a point - half the time you are facing whatever you want and other half exactly what you don't want to face. Of all of Abusepuppy's argument, this was extremely weak and a little out of character in this discussion(sorry, man!). I feel the same way when people say that the game is balanced - it's not. The question if, of course, if one care.

@VT2: Bring such a list and prove the system wrong. I think people on this blogg will be happy to provide with the best available army list for you with high comp. But it has been tested before.

daniel said...

Lyracian - Sorry man, did not read it all and assumed... which is the mother... you hade a hive tyrant with shield, regenerate and old advesary and 3 guards with Boneswords.. it is quite hard comped, but if you remove the shield you bump up quite high.

VT2:
"Why can't I run my rhinos, terminators, or predators?"
You can easily design a list of vanilla marines with 10 terminators, a few 3-4 rhinos and 2-3 Predators at a comp of 35 ish at 1750. That comp score is probably representative or close to representative to the hitting and stayability of your army.
Who decides what's 'hard,' and what's 'soft?' The mafia?
HAHAHA - Yeah, the mafia or wait, I finally realized, you are illiterate..
But if you have a friend how can read the posts above, you see how the comp is decided. It is decided by: Copy paste:

http://www.svenska40k.se/forum/viewforum.php?f=52&sid=f93a9f44c214fd32592ea8916972631

If you check that link, every post in it is about the comp system, the framework for this compsystem is worked out by the 40K community. It is about 100 000 posts, so every voice is heard, the list is however compiled by 5 guys, from 5 diffrent big gaming communities, from diffrent parts of the country, what they do is to listen to the community and tries to balance and compile the ideas and arguments from within the community.

So you VT2 can also participate and make your voice heard or, forever be silent... cause people that just hate and not try to affect any system should just be quite. So I encourage you VT2, make your voice heard and you might see that the community ain´t a secret order nor the mafia.

Best regards

Papa D

VT2 said...

I don't play handicaphammer 40k. Fact is, I've made it a point not engage in such things, and I've been in the game for over 10 years.

There's nothing for me to prove, and nothing for me to accomplish. If I were to bring Taak's legion list (100 comp, guaranteed), you'd answer by giving me horrible softscores on the spot, and alter the comp afterwards, so such a list can never be made again.

It's you who should prove to me that you can win games played with the rules as they are written.

VT2 said...

Why is there even a need for a 'community' on a forum somewhere to 'balance' the game?
The rules aren't good enough on their own? Really?

Orks are weaksauce.
They can compete when you strip mech out - which is done by the 'comp' - not really comp in the traditional sense, since it makes a whole lot of fully legal, available units illegal.

Jaws of the world wolf is -billion, but living lightning is -almost nothing? Nullzone and avenger librarian is almost a free card?
Sometimes, I doubt people have played the actual game, and are too busy reading warseer to bother.

daniel said...

Last post for tonite:

Are everyone illiterate.. it is except for vt2 atleast 2 others that have said... play the game as it is intended... I think I have written atleast 5 times that we have alot of non-comped tournaments.. I love them!! I love them equally to the comped tournaments. I and majority of the active community in Sweden, understand and have played without comp, myself, started playing 17 years ago and entered the tournament scene 2 years ago. Before that I never played with comp. So I have some accumilated experience.

And vt2 - Funny enough I have most of my best placements in the non comped tournaments.

An interesting anecdote to this is that in the south we play with comp alot, not always but 66% in the north they don't. the last year there has been a tournament in the north twice a year, the last year the southeners have ended up basically filling the topp 10 positions with one or two exceptions, this is a tournament with 10 southeners and 60 - 70 northeners..

Good nite kiwiland and ausies and whom ever that might be listening.

Best regards

Papa D

andreas said...

to state something and then not backing in up ...

quote from VT2:
"I don't play handicaphammer 40k. Fact is, I've made it a point not engage in such things, and I've been in the game for over 10 years.

There's nothing for me to prove, and nothing for me to accomplish. If I were to bring Taak's legion list (100 comp, guaranteed), you'd answer by giving me horrible softscores on the spot, and alter the comp afterwards, so such a list can never be made again."

if you want to prove this broken etc. and so forth. do accept the 'challenge' and attend a tournament or a match with comp. how much can it hurt? your opinion might be the same afterwards but it will give you some more insight.

to just point and yell and then, when given the chance, not take it to see what it actually is.

try it, then hate it. give it a chance.

VT2 said...

Why?
It's enough for me to make broken, high-comp lists. Besides, I still don't have to prove anything to anyone.

You're all proving how silly our comp is on a daily basis.

'Point and yell?' I gave a link to our failcomp when Taak was discussing aussie comp. Because I'm the only swede aboard, I said what I knew, and asked an active handicaphammer40k player what comp was really all about, and then this happened

Bam!
Lots of butthurt for you, and lots of giggles for everyone else.
Mission accomplished.

AbusePuppy said...

>and so forth. do accept the 'challenge' and attend a tournament or a match with comp. how much can it hurt? your opinion might be the same afterwards but it will give you some more insight.

I can understand Vt2's side of things here; building a new army- as the comp system tends to require, since its strictures are rather different from those of normal 40K- is not a small investment. Spending what would come to US$500+ (I'm not really familiar with the prices in Sweden) just to prove a point, plus spending all the time painting, assembling, etc, is probably more than he may want to invest.

Auretious Taak said...

VT2, take the legion list to a comp'ed tourney. Then play to win every game (alongside the side special objectives). You make a better arguement if you win at least one game out of three with the list in the environment as we've all seen the reaction to the list over on YTTH for example. heh.

it's interesting examining Swedish comp and comparing it to aussie comp as both systems are so different. In both cases, non-comp tournies are available, and for you, you lucky bastard, youa t least have at least a third of the events around as non-comp, and at least 3 at 2,000pts comp or otherwise. Australia has ONE Major Non-comp tournament, and no, it isn't Fester's centurion. that hasn't even taken place yet and he is full of it to claim it is - Phenomenon in canberra is what I am talking about here. We have a few one day non-comp events but that's it outside Western Australia.

Run the 100 comp lists and podium by tabling people, or winning games with them, it's a challenge and actually supports your arguements directly. heck, you have autrhorship rights here so abuse both those and tournament wins in the system and direct responses to the tourney comp which is apparently reviewed and changed every 3 months or so. So see if your 100 comp armies which top all the comp tournies you go to because apparently you are that good, system abuse or not, and whether it changes the comp make up on units or not. Be funny if it did. :)

AbusePuppy said...

New post should be up soon, so we can shift discussion thataway so people don't keep having to scroll past four pages of discussions to see anything.

Also: army lists. Who doesn't love army lists?

Auretious Taak said...

It's still on the first page Puppy. :p

Everyone loves army lists. Works better when the PDF is actually right on all counts not riddled with mistakes...

VT2 said...

Maybe we should hold a poll over whether or not VT2 should attend comphammer - Sweden edition.

If I bring marines, I can make pretty much any list under the sun.

Post a Comment

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...