Swedish Komp System

[Grimwulfe]

I would be surprised if it was 9/10 the actual numbers would be far more telling.  As for Joe schmo bringing a net list yes would be good for people like me who love challenges but what happens when joe schmo players another joe schmo and pushes his face making the game unfun for that joe schmo.

[Ian Mulligan]

Came into thread expecting delicious candy fish.

Leaving disappointed.

On topic: I share Troy's concern.

[andalucien]

When I read Grimwulfe's post I thought he meant, what do we think of it as a possible approach to all types of tourneys, not as a way to solve an issue with Battleground's tourneys only.

Battlegrounds doesn't suffer as badly from the netlist phenomenon as some places (especially large national tourneys) do.

[Chase]

I'm not sure that's any different than what might happen is Joe Schmo #2 plays any one of the more competitive guys.

The major difference is, and this is EXTREMELY important, that he can justify his loss again the "douchey net list" by saying to himself or his friends "that guy had a douchey net list, what was I supposed to do?"

People LOVE to place blame and generally dislike losing.  If people can place blame on something other than themselves they will.

Having an event full of comped lists eliminates one more thing Joe Schmo #2 can place blame on.


Besides, it's probably cool for a new, active player to get smashed by a net list in one of his first events.  Now he's got real world experience with which to complain on various message boards with.    No more reading about X-star, Riptides, Taudar, etc...  Now he can speak from experience like the cool kids!

Money well spent!

[Grimwulfe]

When I read Grimwulfe's post I thought he meant, what do we think of it as a possible approach to all types of tourneys, not as a way to solve an issue with Battleground's tourneys only.

Battlegrounds doesn't suffer as badly from the netlist phenomenon as some places (especially large national tourneys) do.

EXACTLY

[Chase]

It might be a good idea for some of the larger events to think about, but comp of any kind discourages some.  I promise that all of these larger events want as many people to come out and play as possible, and I'm not sure many of them are going to be keen on adopting something like this, which reads like a major change, soon. (In practice it's apparently NOT a very large restriction.)

Small steps. It's cool. I'd be interested in seeing what might become of it.

[andalucien]

I'm not sure that's any different than what might happen is Joe Schmo #2 plays any one of the more competitive guys.

The major difference is, and this is EXTREMELY important, that he can justify his loss again the "douchey net list" by saying to himself or his friends "that guy had a douchey net list, what was I supposed to do?"

People LOVE to place blame and generally dislike losing.  If people can place blame on something other than themselves they will.

Having an event full of comped lists eliminates one more thing Joe Schmo #2 can place blame on.


Besides, it's probably cool for a new, active player to get smashed by a net list in one of his first events.  Now he's got real world experience with which to complain on various message boards with.    No more reading about X-star, Riptides, Taudar, etc...  Now he can speak from experience like the cool kids!

Money well spent!

Hmm....  I get my ass kicked by the more competitive guys all the time, and I enjoy it more when it is a closer game, and I can see that the kickage was a result of in-game tactics, rather than a disparity in the tools we each brought to the fight.

[Grimwulfe]

Ya you may be right Chase in that regard.  However the game forced the hands of the Fantasy community and I think up until this point 40K was never forced like they are now.  The time is upon us to adapt or run the risk of making the issue worse and losing the new blood. 

We shall see what the future holds.  On that note however I would love to see this tested at least once locally to see how it really turns out in a live setting.

[Sir_Prometheus]

Would a guy like Alex do much worse if I built his list by throwing darts at the 40k wall? 

Uh, yeah, I'd think so..  You could always ask Alex.  There are times I feel when I've almost beaten him, so I certainly that would be easier if he had a crummy list. 

List matters a lot, I think.  That said, I don't know that this comp does a great job of punishing "good" lists, it seems like it more merely punishes "popular".  Those are not at all synonymous. I like Hammerheads, personally find them more useful per point than broadsides, but they're aren't popular, so they weren't penalized. 

It's worth asking, what do you want a comp system to do?  Way I see it, there's a few options:

1) Balance out "Good lists".  I.e. if you actively take a bad list, you're rewarded for it.

2) Create more diversity -- either by reducing spam (3 riptides, 7 wave serpents, whatever) and also by making sure we see more than one type of list....not everything einds up being jet seer all the time, or O'Vesa star

3) Some people just want to get rid of the "broken" things.....mostly deathstars of various types, atm. 

I don't love #1, because to me, list building is a fun part of the game.  Personally, I just want to see both more different codexes and more different builds within those codexes do well. 

[Mike_k]

Even though I enjoy challenges playing schmoes running super powerful lists is not very fun and makes 40k very difficult to enjoy nor does it help either player or the hobby.  Playing GK during their 5th ed. prime was probably one of the worst things for my 40k skill level and as soon as the codex balanced out in 6th it was literally almost like starting over and relearning the game.

Playing the power army you are very rarely on your heals, you hardly feel your mistakes because the codex covers them up, you can do the wrong thing and still win (right Jared the Galleria of Cheese? =P), and you very often don't leave a happy opponent behind no matter how good the game actually is.  You are always dictating the game, forcing the opponents actions much more than they may be forcing yours etc.

I feel this Komp system has some very bright points and is a good starting point to introduce some balance to 40k.

[Chase]

I'm not opposed to limiting to like 3 points or something.  5 seems like it'd just be too much of the same around here.

Like, the last 1850 looked something like:

Todd - 2 (or 4, depending on how you read the exalted reward thing)
Alex - 9 or so  (Eldar)
Chris - 4
Bill S - 4
Bill M - 7  (Eldar + SM)
Sam - 2 (let's pretend it's 5 because I don't know if Fateweaver or Be'Lakor have rewards or 4 mastery levels)
Troy - 3
Jason - 5
Matt B - 5
Stephen - 6 (maybe 7, because "1 Each Stormtalon after the first (including the first if more than one Flyer in the army)" doesn't make much sense.  It would seem like having 2 Stormtalons would cost 2 because if you've got 2, you've also got more than 1 flyer.)  (White Scars)


Seems tough to build a sick Eldar list without hitting 6.
Seems like SM bikes get punished a little too much.
It's tough to get 5 or 6 with CSM or Demons unless you legit spam FMCs or Helldrakes.
Seems easy to get over 5 as Tau.


Edit:  John Walsh took Taudar with 3 Riptides and scored a 6, I believe.  Not too bad.  Although I don't know what does and doesn't have marker lights or if they're normally present on a list.

[Sir_Prometheus]

And 9 of 10 players wouldn't change a thing.  What's the point in that?

Huh?  Did I miss something, or are most lists like in the 4-8 range?

You must have, yes.

4-8, right? 

[AstartesXXVI]

People LOVE to place blame and generally dislike losing.  If people can place blame on something other than themselves they will.

Having an event full of comped lists eliminates one more thing Joe Schmo #2 can place blame on.

And adds one of the all-time favorite things to blame..."The comp screwed me!" (Which isn't a far translation to "[This event/this event organizer] screwed me!", which is why I'm generally not a fan).

I don't go to comped events because I play Space Wolves and generally people still haven't calmed down about them. I don't even play a good list and usually see myself score pretty badly on most rubrics I've seen the past few years. So I just stopped. I'd rather an event reward better play than better or worse lists, but that's just my opinion.

[Chase]

It seems like you need to be pretty abusive to score more than a 7.

[Sir_Prometheus]

I'm not opposed to limiting to like 3 points or something.  5 seems like it'd just be too much of the same around here.

Like, the last 1850 looked something like:

Todd - 2 (or 4, depending on how you read the exalted reward thing)
Alex - 9 or so  (Eldar)
Chris - 4
Bill S - 4
Bill M - 7  (Eldar + SM)
Sam - 2 (let's pretend it's 5 because I don't know if Fateweaver or Be'Lakor have rewards or 4 mastery levels)
Troy - 3
Jason - 5
Matt B - 5
Stephen - 6 (maybe 7, because "1 Each Stormtalon after the first (including the first if more than one Flyer in the army)" doesn't make much sense.  It would seem like having 2 Stormtalons would cost 2 because if you've got 2, you've also got more than 1 flyer.)  (White Scars)


Seems tough to build a sick Eldar list without hitting 6.
Seems like SM bikes get punished a little too much.
It's tough to get 5 or 6 with CSM or Demons unless you legit spam FMCs or Helldrakes.


Edit:  John Walsh took Taudar with 3 Riptides and scored a 6, I believe.  Not too bad.

So, I'm ok with setting a level that doesn't make TOO many people change their lists, or not that much.  Particularly since despite the high level of play at BG, most people take fairly balanced lists.  So just because most people are relatively behaving themselves on the list building end, that doesn't mean we need to be more stringent. 

And to your point earlier, Chase, Alex obviously doesn't win just because of his lists.  But generally speaking, I think it would be nice to not have to face 3 LR (or five!) or sure, 3 Stormravens, or 3 wraithknight, or whatever. 

It's also worth noting that this comp system isn't usually just a cap -- it actually usually yields extra points.  So a 5 point list fights a 1 point list and the 1 point list gets 4 extra battle points, or something.