boldo
Moderator
The card carrying
Posts: 646
|
Post by boldo on Feb 17, 2006 14:37:19 GMT -5
It seems that we would like to use some Comp system using a check list for the big tournament in October. If possible I would like to work out the details by Burpanomicaon on March 4. Some ideas for this can be found at www.boldo.com/miniatures/warhammer/compsys.htmlI can not find the other site so Mike please post the link. I think we decided we like a system that has a simple general system and then further book specific results. How about trying to come up with a 10 box system for each army and a 20 box system in general. For each of the boxes your army checks you get 2 pts. This would be easier for people to do as a score. I have some ideas for general boxes No Lord Less than 7 casting dice equivalent Less than 9 casting dice equivalent Less than 11 casting dice equivalent Less than 13 casting dice equivalent two or fewer characters Three of feweer Characters Fewer than 10% rare fewer than 10% special fewer than 15%special More ranked infantry units than any other unit two or fewer skirmishers two or fewer cavalry one or fewer artillery two or fewer units with missle weapons No duplicate units other than core infantry What do people think? Boldo
|
|
|
Post by Norton on Feb 17, 2006 15:36:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Dude on Feb 17, 2006 15:51:54 GMT -5
I like these ideas. I think we would need to sit down and hammer something out for ourselves that blends the two if that's what we want. My army would suffer from some of the restrictions, but it's made up for by some of my bonuses, and I can accept the downsides. Some of the ideas should be tweaked a bit.
|
|
Iron Warrior
Moderator
The Iron
Iron Within! Iron Without!
Posts: 2,573
|
Post by Iron Warrior on Feb 17, 2006 16:04:22 GMT -5
I like the idea of a basic comp system then a specific army comp system all in one single score.
Like what norton posted. I like that Idea. It can be easily manipulated to 40k.
|
|
boldo
Moderator
The card carrying
Posts: 646
|
Post by boldo on Feb 19, 2006 22:35:05 GMT -5
Ranger,
What needs to be tweaked?
Boldo
|
|
|
Post by chiefarmorer on Feb 20, 2006 8:26:52 GMT -5
Of course under the boxes you propose my Nurgle Daemon List gets an almost perfect score (missing 1 box) With Papa Nurgle on board and a hero in chariot that can't be quite right. I'm not quite sure what the answer to comp is. I very much liked it when the 6th first came out, it lead to fun and flavorful armies with losts of peeps on the board. Now we're more or less back to 5th edition hero hammer. Perhaps a ding for immune to psych units? Terror causers? 50MM based creatures w/ 5 wounds or more? Multiple marks of chaos in one army (i.e. undivided, Slannesha nd Tzeentch in one list). dings for ratling guns -- i.e. X number of warmachines (where X =2+ and then steepens up?). Think about what is really offensive in the game, i.e. broken. Perhaps a bonus for taking the battle standard is a nice idea, since it gives your opponent a chance for bonus victory points and frequently battle points.
|
|
|
Post by grumgore on Feb 20, 2006 17:14:13 GMT -5
I personally think that this comp system *heavily* favors mob/hoard armies like skaven and O&G's. I could easily build a Matt York army and be nearly unstoppable yet have almost perfect comp (ok, so I suffer for having four characters...). I can also create a 300+ model O&G army without chariots, etc (they aren't needed in this type of army) and also be very difficult to stop/score points from. And magic would easily be below your totals (but still be very effective). These armies will even have an easier time when their opponents try to take more comp friendly lists - thus skaven and O&G get to use their strengths against everyone else who try to tone down their lists.
With so many troops the only way you can fight them is either to play a hoard army yourself, or to use fast hard hitting troops that this system will penalize.
IMO the goal of a good comp rating system is where you penalize players for fielding things you don't like to see on the table. This willl vary from player to player. Some players find more than 6 magic dice offensive, yet some armies require it (like vamps who need at *least* 8 dice). Others will penalize you for taking a lot of calvary, though there are others like myself that enjoy playing against calvary armies because they are different (and rarely more effective than my O&G's).
As an exercise, on Marauders we spent several weeks trying to come up with an all inclusive comp system. We spent a lot of effort coming up with ways of making a system, and then abusing it. In the end everyone came to the realization that you either "make everyone's army for them", have a subjective comp system where either the judge or opponents rate you, or you drop comp completely.
Personally I don't think there is a comp system that will work to cover all situations. I really like the comp system where you rate your opponets relative to each other. This would work very well in 5 game tournaments where the scores will average out better, but also it works in a 3 game tournament as well.
|
|
boldo
Moderator
The card carrying
Posts: 646
|
Post by boldo on Feb 21, 2006 11:09:19 GMT -5
Ideas from Mike Marko - no more than 500 points on characters - no special characters - no more than 8 dice of magic - no more than 100 points of magic items, marks, vitues, etc (this includes "free" items such as the errantry banner for the errantry list) - no more than 1 rare choice, and 3 specials - no more than 300 points on chariots. - no models that can only be affected by magic weapons - no terror causing units - no more than 200 points on unit auxillary upgrades like ratling guns, fanatics, etc. - no more than 1 flying unit, or 2 flying models - no 0-1 limited troops (including chosen, etc).
|
|
Hagbard The Mighty
Sergeant
The cheesiest
In 40k if something is off, it can easily be explained in-universe as being because the Warp did it.
Posts: 223
|
Post by Hagbard The Mighty on Feb 21, 2006 11:29:21 GMT -5
i think dingin someone for using a 0-1 choice is double dipping. The unit is already restricted and people should not be penalized for including it. I think they should be allowed at least one 0-1 choice so i would change that to: "One or less 0-1 limited troops (including chosen, etc)."
just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by MallSecurity on Feb 21, 2006 13:06:31 GMT -5
I'm not so sure about that list; I can still bring the Skaven SAD with no dings but get randomly hosed for bringing Empire greatswords?
I just don't believe that there is one 'catch-all' list that works. I believe you either need to make a list for each army, or do pre-tournament subjective judging.
|
|
Hagbard The Mighty
Sergeant
The cheesiest
In 40k if something is off, it can easily be explained in-universe as being because the Warp did it.
Posts: 223
|
Post by Hagbard The Mighty on Feb 21, 2006 13:50:21 GMT -5
I think you missed Bolod's original post - there would be 20 general boxes that everyone gets marked against, and then there would be separate 10 box lists for each army. So the max comp score would be 60 points (20 general boxes at 2 pts each, 10 army specific boxes at 2 pts each).
At least that was my understanding of it. so, your skaven might score 40 on the general, but might not get any from the army specific boxes. Or were just refering to Mike Marko's list?
One suggestion I would make is make the total comp worth 40 pts: general boxes score 1 pt each, specific army boxes score 2 pts each.
|
|
|
Post by grumgore on Feb 21, 2006 19:13:32 GMT -5
These ideas I sent Boldo were just suggestions based on what I thought was the goal of the comp. As I mentioned to Boldo in a private email, I stood corrected after hearing his intent.
Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan of comp. I have had comp in my tournament for the past 9 years in various forms. I was one of the founders of a systematic comp system that was leveraged for the GT's for a period of time (after discussing the matter with Jervis at one of the early GT's). But the game has evolved since then. The armies are a lot more diverse now: a lot that "break the supposed guidlines" relative to other armies. This was especially true once they put out storm of chaos.
But I am definately in favor of the cause. IF it is possible to come up with a universal comp, then I am 100% behind it. And I would enjoy helping you to tweek out the system because I myself would use it.
So enough of this chatter... can someone post the entire proposed comp list... including army specific stuff, so we can get started? I have tried a similar exercise on Marauders, so I am not overly optimistic, but maybe different blood would help. Once we think we have a system I will turn it over to the wolves and see what they can do to break it. There are several people on Marauders that are more than willing to post lists in an attempt to try and find loop holes in a comp list.
And if you wanted to move this army building to Marauders I would support that to. ;D
|
|
boldo
Moderator
The card carrying
Posts: 646
|
Post by boldo on Feb 22, 2006 1:25:29 GMT -5
Okay here are 20 general questions:
1 less than 25% characters 2 less than 15% characters 3 No Lord 4 Less than 10 casting or 7 dispel 5 less than 7 casting or 5 dispel 6 less than 10% magic items 7 less than 5% magic items 8 No terror causers 9 less than 4 shooting units 10 less than 3 skirmishing units 11 less than 3 Cavalry units 12 less than 3 artillery 13 less than 3 chariots 14 Have a BSB 15 has atleast 3 standards other than the BSB 16 At least 3 core choices at 2.5 times minimum 17 No more than 3 units armed and equiped the same 18 No rare choices 19 less than 20% special 20 Fewer than 5 units which can strike at S5 or greater on the charge not counting champions in units
Qualifications: Cavalry are all models mounted on a cavalry base For casting dice a bound item power level 3 counts as one, power level 4-5 counts as 2 and power level 6+ counts as 3. One use items do not count at all. Tomb priests, and tomb princes count as 2 dice each, a tomb king counts as 3 and a High tomb priest counts as 4. Spell like effects which can be dispelled count as bound items. Items which can generate dice are considered counted at their maximum possible benefit as long as they are not one use only. Tomb king chariots count as a only half a chariot each.
I would not allow special characters, optional units, or appendix lists.
How does this sound?
Boldo
|
|
|
Post by johnboo on Feb 22, 2006 7:56:41 GMT -5
While I'm pretty sure of the intent, but I figure it bears asking anyway.... The intent of this system is to be very difficult (ok, impossible) to get a perfect score, right? And a perfect score would be 60 points? (40 general, 20 specific) Maybe army specific be worth 1pt each, instead? Things I notice right off the bat: 2 & 3: Black orc hero, Orc BSB, L4 goblin shaman is 16% already. HE prince and 2 L2 mages is 17%. 9: exclude chariots from this one. 16: This one penalizes expensive core like high elves & ogres, and a freebee for horde armies. maybe drop it down to 3 at 2X or 2 at 2.5X 17: Doesnt this just say "you dont get these 2 points!" At 2250pt armies, isnt duplication expected? HE spearelves, Orcs w choppas, Dwarfs with HW/shields, skeletons w/shields.....
|
|
|
Post by grumgore on Feb 22, 2006 9:18:18 GMT -5
John makes some very good points. Also:
9&12: is the intent to double penalize warmachines?
16: You may want to also apply this to special as well, especially if the intent is to encourage larger units and discourage MSU. You already have a penalty for % special, why double penalize?
20: What is the point of this one? You already have chariots covered. You are basically discouraging people from trying to field units with great weapons/flails in additional to fielding characters that have any strength boost (magical or mundane).
|
|