Swedish Komp System

[Chase]

Meganob army comes out to one point if I'm doing this right. So yeah it's pretty hard to make a high point Ork list. Also I really don't know why everyone says Painville is super competitive and serious. I've been going there almost every Thursday for over year and it consists mostly of friends who've known each other forever playing against each other, people showing newbs how to play and lending them models if need be, running increasingly sillier Ork armies, 2v2 and 3v3 lol fests, and more recently singing the occasional Bone Thugs 'n Harmony song.

Man, I want to hang out on Thursdays and sing Bone Thugs 'n Harmony. 

[steelforge]

So Comp? That thing we were suppose to be talking about?

First: Disclaimer, my army has a comp score of 9.  It's Tau+Eldar + Inquisition.  I'm that guy.

Second: I'd play in a comp event and I think it can be good for the environment.

Here is why: the current lists lack diversity.  Comp increases diversity.  Diversity equals more fun lists.
Right now saw about 2 lists at the last tournament: Bikes and Tau-Tide.

I love my 3 Riptides with all their special rules but it'd be more fun to play something different with all those units I never take off the shelf because they aren't Riptides.
-Gundam John

ps, can we lay off the Bennett bashing?  Yes we get it.  Also it doesn't contribute to the discussion of how to make the most awesome gaming store even more awesome.

-Gundam John of the Greater Booze.

[Chase]

I'm going to split the highlander convo into it's own thread.

[the_trooper]

Every list I play(ed) seems to top out at 3 in this comp thing. Hell, even my DG which is essentially loads of plague marines and a nurgle lord, nurgle prince with wings is fine for this. My drop podding SM also seems to be pretty chill with it considering it's Carchardons with loads of tactical squads in pods.

If this is something that the community can agree on as a standard, I could see myself playing 40k again.

EDIT:

For a long time, 40k has required a certain understanding of you opponent's army in order to be a fun game (don't bring 2 flamer heldrakes if they don't have AA!"). This is a much more structured version of what had to be intuitive before. In a lot of ways, I really like where 40k is going as he imbalance is becoming even more apparent and now people are willing to address it.

[Sir_Prometheus]

So, we run a tournament with this system, what are we going to limit it to?  I say 5, partly because in the interview I heard on the 11th company, that was what I heard as one of the commonly used #'s.  Also, we're new to this, let's start off slow, but 5 should weed out some of the crazier stuff.  We should also give bonus points for the comp differential, so there's still a benefit for having a lower score.

(And, yes, my basic list scores a 5 but that's not really why I'm suggesting this number -- I could shave it down to 3 easy enough)

[robpro]

I say 0. Lets test this system from the ground up.

[andalucien]

hardcode dude.

But... I think that would actually take away from the fun.  0 means any unit that is comped is just banned, so a lot of currently popular models are just banned entirely.  THAT I don't think is what Chase would be looking for    Also, it takes away the decision, it's no longer "hmm, do I spend my comp point on this or that", there's no option because you can't even spend 1 point.

[robpro]

If the point is to get people to change their lists, why start with 5 when a number of lists are there already? I'm really curious to see what a field of 0-point lists looks like.

[PhoenixFire]

If the point is to get people to change their lists, why start with 5 when a number of lists are there already? I'm really curious to see what a field of 0-point lists looks like.

As Matt said 0 points would be rediculous and would probably drive down attendance as many popular units cause 1 comp point to even field one. 3 points would impact most lists, 0 Is nuts

But again let's remember a highlander only event would make several army types unplayable (DE, drop pods, SM bikes etc) and again might impact attendance.

I would imagine Chase is looking for an event that appeals to the masses after that disastrous 11 person tournament at Abington.

[robpro]

You mean the doubles? It was actually a lot of fun, I think there were a lot of factors at play for the lower turnout like a TempmeCon practice event at another store.

I think the point of highlander is it forces you to think outside the box. I wouldn't be interested in playing in a 5 point tournament, but if that's what people want then don't let me stop you. 3 might be alright, but 0 could be really fun. My reasons are mostly selfish, you can't run a necron army with only 5 points and my eldar aren't built/painted enough for a tournament.

[Benjamin]

If there's one positive to a system like this, it's that in theory you could dial it to taste. So a 1-point tournament could be casual while a 15-point tournament is everything-and-the-kitchen-sink competitive.

5 points would probably be a good testing ground. Of course too, we could assign the community a number and have players create the most broken lists they can within those confines. Game the system as hard as possible before even playing a game, and we might save some aggravation on game day!

[Sir_Prometheus]

I don't see how zero points makes any sense, completely unplayable for many people. Anything less than 3 looks too restrictive to be much fun.

Keep in mind that's there's supposed to benefits/penalties based upon varying comp scores. So even if you view 5 pts as "permissive" there's still a lot of benefit to playing a 2 or 3 point list.

[Chase]

5 points would probably be a good testing ground. Of course too, we could assign the community a number and have players create the most broken lists they can within those confines. Game the system as hard as possible before even playing a game, and we might save some aggravation on game day!

People, show me some stupid 5 point lists.

My gut reaction to running an event like this that "features" the "komp" rules would be to start at 3.  At 5 the majority of people just take what they were going to play anyways.  I feel like trying something different should actually involve trying something different...  Unless we don't want anything that's too much different and are just looking to keep some "super cheese" stuff away.

[Sir_Prometheus]

At 5 the majority of people just take what they were going to play anyways.

Ya, maybe, but so?  You're still weeding out the super cheese lists (and honestly BG isn't bad for this, but there are some) and as I've mentioned lower Komp point lists will still have an advantage.  If like 60% of current lists past this test, then I think that's fine.  You're still cutting out some of the nonsense and rewarding the fluffy (2-3 point) players. 

I think you only see a few "net-lists" at BG, so I think it makes sense that most would pass that threshold. 

[andalucien]

I vote for 3 as an experiment to see how it would look.  It would be quite a bit different than what we've been seeing.   5 point limit would basically amount to an enforcement that tourneys will continue to run at BG how they mostly have been already.