Those jumping into this discussion might find it helpful to read the earlier articles, here (where the initial discussion happened) and here, where we saw responses from many of the Swedes and talked about lists some.
Now, to clear the air on some points:
1. 'Threshold' comp (where you merely have to meet a minimum value) is roughly split, or perhaps a bit more common than "modifier" comp (where yours and your opponent's battle points are adjusted after each battle based on the difference in your comp scores). Non-comped tournaments also exist and are far from unheard of.
2. Most tournaments have upper and lower comp limits; 80 or 90 is the general ceiling, with the floor being anywhere from 0 to 60, depending. (40 has been brought up as a common number.)
3. Sweden, in part due to the smaller player base as compared to the U.S.A., has a much more unified national style. There is a common FAQ accepted by most players and terrain in relatively standardized- LOS-blocking terrain is very common there, compromising 70-80% of the terrain on a given table. Ruins and area terrain are not nearly so common. IG is generally seen as the power list and, as a conflux of the other factors, shooting lists in general seem to be less prevalent. 1750 is almost always the points level that is defaulted to.
4. Comp in Sweden is generally seen as a way to control "broken" armies moreso than punish unfluffy ones or to "equalize" the codices. Soft scores are very uncommon, apart from perhaps a token painting score.
Now, let's dive into the meat of things and talk about some of what I feel are misconceptions about comp and what it does. Also, we'll see some more lists and maybe talk about that a bit, eh?
Erik Robertsson...
1. The difference between the hardest and the nicest army list is smaller in an comped tournament.
2. Play with whatever you like AND play for the win.
3. It does balance out some of the games edginess and an organizer should be allowed to do so if he so wishes.
4. variation adds to the pleasure.
Some interesting ideas, and ones Kirby talked about in his email, but still things I want to bring up.
1. I don't feel this is really true, or certainly not necessarily true. "Overpowered" strategies usually have weaknesses of their own, and good competitive play should find them. (Lash, for example, is terrible against anyone in a vehicle; PBS suffer a similar problem and roll over and die in the face of any kind of psychic defense; Nob Bikers are easily fed a sacrificial unit as they are methodically chewed apart.) As I have said many times, comp does not balance the game, it rebalances it. Nothing guarantees the new status quo will be any better than the old, and some (not all, of course) of the lists aimed to prove that. It's nice to see all the melta and lascannons out of the game... until you're facing down a bunch of T5/6 fast-moving monstrosities ignoring your armor save.
2. Comp limits "play what you like" just as much as anything else. Some people like Terminators, or TWC, or Stormravens, or massed vehicles, even before these things were good or recognized as good. In fact, players are quite likely to have to drop favorite units in order to fit into the comp restrictions- something that seems to run counter to the nominal purpose.
3. Does it? I have yet to see any real evidence of this. TOs are, of course, entitled to run whatever kind of game they want in the same way that you are free to demand that all visitors to your house wear their pants on their heads, but don't be surprised if friends stop coming over to visit when you do so.
4. Comp doesn't increase variety, it changes one variety for a different one. When you no longer see missile spam and TWC, instead you'll see Iron Priests and Blood Claws. Where you no longer see Tervigons and Tyrants, instead you'll see Harpies and Tyrannofexes. You're cutting off one hand and gluing it on the other and saying "Now look, I've got an extra hand! So much more I can do!" For every list comp opens up and makes viable because of the arbitrary penalties assigned, at least as many more became worthless because of needless burdens weighing them down. Good competitive play will find more interesting lists of its own accord, without interference- if Guard are running wild, someone will find ways to take advantage of all those T3/5+ guys and their side armor 10. Evolution of the metagame- that is, the field of lists that are functional and popular, to soothe those who find "metagame" a dirty word- is a natural result of good competitive play.
"Playing to win" means looking at the game and making a conscious decision to do your best to be good at the game. When you then complain "...But I don't like this and that and these things and the other," you are not playing to win; you are not playing competitively; you are trying to enforce your vision of how things should be on the game. 3++ encourages competitive play on the terms laid down by Games Workshop, nothing more, nothing less. It's perfectly fine to do wacky scenarios and bizarre goals ("Most kill points in a 1500 army, go!"), but these are not the same as competitive play. Competitive play is not the only way to enjoy the game, but it's dishonest to try and represent something else as competitive.
Bjorn said.... (Sorry, Bjorn, I don't know escape sequences well enough to add in that umlaut for you)
i'm going back to 4th ed, the chaos codex to be specific. those of you who played back then might remember the 9 oblit, 3 basilisk-lists that the Iron Warriors where allowed to field. to me, this is representative of GW's drunken inability of writing balanced codicies. the general concensus about this was what you needed to win with this army was opposable thumbs. nothing more.
before anyone starts raging about this, YES. i concede that GW has gotten better. at the rate they are churning out new codicies though we'll be well into 6th or even 7th edition, before they are done. chances are the rules will have changed by then, and thus the codicies will need to be redone, again to redress the balance.
the point i'm trying to make is that the swedish gaming community has come to the conclusion that there are codicies that are inherently weaker than others, and that we need to do something about this.
if we follow this line of reasoning, it leads to the conclusion that some codicies are stronger than others. one build that illustrates this really well is the double seercounsil-build, which has wreaked havoc upon many a gaming board.
I think you are correct in a historical sense- 2nd, 3rd, and 4th editions were all plagued by rather hideous imbalances in gameplay brought about by the fact that GW really wasn't trying to create a competitive game, they were making hobby manuals. But that has changed in 5th edition, and the game is downright playable these days.
Are the new codices "better" than the old ones? Depends on how you define "better." More fun? Almost certainly. More varied? Without a doubt. More powerful? Weeeeeell... I would say not. Eldar, Tau, Dark Eldar, and Witch Hunters can all field some extremely strong lists, and these are some of the oldest books around. (Necrons, on the other hand, are simply trash, and I don't think there's anyone that really believes that some patchwork rules can save them.)
Can GW fix all the books before 6th edition comes out? I can't really say. Past indications say no, but we can cross our fingers and hope that they will change their ways in this regard, as they at least seem to be keeping a decent schedule (3+ books per year) in updating.
Incidentally, even in an uncomped environment the dual-council list you describe is eminently beatable. This illustrates a fundamental problem with comp: the perception of a problem where there is none, and then attempting to "fix" this illusionary issue. A beginner at chess might lament how often he is crushed by the legendary four-move checkmate and how the board needs to be rearranged to prevent it, but a more experienced opponent will laugh at the transparent ploy and destroy anyone who tries it. Experience breeds wisdom, and wiser heads than mine have weighed in on this game and said "things are working well enough."
In fact, let's take a bit closer look at that. How imbalanced is this game? What kind of "good" lists can we field from each codex?
Black Templars: I'm not terribly familiar with this book, but my understanding is that they're slightly sub-par Marines in most respects, with a few nice tricks in the form of Vetran Skills and Land Raider spam. Still, not all that impressive.
Blood Angels: Too many lists to count, from mech to jumpers to hybrid to Stormravens.
Chaos Space Marines: Quickly slipping into the mediocre pile, they just don't do anything well. Still contains some powerful units, though, so lets' just say not to count them completely out yet.
Chaos Daemons: So bad, but so confusing. Only really functional against those who don't understand Deep Strike defenses. A solid entry into the "blech" category.
Dark Angels: Well, their Ravenwing MSU army is scary, but fragile. That's about it. Chalk up one functional build for this terrible codex, at least.
Dark Eldar: Gonna get redone soon, but until then you still have to contend with shit-tons of Dark Lances on cheap platforms. Another old book that's still holding its own.
Daemon Hunters: Well, with IG as allies they can do pretty okay. Not amazing, though.
Eldar: Mechanized Eldar can be very scary; rerollable 4++ galore and S6/S8 en masse. A "bad" codex that uses its three or four undercosted options and things that would never appear in a modern book while avoiding the plethora of terrible and overpriced garbage. It doesn't matter how bad the bad is if the good is great.
Imperial Guard: Again, almost too many to list. Foot, mech, sneaky, psykers, airborne, there are tons of list variations, not to even mention supplementing it with allies. This is perhaps the most versatile book printed to date.
Necrons: Alright, we've hit our first codex with absolutely nothing of value. There are no redeeming features here, no "secret" builds that will take the enemy off guard, just a bunch of really bad stuff. Well, about six bad things, since you don't even get all that many choices, period. (For reference, Wraithwing and Monolith Spam are not good armies. I'm sorry.)
Orks: Well, you all know how I feel about Orks, but I will oblige the majority and list Speed Freaks (Nob Biker-enabled or not) and Green Tide here.
Space Marines: Good ol' vanilla Marines, the standard everyone else gets measured to. Comes in several distinct flavors, although suffers a bit from being the first 5E codex, when things were still getting hammered out. Still never a pushover thanks to Chapter Tactics and fantastic pricing on certain units.
Space Wolves: More different builds than Marines in a lot of ways (foot or mech, etc), but not the same kind of flexibility elsewhere. Still has plenty of really good choices in everything except the troops slot, which only has one choice.
Tau: Another mono-build book, but oh what a build! Markerlights and railguns are absolutely golden in 5E and cheap screens and blockers enable all your firepower.
Tyranids: Hurt a lot by the FAQ, but still have a couple major builds that can give everyone else a real run for their money. It's not just about Tervigons, Trygons, and Hive Guard- there are a lot of other good units in here.
Witch Hunters: Unlike their hellhunting companion codex, Witch Hunters can be a rather terrifying force on their own, and adding an Infantry Platoon to support things turns them into a real nightmare. Admittedly a single-build nightmare, but still more than capable of wrecking face in the name of the God-Emperor of Mankind.
So, out of sixteen codices, only one is a complete flop and four to six others (depending on your evaluation) range from "okay" to "you could probably do better." Of the latter, though, all of them are at least playable, if not optimal. That does not strike me as a terrible percentage- certainly, other games have thrived on far worse. And of the above armies, all the 5E ones can field at least three to six significantly different armies, so you aren't simply seeing the same lists over and over again with respect to them. Of the "strong" lists, no one of them can easily be said to dominate the others by a significant degree and every one has, at the very least, a fighting chance against the others, and often near-equivilancy- this isn't even a case of simple rock/paper/scissors in the metagame.
-------------------------BREAK!--------------------
Alright, enough of that. Many of you were looking for more silly lists. Let's post a couple of the ones the Swedes sent me and comment on them as well as perhaps throwing out some more ideas.
---- ELDAR comp 35 ----
HQ 1: 210 [18+1]
Eldrad
HQ 2: 105 [1]
3x Warlocks
3x destructor
Wave Serpent 125 [4]
(shuriken cannon, star engines,
spirit stones)
ELITE 1:
8x Fire Dragons 128 [3]
Wave Serpent 160 [5]
(bright lance, star engines,
spirit stones)
TROOP 1: 140 [2]
9x Dire Avengers
exarch (twin s.catapult, bladestorm)
Wave Serpent 160 [5]
(bright lance, star engines,
spirit stones)
TROOP 2:
5x Dire Avengers 60 [3]
TROOP 3: 76 [2]
3x Guardian Jetbikes
shuriken cannon
TROOP 4: 76 [2]
3x Guardian Jetbikes
shuriken cannon
FA 1: 60 [1]
1x Vyper
1x scatter laser
FA 2: 60 [1]
1x Vyper
1x scatter laser
HS 1: 120 [5]
2x War Walkers
4x scatter laser
HS 2: 140 [5+1]
2x War Walkers
4x eldar missile launcher
HS 3: 130 [5]
Falcon
(Shuriken cannon, spirit stones)
Vehicles (6 st) [9]
Hrm, well, at comp 35 a lot of lists look pretty normal, although certain things are still prohibitive (Land Raiders, PBS, etc.) Only minimal considerations really need to be made, such as avoiding Scatter Lasers on all the Walkers and keeping the Warlock squad small.
Really, this list is fairly strong but makes some mistakes. Big DA squad? War Walkers over Prisms/Falcons? Even aiming for a comp score doesn't really seem to explain these, as several of them are punished pretty strongly. The Swedish environment should do well with the Eldar's fast, medium-range shooty-scooty that can easily bypass blocking terrain.
----- BA comp 35 -----
Librarian
Furioso dread w talons
Furioso 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
LasPlas supporting Stormravens. The package delivery is... uninspired, at best- Hammernators work fairly well, but at 1750 you can expect that at least one of them will get wiped out by the enemy. Running Death Company + DC Dreads seems superior if you're looking to up comp a bit to take other stuff, but that might not be necessary here. Tacticals are also a bit of a poor choice given their comp penalties, but you could do worse.
Also no mention of Libby's powers, which is a big deal with comp. Is he just taking two trash powers? I'd rather be backing things up with Lance, Shield, Unleash, or something else decent than be stuck with useless powers on my character.
HQ
Brother captain 61p
Teleport homer 10p
Psychic hood 20p
Elite
Inquisitor 20p
Teleport homer 10p
Hellpistol 1p
Close combat weapon 1p/32p
Eversor assassin 95p
2 Deathcult assassins 80p
Troops
10 Stormtroopers 100p
2 Meltaguns 20p
Rhino 35p/155p x 2
10 Stormtroopers 100p
2 Meltaguns 20p
Chimera 55p/175p
Command section 30p
3 Grenade launchers 15p
Bolt pistol 2p
Chimera 55p
Heavy stubber 10p/112p
Infantry squad 50p
Meltagun 10p
Autocannon 10p
Chimera 55p
Heavy stubber 10p/135p
Infantry squad 50p
Meltagun 10p
Autocannon 10p
Chimera 55p
Heavy stubber 10p/135p
Infantry squad 50p
Meltagun 10p
Autocannon 10p
Chimera 55p
Heavy stubber 10p/135p
Fast attack
5 Grey knights 150p
Fast attack
5 Grey knights 150p
Fast attack
5 Grey knights 150p
A comp 60(?) that, apparently, "...is designed to manage to pull off draws, and then achieve wins through the comp bonus." I think it fails rather hard at this job, though, as it's simply a poor list in most ways. Infantry with AC/Melta are severely punished and the designer missed out on the absolute best squad anyone with a transport can field:
Inquisitor (Inferno Pistol, Carapace)
3 Vetran Guardsmen (Meltaguns)
100pts. -1 comp. Four Melta weapons. The Inquisitor can be upgraded with a variety of other things as the army needs (psychic hood, artificer armor, etc) and retinue members can be added as appropriate, but right here we have a perfect suicide melta squad that costs minimal points and virtually no comp. Even the version with an Inquisitor Lord only costs another 25pts (and no more comp), which is still quite a bargain when shoved into a Valk/Ven or stealing someone's Chimera. Plasma can also be substituted, especially if a Chirugeon is added.
SM, 1749 pts, komp 60 med mall 6.1
Master of the Forge 120 (0)
Conversion beamer
5 Tacticals 175 (-3)
Razorback (las-plas, hunter-killer)
5 Tacticals 175 (-3)
Razorback (las-plas, hunter-killer)
5 Tacticals 175 (-3)
Razorback (las-plas, hunter-killer)
5 Tacticals 175 (-3)
Razorback (las-plas, hunter-killer)
9 tacticals 154 (0)
Iron Clad 155 (-3)
2x hunter killer missile
Iron Clad 155 (-3)
2x hunter killer missile
Iron Clad 155 (-3)
2x hunter killer missile
Iron Clad 155 (-3)
2x hunter killer missile
Iron Clad 155 (-3)
2x hunter killer missile
9 Vehicles (-19)
This list is actually rather interesting, if perhaps not quite optimal- it has large numbers of missiles to de-mech an opponent early on and abuses LasPlas quite effectively. However, the extra penalty from the Ironclads' DCCWs could be avoided by running Riflemen Dreads, although obviously this removes the extreme H-K Missile spam. Lacking a bike also hurts the Conversion Beamer a lot, probably more than is worth it.
Since my compy crashed out I don't have any solid lists here, but some thoughts:
-IG can run a Stelek "Ambush"-styled list relatively well at 60 comp. The above Inquisitorial melta-squad, another in its HQ, two Stormtrooper squads (5man, double melta) to scout forward and help cause havoc, two squads of Autocannon Sentinels, and a pair of Valkyries with MRPs to deal with massed infantry. (Meltavets and a Platoon with Flamer-PCS and random shooting back it up.) A very mobile army with lots of deployment options and different tools to handle enemy units. Stormtroopers and Special Weapon Squads are the sleeper hits here, bringing good stuff for minimal cost.
-Also riding off of a Stelek idea, Chaos can field 5 Noise Marines in a Combi-Melta Rhino with a Blastmaster for a reasonable price. A pair of Warptime Sorcerers on Disks give us counter-assault and Havocs provide us some comp-efficient melta for anything that gets too close.
-IG can use the Forge World Autocannon Chimera turret, apparently. So yeah, abusable as all get out. Infantry with ACs, Chims with AC/HB, flesh it out with some Las, Melta, and Flamers and you have an army ready to sit on its back table edge and end you. Autocannons break IG, guys; you don't give an army an abundance of cheap, 48" guns and strong anti-MEQ tools and pretend they won't ruin everything they come across.
-Space Marines can get a Multimelta turret for their Razorbacks, also courtesy of Forge World. I'm not sure if this one is as breakable but it sure seems like you could do something nasty with it. Maybe Blood Angels? Do it all Immo-spam style, with squads cruising around and popping out of transports to cause havoc while the transports cause even more havoc. And guess what: only +5pts and no extra comp penalty. I'm sure there's something that can be done with that.
