|
|
Post by netter on Apr 24, 2011 18:43:54 GMT -5
Just to add to boldo's comments regarding the quality of Rochester fantasy players:
One of your players (Brian Moyer)won the recent (March) Warmaster's Challenge. No small feat. This is a large event that involves a combination doubles and singles tournament and has an overall winner for the weekend.
Brian placed second in the doubles, won the singles and was the overall winner. Mike Norton was Brian's partner for the doubles and was second place in the singles.
I have a feeling that they do well at other events, too.
Netter
Just thought I'd throw that in.
|
|
|
|
Post by rongr100 on May 2, 2011 14:33:51 GMT -5
I think if you are going to penalize a dwarf player for taking runesmiths and runes on their BSB is kinda saying you can't be a dwarf player but I do agree there needs to be a comp system mainly in the magic phase and size and spamming of elite/rare units. That being said I do think that a comp system should be play tested and worked out
|
|
|
|
Post by skyth on May 2, 2011 19:43:46 GMT -5
With the new rules, spamming isn't a problem except with a very few units (Flamers). Playing MSU actually puts you at a disadvantage. The biggest problem is death stars and magic.
|
|
|
|
Post by netter on May 3, 2011 9:50:08 GMT -5
The other thing to consider is how some basic changes from 7th contribute to the abuses in 8th.
For example, deathstars are popular because of how VPs are scored, the decreased utility of high movement, how steadfast works, the combat flexibility (horde vs inferior units, or 5 wide vs superior units) and general durability in a true line of sight environment. Perhaps tweaking some of these rules might make deathstars less viable in the first place.
The usual counterpoint to this is that 8th ed rules are fine and shouldn't be messed with. Fair enough, but the rule book clearly states that "Warhammer is not specifically designed for highly competitive, cutthroat play." So small rule adjustments, that might have a large impact on list building might be better than an involved comp system.
The other concern is that a heavy comp system or funky rules adjustments (even small ones) attached to a large tournament might be detrimental for out-of-towners. A fair number of players have a 'tournament list' that they play and may have some wiggle room within that list. However, if the comp system/rules changes (whatever) work against that list, even if it's a percentage issue, then they may lean towards staying home.
It would be nice to know what GWs release schedule for new books is. It would be nice if the new books helped balance things.
Netter
|
|
|
|
Post by skyth on May 3, 2011 19:19:10 GMT -5
Something to keep in mind about comp (I found this on a forum for a different game, but it holds true)...Comp is like driving. Anyone who drives faster than you is a lunatic. Anyone who drives slower than you is a moron...
|
|
|
|
Post by jay on May 4, 2011 11:13:39 GMT -5
Something to keep in mind about comp (I found this on a forum for a different game, but it holds true)...Comp is like driving. Anyone who drives faster than you is a lunatic. Anyone who drives slower than you is a moron... the other thing with Comp is there is a lot of drama associated we it. Good or bad. |
|
|
|
Post by netter on May 4, 2011 15:13:46 GMT -5
Something to keep in mind about comp (I found this on a forum for a different game, but it holds true)...Comp is like driving. Anyone who drives faster than you is a lunatic. Anyone who drives slower than you is a moron... the other thing with Comp is there is a lot of drama associated we it. Good or bad. What dost thou intend with words so boldly proclaimed, jay?  netter |
|
boldo
Moderator 
The card carrying
Posts: 646 
|
Post by boldo on May 4, 2011 18:54:36 GMT -5
Well it seems that 2 things are a bit funky and could be better controlled magic and hordes. I also think the units with all characters in the front are a problem and that should be penalized.
Boldo
|
|
|
|
Post by skyth on Jun 14, 2011 8:10:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by netter on Jun 15, 2011 10:17:02 GMT -5
I looked it over, briefly. The system is a work in progress, and it needs a lot of work.
Main issue is that it's too detailed. I stopped looking closely at it after a list or two. The skim began after that.
The trouble with this crazy Swedish system is that it micromanages your list choices. It's designed to nudge your list in a certain direction, right down to character and magic item choices. In short, they like certain things and dislike certain things and there's not much middle ground.
I still think a comp system needs to be broad and guide the game away from generic abuses rather than sift through the nitty-gritty of each list.
Netter
|
|
boldo
Moderator
The card carrying
Posts: 646
|
Post by boldo on Jun 15, 2011 13:21:50 GMT -5
I agree but the problem is that the new army lists are tame by comparison to the 4 bad books. I do see a few points of problems. Huge horde units, magic dice manipulation, magic item combinations, and spaming the good stuff. This is where I think we can get a system that works. Of course then we have to work in something about the Lizardmen, deamons, Dark elves, and Vampire counts.
Boldo
|
|
|
|
Post by netter on Jun 15, 2011 17:14:56 GMT -5
I would tackle the issues separately.
If you think there's enough difference in 'power level' between books then a fast start is to tier the lists, such as the ETC and others were doing at the end of 7th. This could be as little as two tiers; I would hesitate introducing more than four. If you're playing 2500 point standard (or whatever) then a points adjustment of roughly 100-200 points should bring things back into balance somewhat.
As for the 'huge horde units, magic dice manipulation, magic item combinations, and spaming the good stuff' adifferent story.
Just hit the absolute most broken combos. Anything more simply pushes the power gamer to choose the next most broken combo and nothing really changes.
A simple unit cap penalty will take care of the huge hordes. Say a max of 50 models and 400 points per unit (magic standard not included) or you take a comp hit. That sort of thing will help.
Personally, I feel that if you ban the power scroll then magic is so risky that manipulating the dice here and there shouldn't be overwhelming. Otherwise, just set a basic comp hit for a list that generates additional dice in different amounts.
As for spamming the good stuff, introduce comp penalties for excessive duplication. A variety of unit types is usually fun to see on the board and play against.
That's the fast and loose idea but it works without smothering the entire list building process.
netter
|
|
|
|
Post by skyth on Jun 15, 2011 19:56:22 GMT -5
Main issue is that it's too detailed. I stopped looking closely at it after a list or two. The skim began after that. With how complex warhammer, detailed is neccessary. So in other words, it's no different than any other comp scoring system. At least this one is open and honest about it. Granted, scoring is still lower than restrictions in the effective list  |
|
|
|
Post by skyth on Jun 27, 2011 19:25:01 GMT -5
www.giantfanatic.dk/downloads/#cat7Here is the rules pack from one of the european tourneys doing restriction comp. I kinda like this example, other than I would make Cav units able to be fielded 10 to a unit, and it doesn't have a unit size restriction for warbeasts. Granted, Giant Fanatic is known for having one of the most restrictive comp systems in the area.
|
|
