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


Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Swedish Comp Part 2: Electric Boogaloo


Continued from here, where a lively discussion was going on. I promised some lists in the previous thread, and lists I now deliver.

Now, keep in mind some of these are predicated on a mech-light environment (and hence do not feature much Melta, etc). Depending on what kind of comp you are expecting, you could obviously modify these to suit your needs. Keep in mind that, by the rules as explained to us in the previous thread by daniel and several of the other posters, every +5 you can squeeze onto your comp is the equivalent of +1BP every single round of the tournament, so it is in your best interests to score as high as you possibly can without crippling your army.

(In a "threshold" comp system, of course, this isn't an issue and you simply need to keep yourself as minimally above the threshold as possible; depending on what that is, you can expect varying levels of "competitiveness" by our more common definition. A comp 60 threshold, for example, is almost impossible to spam transports, so you can safely leave some AT at home, whereas a comp 40 environment it becomes very possible to do so, so consideration must be given.)

So enough of that: lists! I'll put some comments after each one. Because these are rough lists, I expect that they could be improved upon by some enterprising players and many of them are slightly over in points, since I didn't feel the need to finalize those last few points of tweaking. In all cases comp score is listed first, at the top, followed by points total, and then the unit list, with comp values for each of them.

List Number One: Stealer Shock Therapy
(99)
(1500)
1 Hive Tyrant (-1)
HVC, Hive Commander, Scream, Horror

10 Ymgarl Genestealers (-2)

10 Ymgarl Genestealers (-2)

3 Lictors (+5)

8 Genestealers (-2)
Toxin

7 Genestealers (-2)
Toxin

1 Harpy (-1)
HVC, Regen

1 Harpy (-1)
HVC, Regen


So this list is pretty simple: take all of the "underpowered" Tyranid units, abuse them until they cry like little girls, and fill things out with some decent stuff that isn't heavily penalized. We have a pretty standard reserves gimmick, taking as many Heavy Venom Cannons as we can because A, they're suppression and we need that so our melee units can do their dirty work and B, +1 comp for taking an AT weapon? I'll take a dozen! Tyrant has crappy psychics because the good ones cost too much comp. Since it comes in with an absolutely absurd comp rating of 99 (and could easily be taken to 100, if they want to round against you), you hardly even have to try against most people to take home crushing "victories" (i.e. tying a list with "only" 60 comp and beating him 18-2). Oh, Ymgarl Genestealers are really, really good against any army that isn't mechanized. that's why you shell out for them. Chances are you will pounce and kill 2-3 units on turn 2.

List Number Two: Waiting for the Wolves
(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

Well, you've got a big, scary Wolf Lord with Warrior Born to cut through enemy squads and three Iron Priests, who are pretending to be the same. Iron Priests, you say? Well, they're T5 units with four ablative wounds and a Thunder Hammer. Most people don't appreciate that hitting their lines at cavalry speed. Unlike most lists, this one has a decent amount of AT shooting, since Blood Claws don't take a penalty for Melta unless they have a Wolf Guard. You just attach your two ICs to them instead and run forward every turn. (The Priest also acts as a bonus melta and makes the Claws potentially dangerous on the charge.) Swiftclaws earn you free comp and can tie up shooty units like battlesuits and heavy weapon squads. Really, though, you're relying on delivering one ridiculous character to their lines and ending everything they have, which is quite possible.

List Number Three: Where the Wild Things Are
(98)
(1499)
Shas'el (-3)
Flamer, AFP, MT

3 Crisis (-7)
MP, PR, MT

3 Crisis (-8)

3 Crisis (-9)

6 FWs (-1)

10 Kroot (+1)
3 Krootox

10 Kroot (+1)
3 Krootox

10 Kroot (+3)
3 Krootox

2 Piranhas (-3)
FB, TA, 1 DP

6 Vespid (+4)

6 Vespid (+4)

This army has one plan and one plan only: fit as many Fireknives as humanly possible into 1500pts. Everything else it does is to support that, and to enable them; unfortunately we can't easily include any Markerlights in the list, which is truly saddening; it might actually be worth switching some stuff around to get some (adding Marker Drones, ML to the FWs, etc), as they are invaluable to you. However, even without you have several blocking squads, meltaguns, and a plethora of Autocannons. Hell, you get a pseudo-Autocannon that gives you +1 comp in Krootox, so we maxed those babies out. Note that the Kroot squads can actually soak a fair bit of punishment due to three wounds each on the Krootox; use them to minimize squad losses where necessary. Vespid likewise contribute absurd amounts of comp back, netting us another near-absolute value. In retrospect, one of the team Crisis should probably carry the AFP and the commander Plasma/Missile, in order to take better advantage of his high BS. You aren't ever going to score more than one objective, but you can shoot most anything in the game to pieces- so do it.

List Number Four: Shock and Awe
(92)
(1495)
1 CCS (-5.5)
Standard, Missile, Vox, PPistol

6 PBS (-2)

6 PBS (-2)

6 PBS (-2)

Infantry Platoon
PCS (-1)
Mortar, Sniper, Vox
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper, Vox
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper
HWS (0)
3 Mortar
SWS (-.5)
Flamers

Infantry Platoon
PCS (-1)
Mortar, Sniper, Vox
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper, Vox
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper
HWS (0)
3 Mortar

Infantry Platoon
PCS (-1)
Mortar, Sniper, Vox
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper, Vox
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper
Infantry Squad (0)
Mortar, Sniper
HWS (0)
3 Mortar

3 Scout Sentinel (-1)
Auotcannons

3 Scout Sentinel (-1)
Auotcannons

3 Scout Sentinel (-1)
Auotcannons

Yikes, that's a long one. But pretty simple. This will hurt a lot against anyone it can't dismount, but once it does the gimmick is great- three(ish) squads each turn take a hit from a PBS and are blasted with pinning weapons (or just plain blasted) such that they are falling back/pinned every turn. The latter is obviously preferable against Marines, but even they struggle when they have to keep jumping back 2d6 every single turn, and if you can force a second morale check on them... well, they're probably off the board at that point. Lists with good saves will be a problem for you, but FRFSRF can deal with some of that, and Autocannons help against MCs somewhat. Sniper Rifles will also get you some random wounds, so don't forget to roll them as well. Running Griffons or Heavy Mortars would be nice, but the former are vehicles (and thus hit your comp HARD when in squadrons) and the latter take away slots from your all-important PBS squads. This is perhaps the weakest of the lists, but against some armies it will simply crush them by weight of firepower. Remember, those PBS can also fire a S5 large blast if you need them to, and more often than not it pierces MEQ armor.

List Number Five: Raiders of the Lost Ark
(96)
(1480)
1 Captain (-3)
2 LC, TDA

5 Terminators (-1)
Assault Cannon

5 Scouts (-1)
Sniper, Camo Cloaks, Telion

5 Scouts (-1)
Boltguns, Camo Cloaks, Teleport Homer

8 Vanguard Vetrans (+5)
Jump Packs, 3 PW, Sgt w/Relic Blade

8 Vanguard Vetrans (+5)
Jump Packs, 3 PW, Sgt w/Relic Blade

1 Land Raider Redeemer (-14)

Land Raider, yaaaaaaaay! This army has two basic modes: Scouts in Raider and Termies in Raider. Scouts go in there if your opponent does have Melta/Railguns to deal with it; you trundle forward, putting out a bubble of "it's safe to land here" and hope to bring in your three hammer squads. The Terminators can simply shoot units up as they land and then charge after- they're still 2+/5+ guys with Fists, so while they may not be as devastating as TH/SS are, but they can still chew apart most units in combat. The Vanguard are a giant comp boost and, if they arrive at the right time, will wreck several squads quite badly. (You generally want to multicharge and hit two squads, since you deal out absurd numbers of PW wounds.) Make sure that Raider moves 12" towards them every turn to insure you get there before the VV do. Alternately, the Termies can stick in the Raider and the Scouts can infiltrate near a juicy target- this is why the have Boltguns, so they can be mobile and still get some random shots off. The Captain cuts down some guys before they can put attacks on your Termies and is generally only there because you have to take something in the HQ slot. Telion is there because, once again, you need to fill a slot and he can sometimes pick off a meltagunner, etc, to let you do something key. Don't be afraid to go to ground with your Scouts for that 2+ save, but do be afraid of heavy flamers.

List Number Six: Dread Non-Pirate Roberts
(92.5)
(1500?)
1 DC Tycho (+1)

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

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

1 Furioso (-3)

10 Scouts (-2)
Sniper, Camo

7 Death Company (+3.5)

1 DC Dread (-4)

5 Vanguard Vetrans (-2)
Jump Packs, 2 PWs, 2 Infernus

1 Dread (-3)
2 TLAC

1 Dread (-4)
2 TLAC

1 Dread (-4)
2 TLAC

This is one of the better-faring lists against other "hard" lists- you have a bunch of melta (which you don't get penalized for, yay!) and Autocannons galore. As usual we spam Death Company and Techmarines because of easy comp bonuses for decent units. (Note that in this list DC are kinda mediocre, since we have no way to control their rage, but they work anyways as simply another threat to worry about for the enemy. And they enable some other stuff. Tycho serves a similar role and fills the necessary HQ slot.) Five Dread frames give us a pretty resilient force, and our one Scout squad will claim an objective and camp it the rest of the game while our crazy men do their thing. Heavy infantry are a bit of a problem for the list- switching the Furioso/DC to Blood Talons is a definite possibility, and only causes a limited comp hit. Basically, you are putting a lot of scary things down and hoping your opponent can't easily deal with all of them arriving at roughly the same time- the three HS Dreads are the weak link here, since they only really hurt mech armies; against anything else, you can pull much crazier stunts.


So I hope you can see that any explicit comp system, no matter how intricate and well-designed, can be broken. Certainly they could fix the loopholes I've used here, but that is merely a stopgap- there will still be other holes to be exploited, and other units with less comp penalty than their usefulness would have you think, and these units will become the new TH/SS, or IG Chimera spam, or SW Rune Priest, or what have you. It's an eternal game of whack-a-mole, constantly trying to push down the "best" options, only to have a new best option raise its head to annoy you.

There is something else we haven't talked about, however, a different type of comp system that can't be broken in this way; many tournaments, rather than having a specific set of guidelines like this, use some sort of personnel-scored system, where an individual (or, in come cases, a group of individuals, out of "fairness") judge each list and give it a rating.

Now, at a first glance this seems to solve the abuse, right? After all, you can't abuse a system that isn't there- but any con man will tell you that people's perceptions are the easiest system to game. For such a human-centric system of comp, gaming the system becomes a matter of assessing the judge's personal biases- and believe me, most of them will have strong opinions on what is "too good." By simply taking an army that the judge doesn't perceive as powerful (avoiding vehicles if they hate mech, etc) the "system" can still be gamed. Worse yet, those the judge is friendly with will almost invariably be scored more generously than those that aren't- even anonymous lists only mitigate this; if you know what list your friend Dan has showed up with to every tournament so far, you're going to recognize it when you see it again in his handwriting. Outsiders (most notably those new to town or who traveled to attend the tournament) will likewise be invariably scored lower; this is not to call the TO's of these tournaments unfair or to say they are attempting to cheat, but simple human nature makes it all but impossible to rate everything on a perfectly even standing.

The uncertainty of such a system is, by most perspectives, the worst part- what might get you a good rating one place nets you a huge penalty somewhere else, and it is impossible to tell which unless some sort of rules are spelled out... at which point you are walking straight down the path to our "checklist" system above, and all its abuses.

I have reiterated many times what comp does not do: it does not make more lists playable, except at the expense of removing similar numbers of lists from usability. It does not make the game more friendly to older codices, as they lack the flexibility to work withing comp's restrictions, whereas newer books can easily do so. It does not make the game more friendly to new players, as they are just as likely as experienced players to bring an army that comp punishes for some offense or another- even little Timmy can figure out that Land Raiders are good and bringing several of them can be really cool and strong.

What comp does do is impose one person's- or a small group's- views on how the game should be played on the game at large. You may not feel that my Vulkan list with tons of flamers and melta is "fluffy," but Games Workshop seems to disagree- isn't that why they MADE that character in the first place, to encourage people to build that army to represent the fighting style of the Salamanders? I may not like your Chaos Undivided army that includes one of each squad of cult troops, but I do not feel I have the authority to punish you for wanting to play it in a tournament if you so choose. Comp is a system of judgement against certain lists; it can never be for or encourage anything, except indirectly.

43 pinkments:

Chumbalaya said...

First!

lehcyfer said...

And some Orks?

Kirby said...

^ lol chumby. Some good lists there using comp and assuming a less mech oriented environment.

GreyICE said...

Oh shit dawg, now ya done it.

Third!

IG makes me cry :(

Gustav said...

Being from Sweden I can tell you that scoring a high comp isn't always what you're after. The comp has different impact on different tournaments. Most of my lists are in the comp 25 range.

I might not - like most of you guys seems to as well - like the comp, but its a unified set of "rules" that works on a national level, and apart from being a seperate game in the game, that is good.

AbusePuppy said...

Well, sure, depending on the system you may not need to optimize for max comp. But the point is that you CAN. Comp doesn't stop you from bringing hard lists (which it is nominally supposed to do). I can write a hard list for any comp value you care to specify- even 100, as the above proves. And if it doesn't do the one thing it's supposed to (limit such lists), what is it even for?

Lyracian said...

Some fun looking lists. I think "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is actually 92 Comp and the system says -1 per Terminator!

With a 99 rating you can probably afford the Comp to buff your Hive Tyrant in "Stealer Shock Therapy" a little bit.

I do find it funny that a system that 90% or more of your readers will never use seems to be generating more discussion than any of the Tactics/Building articles...

Thud said...

So, I was looking through 'Kompmallen' and I found something interesting...

It said "a balanced list on (sic) 1500 points should have a KP of 50." My 1850 point Eldar list scores 40. Drop two Vypers and a DAVU to get it down to 1500 points (more or less) and I'm at 56. And this is a list made to pwn face in a heavily competitive, non-comped environment.

Now, being an anti-comp sort of fellow from the get-go, I'm not sure whether this makes me think better of the Swedish comp system, or worse.

Why do I say that, you ask. Well, on the 'better' side, it shows that competitive lists aren't necessarily comped out of the running, to the point where only Warseer sensations can hope to place. But on the other hand; this makes me seriously question the balance of this system. Obviously -something- gets hit over the head with this system, right? Otherwise there would be no point in it. And if that is indeed the case, then why should I get away scot-free with my competitive list while other players gets a slap to the face? I table Leafblowers on a regular basis without comp, so I don't see why I should have a further advantage on them.

AbusePuppy said...

@Thud
Eldar, because they largely don't suffer the vehicle tax or melta penalties (other than -3 for Fire Dragons, which is minimal) score much, much better than other armies. Try building a normal BA, SM, SW, Tyranid, or IG army and seeing how you score; hell, build ANYTHING else.

Sage said...

Comp should be posted by GW as a way to nudge things in the right direction while they can't do a new codex. Also, errata/online versions, with updated rules. A $7-10 codex = sign people the fuck up. Would solve some things.

Thud said...

@Puppy: But that's my point. I get an easy ride with my competitive 5th edition army, while others gets screwed over.

@Sage: Not happening. Ever. "O hai thar, gamers. GW here. These units, yeah these ones, DON'T buy them!" About as likely as a year without any Imperial codex releases. There's a reason why they have done a 180 on their ridiculous SC policy, ya know.

lehcyfer said...

@Sage: I can see such official comp as a means to drive up sales of GW's not_so_well_selling pieces of merchandise - like if you take techmarine with his retinue you get some victory points right away :)

Thud said...

Marketing 101:
Positive reinforcement > negative reinforcement.

Elttaes said...

Heh, very good point about the Subjective Comp style. I remember reading about a Dark Eldar player that got trashed in comp scores at a tournament because he'd taken AP 2-3 weapons on all of his Raiders. (Nevermind that he can _only_ choose from those 2 weapons, then.) Subjective comp is way worse than checklist comp. (Don't get me wrong, I hate checklist comp, too.)

Henrik said...

I am really enjoying the excitement about this. Thank you very much for putting so much energy into it!

Given the assumptions you have, you have created some decent lists. But, I must tell you that things are not so easy in reality.

You wrote that you get 1 BP per every 5 comp score, unfortunately this is not correct; actually you only get 1 BP per 10 comp score.

The most common usage of comp score is to have both a lower and an upper limit for the comp, for example between 30 and 90 at 1500 pts. You are, of course, allowed to play with an army above 90, but you'll not receive any more bonus from it.

At the start of the tournament, the comp score will be divided by 5 (with a limit 30-90, the comp value will between 6 and 18).
Battles scores are 0-20 per game, normally 0-10 for objectives and 0-10 for victory points.
After the objective and victory points have been calculated, you will adjust each result with half the difference between the two.

example:

You play with the 'Stealer Shock Therapy" list (comp 99), I play my mech eldar list (comp 45).

I win the battle with 15 to your 5.

We add the comp factor: I have 45/5=9.
You have 90 (that's the upper limit) /5 = 18.

I get my result subtracted by half the difference: 15 - (18-9)/2 = 15 - 4,5.

You'll get the same amount as a bonus: 5+4,5 = 9,5.

So, I still win in this game, despite the huge difference in comp.

You see, the effect is actually much smaller than what you might think in the first place. But in highly competitive environment, as the one we play in, those points do matter.

During a 5-game tournament, you will get more than a massacre's worth in bonus points, but you have played with a force weaker than most, chances are that you have suffered lots of BP:s because of your weak list.

Adding 3 rhinos to an all-foot force will make it better, but lower your comp by ~10. This will give you a net loss of 1 BP/game. Is it worth it? It depends of the rest of your list, and what the other guys are playing.


There are other ways to use comp, but the effect is more or less the same.

My said...

One should note that many of these armylists wouldn't be really effective in the battlefield. My point is: you make a 100 list and abuse the system. I make a 80 point list and abuse the system - I win, most likely. That Tau list should be effective, though. Otherwise - without scoring units...well you most likely will get maybe 2 or 3 points from VP/KP - and it's not enough.

It's fun to see what army lists you can create (especially when you find some loopholes) but it's awfully theoretical and I think a lot of players here, on this blogg, could make a comp 70 list that destroys most of these comp 100 lists without much difficulty. Players have tried it before and found that around 40-60 in comp should be alright.

/Erik - using my woman's login

VT2 said...

One should note that these comped lists ae really effective on the battlefield, since mech is punished out of existence, and you get bonus softscores for having as high comp as humanly possible.

Henrik said...

VT2: why are you lying? I don't get it.

My said...

@VT2: Mech is seen on the table. Didn't you say that you don't play in this kind of system? How come you know so much about it? There _are_ mech armies, there are armies with scatter-laser-walkers and a lot of able armies. As Henrik put it; why are you lying? If you have to lie to make a point I would say your point isn't that good...I've played in these kind of tournaments and tell you that they are not that good.

AbusePuppy said...

@Henrik

May have been mistaken on the 1BP/5comp, thought I had read that in the previous thread.

>You see, the effect is actually much smaller than what you might think in the first place.

Except that, in your example, you _crush_ me 15-5 and comp turns it into... what is basically a tie. And this is with me not even getting the full benefit of my comp. (If I was playing a system capped at 90, I would modify my list to suit.)

These lists are weaker than the lists I would run in a non-comped tournament, but they aren't weak lists. The Space Wolf, Tau, and Tyranid lists in particular are basically slimmed-down version of things I have seen take 1st in tournaments and even go to 'Ard Boyz (although that isn't saying a lot.) The BA Storm Raven list from the previous thread (using Sanguine Guard, which is a big improvement for it), is extremely dangerous to most lists that are possible with comp.

Adding three Rhinos to a foot list should lower your comp by at least -11 (-3 per Rhino, -2 for vehicle tax). It only makes it marginally better, because vehicle saturation is what makes them strong- when your force is split like that, it becomes less useful. (Some lists can do it, but I doubt the hybrid lists I am thinking of are anything like what you are thinking of.)

@My
It would depend on the environment. As I said, these lists are created in a vaccum; if I knew more about what is popular at tournaments, or what kind of comp I was designing for at a particular tournament (what the max/min values are, whether it's threshold or modifier, what level of comp lists most people bring, etc) I could arrow in on a better list. These are examples to show that I _can_ do basically anything with comp.

Would you care to post an example of what you consider a strong 80pt list? I could easily strengthen these by ditching some comp, but I'm curious what you see as a "strong" list. While I like my Tau, I am pretty sure they would roll to several of the other lists I have there, especially without Markerlights.

Sage said...

Thud: 'Not happening. Ever. "O hai thar, gamers. GW here. These units, yeah these ones, DON'T buy them!" About as likely as a year without any Imperial codex releases. There's a reason why they have done a 180 on their ridiculous SC policy, ya know. '

@ Thud: Cause, you know, people buy SO MANY vespids, Sniper Drone Teams, Krootox, and ethreals. I'm sure people could toss in examples of other codecies that have similar problems. Then they could offer an online version of the codex (discount if you bought the codex before/included in new codecies). Online = less printing costs/easy distribution. You want to torrent it for a bit, or just toss out a tenner and get a pdf?

If they buffed all the races a bit, giving a bit of love to units that need it, and fixing little bits of armies that needed fixing, they could dramatically increase profits by forcing us to basically open-beta test it.

Sage said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sage said...

Also note that your online version is a perfect-quality PDF, compared to lesser scanned versions.

@Henrick: So, in a game where you COMPLETELY FLOOR him, noting that Eldar aren't that great in this version, and that the suggested lists are slightly tweaked versions of the usual build, you'd beat him by 1 point. In your 1 bs/5 comp example, if you beat him 3 to 1, you'd get a minor victory.

Lets try 10 points each, same examples. You have 9 comp BPs, he has 18. Difference is 4.5 as previously calculated. Your list has lower comp, so you get 5.5 (10-4.5) actual points. His list has higher, so he gets 14.5 (10+4.5). So in an equal deadlock, he beats you 2.63 to one. Do you really want to calculate a 15-5 win his way?

Totally balanced system.

My said...

@Abusepuppy; I have no doubt you could make a harder list by sinking your comp a couple of notches (hell, probably a harder list with the same comp). But my point is more of the type: if you can make an hard list - chances are that your opponent can do it as well. When you come to an tournament the system have balanced itself out.

The basic Swedish tournament-missions forces different strategies - sometimes you need to hold back and sometimes move forward and the high comp lists posted here usually lack the chance to "do everything" which is many times needed in a tournament. I can agree that no list made here is by default "weak lists" but they have a tendency to hope for perfect opponents.

The lists posted here are more of the extreme type. I'd like to see more balanced lists as examples. The type that can handle all kind of situations. Basically an army must be able to handle tough vehicles, light vehicles, transports, massed troops and so on. And have about 4 scoring units (you need two in perfect locations to take 8/20 points (the rest is 4 points secondary and 8 points for VP - as an example). This forces some balance in the army and I'd like to see what you make for kind of army then, while assuming everything isn't going to go peachy?

/Erik

My said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
My said...

I noticed I might have just repeated what was alreyade posted. If so - sorry. Puppet, did you get anything out of my answer? I'm not sure it will matter if I post and army list - in Swedish tournaments it's important with balance in the army and killing stuff only gives you about 8 of 20 available points (assuming the opponent doesn't get at least 300 points from you) and I'm sure you could post something that will work in such a environment.

Sage said...

@ My: The experiences of the more active players here have suggested that you pay too many points and sacrifice too much firepower for 4 scoring units. Instead, get 2-3 (depending on army obviously, some armys <3 their troops), then contest/blow up the competition.

I'll give an example. Tau Troops are T3. FWs get 4+ saves, Kroot are bubblewrap, and get cover saves from shooting if you're lucky. Now you're suggesting 4 scoring units. Now I want to be able to transport these guys. So I've got to get transports. And now I have to bling out transports, because I took points from my offense, to do lesser offense/protect the troops inside the transports. Or watch as my Fire warriors get grinded to dust from assaults/shooting.

Nids can field Tervigons to mitigate this, as an example, but I'm going for an army I'd play.

I can almost see why Australia black-boxes it's comp score. People don't want to be penalized for taking the choices they like. You've now met a bunch of people that the comp list would hurt.

But it creates choices, right? Well, there's the choice of NO YOU CAN'T TAKE ELDRAD. Well, without a bunch of swooping hawks. As many as you can take, really. There's also the choice of -2 comp for Sniper Drone Teams, a Tau heavy support unit that's doesn't field enough firepower compared to other choices, plus pinning doesn't do much to mech/fearless units.

Comp penalizes things here. It shouldn't. It should buff bad choices/bad units, and that's it.

Sage said...

Sorry if I was a bit harsh in my last post. But we see tons of weird choices here. Is it going to be perfect? No. But should it do really bizarre things? No.

My said...

@Sage: (regarding using less Troops). I might have agree upon the reasoning if the system hadn't been tested. But...I really can't explain in more detail than...that theory is wrong, in practice. This blogg's readers are not first in trying this. Even if you just wanna prove that you could disrupt the system...

This is awkward. I can only say that I've been participating in these kind of tournaments and seen people try this and it doesn't work. I hate to say it but I kind of hoping that you'll just take my word for it (actually, I'm hoping you will try it out, to find the answer yourself :-) ). I'm basing my opinion on actual gaming in this system - and that says it most likely won't work.

Sage said...

My, one of the problems with faith in anything beyond the perfect is that it's flawed. That's kinda why the bible suggests not having faith in anything beyond God.

I'm asking for an argument. Kirby is VERY good at arguing, as you can see from his disassembly of the e-mail in the other thread. Ask him to help you, I want to be proved wrong in this. It makes for such more interesting discussions. :)

As to Tau and Troops, Fish of Fury isn't efficient. It is, unfortunately, more efficient just to 1-troop it, with Kroot Bubble-wrap that MIGHT grab 1 objective, then to take more then one. For Tau. Marines in a mech-heavy build, for example, will probably take 2-3 tactical squads. But they have firepoints in rhinos, and heavy weapons. Tau don't have them in Devilfish, and thus suffer for it.

I can see what I'd like the system to be. I can see it has major flaws (disallowing regular builds such as Marine Armour saturation and Eldrad? Never mind if they're good, people want to play them, but I guess that's part of the trinary choice, they can go uncomped or not play), minor flaws, and maybe some good things, but it isn't my system. I don't need to apologize for it.

It's like the political choices of the U.S. government, they're proven to be horrendous, but it's not my fault (if I had the resources, I'd try to mitigate them). And it's not yours either, so look at the comp list, and explain to me what you find right, and what you find wrong.

Kirby said...

Ya my parents always said I should be a lawyer. I'm also told I could sell an Eskimo a freezer. People are so offensive.

What? Oh ya, I do psychology lol.

AbusePuppy said...

@My
>The type that can handle all kind of situations. Basically an army must be able to handle tough vehicles, light vehicles, transports, massed troops and so on.

The thing is, depending on comp value, you're simply not going to realistically see all those things. You're never going to fight more than one Land Raider in a comp60 minimum tournament, and with only one in the opposing army you just spend the whole game avoiding it and working on the rest of their forces. You likewise aren't going to have to fight significant (5+) transports for the most part, because it's simply too crippling, comp-wise to do so. (Running five Rhinos alone is -19 comp.)

These lists are all "extreme" because the comp system punishes most balanced lists pretty hard- I could make some balanced lists, but there are very few options there. You'll note most of them run only minimal troops- this is because all of the good troops (Grey Hunters, Tacticals, Tervi/Termi, etc) are saddled with major penalties that simply make it not worth it to try and use them in the normal ways. Rather, they play to simply annihilate the enemy, scoring objectives only incidentally and denying the enemy their objectives.

>I can only say that I've been participating in these kind of tournaments and seen people try this and it doesn't work.

2-3 squads of troops is usually quite sufficient for MEQ armies. Obviously other armies can work differently, but no (good) army invests heavily in troops in order to score objectives. The rule that is generally bandied about is "hold one, contest the others," although this is predicated on Rhinos and other cheap objective-contesters, which your system punishes. Having multiple squads of troops will leave your army deficient in other ways, ways that all of these armies can exploit, and once the rest of the army has been swept off the board it's largely irrelevant how many troops you have, as they can't possibly do enough to fight the hard hitters in my army.

I haven't heard a lot of specifics on on your missions other than scoring being 10 for objectives and 10 for kills; presumably you use kill points or victory points to measure the latter? Assuming you use some variant of the basic objective missions (as opposed to "wacky" things, like "two objectives, only Elites can score, only vehicles with less than 32 armor can contest" kind of nonsense) then I am confident in saying that these armies will be able to go at least 10-10 with anything within ~30 comp of them and crush most armies on their comp level. (With a bit of tweaking and optimization, of course. As I said, they're all rough builds.)

daniel said...

Lists that have worked very well for me in Sweden are:

Librarian - Unleash rage, Blood lance.

Furioso dreadnaught w Blood talons
Furioso dreadnaught w Blood talons
Sanguine guards w 2 x Infernus pistol

5 Assault marines
1 Razorback w Las-plas
5 Assault marines
1 Razorback w Las-plas
5 Scouts
5 Death company w 1 x Infernus Pistol & 1 x Powersword

1 Storm raven w Las & Melta
1 Storm raven w Las & Melta
Placed 1, 1, 4, 6

1500p
Komp 50

Nids

Prime w Adrenal glands, regenerate, Pair of bonesword
Tervigon w Catalyst

2 x Hiveguard
2 x Hiveguard
2 x Zoantrope

10 Termagaunts
1 Tervigon w Onslaughter
7 Warriors w bonesword & lashwhip, toxinsacks, rending claws
5 Warriors w bonesword & lashwhip, toxinsacks, rending claws

1 x Mawloc
1 x Mawloc
Placed 3, 4, 7,

I don't know what it comps in the newer system, but it used to be around 35 in komp on 1750

Both are quite hard and competetive lists I think and as you see, it is possible to do not so lame as lists with the comp system.

/D

daniel said...

My point beeing, the argument, why can I not play with my toys I bought... Usually you can, but if you only own 20 Nob bikers a few Kanz, 2 warbosses and 20 grotz or 20 x 10 seercouncil on bike, 2 warlocks, 9 eldar jetbikes... you'll probably have a trouble playing in comped tourneys, but you are very welcome in uncomped, cause there we see these kind of lists almost every uncomped tourney you see 1-2 seercouncil and 1-2 mongoloid nob bikers and every other internet list out there.. But we don't see them on comped tournaments, even tough I have seen 1 unit of mongo bikers or seer council on even comped tournaments, but then the rest of the list is filled with crap.

daniel said...

errata: it should be 2 x 10 seercouncil not 20 x 10

daniel said...

One of my favorite schizo quotes ever perhapse:

July 26, 2010 8:34 PM
VT2 said...
Comp is very rare here these days, and have been since about 2008.
People have learned to enjoy A-games instead, and only tiny tournaments stick to the silly comp rules.


HAHAHA

daniel said...

BTW - It is slightly wrong preceived in the IG list, it says: -5 per psyker (-2 if there is no chimera.) so every squad will set you back -12 and not -2

I really like the Space wolf list, similar to one of my high comp lists I am thinking of fielding, mine is however not as extreme.

Best regards

D

AbusePuppy said...

Wait, so just taking the basic squad in a Chimera sets you back -25? Jesus you guys sure do hate IG.

With regards to the two lists posted:

The BA one is pretty much like the SR list I came up with, but 30 comp lower. It has the benefit of a pair of scoring Plasmabacks, but has a weaker hammer unit, and I expect the fight between the two would basically come down to whoever's hammers could break the other.

The Tyranid list simply isn't very good, and certainly not very good for a list that is starting down 45 points of comp. You have a fair number of T6 wounds, but not enough to really frighten me.

Obviously my assessments of these lists aren't absolute; I could be totally wrong about how well they play. However, my expectation would be that I could consistently field something just as strong and ~30 comp higher than the "standard," which will net me a HUGE bonus towards winning the tournament.

Sage said...

If you can sacrifice small bits of your force for a 30% gain ratings at the tourney, it's probably an exploit of the system. We'd be more then happy if any exploits were fixed, but we'd be even happier if the comp was balanced so exploits didn't matter too much.

daniel said...

Abusepuppy - The BA list is strong in the swedish competative meta game, cause alot of times there is a objective scale, one objective more 7 -3, 2 objectives more 9 - 1 3 objective more 10 - 0 and then you need more then one scoring to win big, but in general I try not to put emphasis on the troops since they seldomly bring any punsch to the game and just costs points, except for in my opinion, Tervigons and warriors w lashwhip and bonesword.

The Tyranid list is as you say not extremely strong, it has played well, but suffer hard if I meet fast and high S shooting armies, like alot of typhoons, and in general, I dislike armies with apperent weaknesses.

I just try to make a point that you can do and use hard things, you do seldomly gain in doing weak lists with high comp, there is always a balance between comp and "hardness" in the army, if you do a comp 80 list that can draw against anything bellow 50 i comp and win against basically anything over it, you have a "good" list in a comped environment.

Best regards

D

Kirby said...

The point Puppy is making is he can make better or similar lists in terms of raw competitiveness than the two above but with higher comp scores and thus do well in games and get buffed by comp.

daniel said...

Point understood and I do not argue with it, but a list with just 1 scoring does not work in the swedish environment, cause the missions seldomly are binaer, it is seldomly win or loss, more scaled as I tried to explain above.

We are very teoretical here since you haven't had the chance to try the system in any large scale. I like what you do with the comp and the lists however, they look very diffrent from what we see at the swedish tourney scene, diffrent climates brings on a certin dialect to the lists creations I guess.
In general the lists we see getting good recommendations on the internet arre from the states and many of teh are deemed useless in sweden, the extreme shooty lists that is. I have had friends that have tried the Stelek builds and ended in the bottom quarter of major tournaments, while he ususally end in the top quarter.

I think list builds and comp are extremly interesting subjects, and I really like the tone here now, it feels more creative and less judging, even thou it is clear where you gentlemen stand in the matter.

Best regards

D

AbusePuppy said...

I understand the scoring system, but as I said, "take one, contest the others" is a solid strategy when you're already planning on wiping out the enemy.

Not knowing the Swedish metagame I can't say for sure, but Stelek's shooting lists, well played, are absolutely devastating (unless you play with ridiculous amounts of terrain, like 50% coverage or more.) Not to knock the skill of the players involved, but I expect lack of experience with the list- as opposed to more general lack of experience- may have been what did them in. 50+ games with a particular list is generally what I assume is needed to be "good" with it, and if one doesn't have that level of practice in, especially if it's a style of list unfamiliar to you, play is going to suffer.

(To be honest, the lists I've prepared here aren't really anything like what I generally run, either, with the exception of the Stormraven one. Most of them are adapted for high-comp environments and thus don't have many anti-vehicle measures, whereas I normally cram rather a lot into my lists.)

I'm glad we are able to maintain a civil discussion tone- I've certainly learned a lot from talking to all of you and how Swedish players view the game. (Obviously most of my experience comes from the U.S., but I've also talked at length with British and Australian players as well as some German and French, so it's interesting to see another take on things.) Even when I think I'm right, I try to keep the possibility in mind that I am not, because obviously the other person has good reasons to have come to their conclusions as well.

Hopefully I will get to post some of the other emails I've received here soon and possibly explore some of the topics in a bit more depth. And hey, we'd love to see all of you hang around 3++ and comment; as you say, it's always interesting to get a new point of view on things. ^^

Post a Comment

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...