Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think the comp system looks great to me as far as a general rubric is concerned. Frankly the only way to due a truly 'fair' comp system is to basically lay out codex by codex which builds exactly you feel are over/under powered and then judge each list separately. Anytime you have a set rubric there will be some armies that can 'game' it more than others.

With that said, I think a lot of the cookie-cutter army feel you get in tournaments these days does come from duplicated unit choices, so making this the focus of the rubric, along with a floating 30 point 'judged' section should indeed make sure that armies in this tournament are much more varied than most tournaments.

And at the end of the day, that is the stated point of their comp system...to encourage codex exploration instead of seeing a bunch of unit duplicates, with the floating 30 judged points as a reserve to help focus on lists that are still super-powerful but skirt around the rubric. So I'd imagine if people took the couple of guard lists suggested here you might end up not getting the 30 judged points to your lists, where armies that clearly have gone for straight up diversity over killing potential would get those points given back.

Overall I'd love to attend this tournament because of the variety that this comp system will no doubt encourage and if I lived anywhere on the East coast this (along with the NOVA) would be definite choices for me.


And I'll never understand why people say that tournaments with comp restrictions on them "aren't 40K"...40K like any game encourages the use of house rules, and a comp system is basically just one giant house rule. This makes it no more or no less 40K than any other game with or without house rules.

MVBrandt wrote:
Careful, you'll fall into the very thing you don't like other people doing! The NOVA uses a form of passive comp, that removes much of the pressure of "list building" from the opportunity to compete in a skill sense. This is different, obviously, from comp that puts greater emphasis on building within a new system of "list" and learning that, but it's effectively "comp" in that it benefits less list-intensive hardcore folks, and it increases the permissible variety in attendant list. So, from one fan to another - bravo and keep it up.

For all - competitiveness is directly proportional to the difference between players in terms of skill/capability. The closer a game is, the more competitive it is. Comp or not has nothing to do with this, on face value, though too steep a learning curve on a list-oriented comp system CAN cause greater differences between those who play well but don't have much list building time/capacity, and those who can really dissect and "crack" the list nuances of a comp system.

As I said above, I'll be trying to attend myself this year with some kind of variant on the guard list I posted. DaBoyz is one of the best regarded events around, year in and year out, in terms of how well it's run.

I stand corrected Brandt, I assumed too much about NOVA and generalized. I certainly won't make that mistake again! I am happy to hear you want to attend our GT and I look forward to some good games and better times!

If it's a little "harsh" that I said "not 40k" to some people, I only did it b/c I like playing straight up games. This is TOTALLY a reason that I wouldn't attend.

Now I'm sure Da Boyz run a fantastic tournament. I know these guys personally from Adepticon and actually suffer from a self imposed rivalry with a great guy, Shawn Kemp...damn him! (I'll get you yet Shawn!) I'm sure that the show they put on during the weekend is top notch.

However, when I'm in tournament mode...I'm all business. One thing I really hate, and always has, has been any form of comp. I simply dont like having people tell me what toys I get to play with over the weekend. Indeed, several of the armies that I have 'tournament ready' are flat out illegal to play at this tournament...yet they are completly playable within normal 40k rules. Honestly, and some people will probably wince at this, I'd find a one day 'Ard Boys tourney more satisfying 'game-wise' than this tournament that forces me into building and playing an army that I have no interest in practicing with.

I like redundancy and efficient units. My current Grey knights list doesnt have any fast attack. I'm HEAVILY penalised (indeed, illegal) unless I shoehorn a StormRaven or an interceptor squad into my army....which totally throws the balance of the army that I've build and envisioned.

It's just my point of veiw. I'm not trying to get a mad-on here...really I'm not. I feel comp is silly in a "tournament" atmosphere though...and noone can make me feel different about that.

So what do I do? Not attend, then when I see Da Boyz at Nova or maybe Adepticon next year, have a beer with Shawn, Chris or Jay and ask..."So how'd that stupid comp-lovers tournament go? Harhar!" To which they'd reply "Great! After all Shane...you werent there! How could it have gone otherwise?" Then we both clink glasses and check out the blond that just walked up in the turqoise party dress....

Like I said...good luck with the Tourney, I wont be attending, but it promotes the hobby....even if it isnt 40K.

Hulksmash wrote:

On that note why even have 30pts being "playable"? Why not start at 50 and you need to have a score to play?

It's probably about the overall scoring. Think of most paint scores. If you have the 3 color minimum, most tournaments give you X number of points, while those same tourneys tell you that painting the minimum is required. Why give those points out when you get them for just showing up with what you were supposed to?

In most cases it's just to help the math at the end of the day add up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Deadshane1 wrote:...One thing I really hate, and always has, has been any form of comp. I simply dont like having people tell me what toys I get to play with over the weekend. ...

Doesn't GW tell you how to play with your toys? To me, I look at the rubric and see it as another Force Org chart. It's just another way to play the game.

Anyway, the GT should be a hell of a time. Last year's was a great event, and I'm looking forward to attending this year as well.

Comp isn't my cup of tea but if I lived in the area I'd still go just because it is a fun weekend of gaming with buddies. Hell, if I had the money I'd still go for the same reason.

And if anyone really doesn't like the format, they can start their own GT like we did for the Bay Area Open. Otherwise, be glad you have a big GT locally to attend at all as those things take a ton of work to organize.

I hope you all have a great weekend!

Deadshane1 wrote:If it's a little "harsh" that I said "not 40k" to some people, I only did it b/c I like playing straight up games. This is TOTALLY a reason that I wouldn't attend.

Now I'm sure Da Boyz run a fantastic tournament. I know these guys personally from Adepticon and actually suffer from a self imposed rivalry with a great guy, Shawn Kemp...damn him! (I'll get you yet Shawn!) I'm sure that the show they put on during the weekend is top notch.

However, when I'm in tournament mode...I'm all business. One thing I really hate, and always has, has been any form of comp. I simply dont like having people tell me what toys I get to play with over the weekend. Indeed, several of the armies that I have 'tournament ready' are flat out illegal to play at this tournament...yet they are completly playable within normal 40k rules. Honestly, and some people will probably wince at this, I'd find a one day 'Ard Boys tourney more satisfying 'game-wise' than this tournament that forces me into building and playing an army that I have no interest in practicing with.

I like redundancy and efficient units. My current Grey knights list doesnt have any fast attack. I'm HEAVILY penalised (indeed, illegal) unless I shoehorn a StormRaven or an interceptor squad into my army....which totally throws the balance of the army that I've build and envisioned.

It's just my point of veiw. I'm not trying to get a mad-on here...really I'm not. I feel comp is silly in a "tournament" atmosphere though...and noone can make me feel different about that.

So what do I do? Not attend, then when I see Da Boyz at Nova or maybe Adepticon next year, have a beer with Shawn, Chris or Jay and ask..."So how'd that stupid comp-lovers tournament go? Harhar!" To which they'd reply "Great! After all Shane...you werent there! How could it have gone otherwise?" Then we both clink glasses and check out the blond that just walked up in the turqoise party dress....

Like I said...good luck with the Tourney, I wont be attending, but it promotes the hobby....even if it isnt 40K.

To each their own Dead! And don't worry, you're not the only one with a self induced rivalry with Kemp...though mine is more with Chris as he wrecks me on a weekly basis. I'm playing Kemp this Sunday to get him some ETC training in, I'll be sure to say hi to him for you.

Deadshane1 wrote:If it's a little "harsh" that I said "not 40k" to some people, I only did it b/c I like playing straight up games. This is TOTALLY a reason that I wouldn't attend.

Now I'm sure Da Boyz run a fantastic tournament. I know these guys personally from Adepticon and actually suffer from a self imposed rivalry with a great guy, Shawn Kemp...damn him! (I'll get you yet Shawn!) I'm sure that the show they put on during the weekend is top notch.

However, when I'm in tournament mode...I'm all business. One thing I really hate, and always has, has been any form of comp. I simply dont like having people tell me what toys I get to play with over the weekend. Indeed, several of the armies that I have 'tournament ready' are flat out illegal to play at this tournament...yet they are completly playable within normal 40k rules. Honestly, and some people will probably wince at this, I'd find a one day 'Ard Boys tourney more satisfying 'game-wise' than this tournament that forces me into building and playing an army that I have no interest in practicing with.

I like redundancy and efficient units. My current Grey knights list doesnt have any fast attack. I'm HEAVILY penalised (indeed, illegal) unless I shoehorn a StormRaven or an interceptor squad into my army....which totally throws the balance of the army that I've build and envisioned.

It's just my point of veiw. I'm not trying to get a mad-on here...really I'm not. I feel comp is silly in a "tournament" atmosphere though...and noone can make me feel different about that.

So what do I do? Not attend, then when I see Da Boyz at Nova or maybe Adepticon next year, have a beer with Shawn, Chris or Jay and ask..."So how'd that stupid comp-lovers tournament go? Harhar!" To which they'd reply "Great! After all Shane...you werent there! How could it have gone otherwise?" Then we both clink glasses and check out the blond that just walked up in the turqoise party dress....

Like I said...good luck with the Tourney, I wont be attending, but it promotes the hobby....even if it isnt 40K.

Of course you can and should like what you like. I think it was a bad idea back in the day when prety much every tournament used some sort of comp as well. I think there always needs to be a wide variety of different tournament styles available so that players who like different things have a set of events to gravitate towards.

I just don't like the hyperbole of calling an event with comp 'not 40K' because it's just that: hyperbole. What you like is 'core' or 'basic' 40K, with no expansions, no supplements and no house rules...and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. But there's also nothing wrong with events that include some expansions (like Imperial Armor) or house rules (like comp). They're all still games of Warhammer 40,000 and no version is inherently 'better' than the other.

While I generally gravitate towards un-comped events myself these days, constantly seeing completely theme-less (from my perspective) armies made up of repeated unit choices does tend to deplete my interest in playing the game anymore. That's because behind it all, the reason I still play 40K is because of the cinema of the battle that goes on in my head with each battle, which is why you'll rarely see me ever concede a game early (unless time demands it), because I like to have my little soldiers fight to the last man even if the balance of the game is already long been decided.

Of course, my current army build suffers from the exact same symptom I'm describing...I'm playing an Ork Kan wall with nearly all duplicated choices. Of course in my mind I can justify this as an Ork Mek (or two) leading a ramshakle army of walkers...something I really have trouble doing with 'Grey Knight' armies made up of 5 Psyrifleman Dreads screened by Henchmen Rhinos. Those types of armies (and even my own) really do suck a lot of that cinema out of the game and reduce it down to a purely mathematical formula of tabletop effectiveness.

I don't fault anyone for taking lists like this (like I said, I do it myself), but I do recognize that something is inherently 'lost' when so many armies at a tournament look eerily similar and don't make much of any connection to the background the army is supposedly drawn from. So while I would hate if we ever went back to having most (or all) events using comp, I do really want to attend some tournaments with some decent (and interesting) comp restrictions in place just to get a bit more of that 'cinema' back into army building.


With all that said, the one thing I can totally agree with you that is really bad (IMHO) about this comp system is that they have a minimum that you must adhere to. That essentially makes some lists that are perfectly 'legal' from the codex completely disallowed in this event and that really isn't cool. Players should be able to bring whatever they want, take their massive comp ding for it and play their games. I don't think disallowing some players from attending because their only painted army forms an illegal list is something that should ever be included.

the comp system for this event takes the game back to the stone age of competition.

all it does is make players try to find new loopholes in a new poopy system.

yeah, i said that. your system is doggy doo.

...and dakka: your little 'post editor' asking me about typing in all lower case letters is slowed. since when does the internet give two s**ts about MLA (or formatting for that matter)?

HarveyDent wrote:the comp system for this event takes the game back to the stone age of competition.

all it does is make players try to find new loopholes in a new poopy system.

yeah, i said that. your system is doggy doo.

If you look at it from the perspective of giving people new challenges to create a ballbuster list, isn't that more fun, fair, and upfront than "stealth comp" hidden in missions?

I think the worst downside you can argue to this is that it hurts older, weaker armies. It does create some interesting new possibilities.

What can you say The DaBoyz GT is different event. It is no Nova, Adepticon, Wargamescon, Warmasters, or the Bay Open. All good events, but each one is different and great in there own way. For instance Nova format is great format and a lot of events are coping it, but if every tournament ran the nova format people would think it would be boring (sorry MBV). Gamers want variety. I love going to events. I would have made Warmasters, WargamesCon and Nova this year if it was not for the little ETC I have to attend in about a week.

I think most gamers like me really don’t care. If an event has not comp or sportsmanship or even painting I will still play in it. All I want to do is to get a good game in. Sure I want to win, but if I get beat I get beat. The DaBoyz went down the ACT Tennessee I had to bring a low kill point army because every mission had kill points. I wanted to win so I had to change up my list.
Sure the Comp system is really telling you what you can play, but is no different than other tournaments if want to win.

Hulk: I hope wreck with Nids at the Nova.

Chumby: I am glad you are thinking on coming.

Nate: sorry I can’t make Warmasters this year. Freaking ETC!

MVB: I really wanted to go to Nova this year, but wife would of killed me if I want to Europe and then to the Nova Open.

DeadShane: I am sorry you think it is not 40k. I do think playing with comp just makes you are better player. What is your record vs. Shaun? I hope to see you at the next big event.

Yakface: yea we did not want to put a limit on the comp, but we have seen is that very good players (aka as Brad Chester) showing up with nasty armies just destroying other very good players with sup-par armies.

I hope see a lot of you, if not maybe at one of the events listed above.

HarveyDent wrote:the comp system for this event takes the game back to the stone age of competition.

all it does is make players try to find new loopholes in a new poopy system.

yeah, i said that. your system is doggy doo.

...and dakka: your little 'post editor' asking me about typing in all lower case letters is slowed. since when does the internet give two s**ts about MLA (or formatting for that matter)?

The rules of this site state that, yes, this site cares.

These are the same rules that you agreed to follow when you signed up for an account here.

There's a link to them in my signature.

Please re-read them ASAP.

Thanks!

I'm a sad panda. My Sister's score a -15. New codex looks even worse with repeating units. Glad they are so overpowered.

Good luck with your tournament, just not my cup of tea.

Jay said it well. There is room for types of events and all types of events can be fun. Day boyz gt, by all accounts, is good fun. I hope this is there best year yet. I've met a lot of day boyz club at adepticon and they're all really cool guys.

Looming forward to seeing the results. I wonder if sparks can pull it off again with the mighty footdar!

yeah, sadly there are those of us that like to play this game called Warhammer 40,000. there are no rules in the rulebook that dictate the game be played in the way this tournament wants it to be played.

well... wait, the tournament isn't saying you CAN'T play 40K. it's just saying that you don't deserve to win at 40K the way these tournament organizers want you to win. they think that variety is the spice of the hobby... and thus that is the way you can win. competition promotes diversity, not the other way around.

...and criticizing posts for not having correct capitalization is just silly. that's just another version of personal preference that has gone too far.

Posts without correct grammar are criticised because they are difficult to read.

There is a rule of the site that users should type in correct English. Correct grammar helps readers to understand what you are trying to say.

...and yet you use incorrect grammar. where are the grammar police now?

My two cents before this thread gets closed hehe

If you play baseball and all of sudden use a larger ball and change the field size doesn't a game cease being Baseball and become Softball? They are two different games. If someone wants to call the BoyzGT not 40k they have every right to and not be branded hyperbolic.

If the goal of the BoyzGT is to see different lists than what you see at a standard event then maybe this comp system might work. If the goal that you usually find with Comp systems is to somehow protect the players for "tough" lists then it will fail because any power gamer will exploit any comp system in order to win. Defeating a purpose of the comp in the first place.

Also isn't this rubric the first time it is being tried out? I would want to hear more about how much it is has been play tested so at the very least the organizers if it works well or not.

tastytaste wrote:
If you play baseball and all of sudden use a larger ball and change the field size doesn't a game cease being Baseball and become Softball? They are two different games. If someone wants to call the BoyzGT not 40k they have every right to and not be branded hyperbolic.

That is an incorrect analogy because a comp system does not change how the actual game is played, it simply changes how players are allowed to play the (same) game.

So a much better analogy would be the handicap system in golf that effectively penalizes better players and rewards worse players to allow them to compete with each other despite their skill levels being vastly different. No one would ever consider saying someone 'isn't playing golf' because they're playing with a handicap.

Or an analogy closer to yours would be the difference in rules between college and professional baseball. Professional baseball doesn't allow metal bats (and a variety of other small changes) for example, yet both are most certainly considered baseball.

Tournaments with and without comp systems are still warhammer 40,000 tournaments and in both players are playing games of warhammer 40,000. In fact, for a long, long time the 'official' tournaments run by Games Workshop included a comp system, so were games played in those tournaments somehow not warhammer 40K?

If you think comp systems are stupid, archaic, etc, that's your prerogative and its fine. But to say a tournament using some form of comp system is somehow 'not 40K' is useless rhetoric designed to make the players and organizers who actually like comp systems feel that they are somehow stupid, weak or lesser gamers for doing so.

The only good thing that can be said about this comp system is that it is transparent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Upon second thought, I like it. I mean, feth it. It seems that the only goal of the comp system is to increase variety rather than address balance issues. Let's admit it, triple vendetta/triple riflemen dread/venom spam is boring as hell. Sure people will figure out the most broken list within the system, but the sole goal of increasing variety will still be achieved.

tastytaste wrote:Also isn't this rubric the first time it is being tried out? I would want to hear more about how much it is has been play tested so at the very least the organizers if it works well or not.

They run a great tournament. The rules change a bit year to year, but people attending know what to expect. And they playtest their rules quite a bit.

Folks attending have a good time, and it sells out each year.

If it was in driving distance I'd be there regardless of the format simply because I hear they put on a good event. That and I'm lucky enough to have large enough armies to attempt to break the system. Granted I'd have to play MEQ as Daemons and Nids won't do well at all in this kind of set-up.

Hulksmash wrote:If it was in driving distance I'd be there regardless of the format simply because I hear they put on a good event. That and I'm lucky enough to have large enough armies to attempt to break the system. Granted I'd have to play MEQ as Daemons and Nids won't do well at all in this kind of set-up.

Yeah, there are some legitimate crticisms to be made about this format: it punishes older books, and books that rely on mech, far more than newer, more varied books.

And, I hate to agree with Yak on general principle, but some of criticisms are (or make no effort not to look like) pretty condescending. I had a frat brother that would rail about how stupid the vegan restaurant near us was, seemingly ignoring the near constant 15-minute wait for a table.

It's been a while since I played 40k... but wouldn't it be fairly easy for an army like Dark Eldar to get the 80 comp points, but still bring a really hard list? As Polonius points out, it has a lot of troop choices (at least, if you take a Haemonculus) and a large variety of units that are decent.

People wouldn't be able to spam just a few, but I feel like it'd still be extremely strong just swapping out some selections for others. (I'm starting DE, so it's the only army I can really comment on)

That said, I like it when tournies try to do some sort of crazy comp. The DakkaCon GT was great fun (particularly with the banning of the "number 6 spells", making games get played out a bit more without units being deleted from the board by magic) even though afterwards you realize how certain armies were able to exploit the rules, etc. It's just part of this type of event and I kind of like it.

That said, I wouldn't be able to play in the fantasy tournament since no special characters of any kind are allowed :-/. What an outdated rule... just ban the ones that you feel are overpowered! Throgg-led troll army = no dice :-/

The problem I see with DE is that they're virtually all mech. I don't know enough about them to know if they can take decent foot sloggiers.

Well, with Webway portals they can... but it's a risk (however, it's how I plan to play them ). Certainly not the usual raider-spamfest that is seen in tournaments...

Hulksmash wrote:If it was in driving distance I'd be there regardless of the format simply because I hear they put on a good event. That and I'm lucky enough to have large enough armies to attempt to break the system. Granted I'd have to play MEQ as Daemons and Nids won't do well at all in this kind of set-up.

I placed 2nd overall with Nids last year, and the format isn't all that different. Looking at my army list from last year, I think that it'd score 80 on the rubric as well.

These types of comp events are the only kind of would ever consider attending -- atleast its not entirely based on a subjective panel of judges (which is what they have done in the past IIRC). I know some players see building lists for these events as a challenge, I personaly kind of like it also when attending Astronomicon in past years (they ditched their comp now though).

I agree though it does force many to build and paint almost entirely new armies and that is going to alienate folks -- but it is what it is.

Warmaster Primus wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:If it was in driving distance I'd be there regardless of the format simply because I hear they put on a good event. That and I'm lucky enough to have large enough armies to attempt to break the system. Granted I'd have to play MEQ as Daemons and Nids won't do well at all in this kind of set-up.

I placed 2nd overall with Nids last year, and the format isn't all that different. Looking at my army list from last year, I think that it'd score 80 on the rubric as well.

Yeah tyranids aren't so bad off, assuming the comp and 30 point requirement keeps transport spam to a minimum. No real need to take special characters, no need to take dedicated transports and troops are not just tacked on but key parts to most builds. Perfect comp? Not what I would shoot for (gotta take hits for the elite selections) but minimal deductions seems very possible.

So you are saying I can take a baseball (certain list) to a softball game and it would be ok? The basic FoC is part of the games basic rules this comp system is asking players to change that to suit the comp system. That is changing how the game is designed to be played. That is why I chose softball over say football because while the difference is not great it is still there.

yakface wrote:

tastytaste wrote:
If you play baseball and all of sudden use a larger ball and change the field size doesn't a game cease being Baseball and become Softball? They are two different games. If someone wants to call the BoyzGT not 40k they have every right to and not be branded hyperbolic.

That is an incorrect analogy because a comp system does not change how the actual game is played, it simply changes how players are allowed to play the (same) game.

So a much better analogy would be the handicap system in golf that effectively penalizes better players and rewards worse players to allow them to compete with each other despite their skill levels being vastly different. No one would ever consider saying someone 'isn't playing golf' because they're playing with a handicap.

Or an analogy closer to yours would be the difference in rules between college and professional baseball. Professional baseball doesn't allow metal bats (and a variety of other small changes) for example, yet both are most certainly considered baseball.

Tournaments with and without comp systems are still warhammer 40,000 tournaments and in both players are playing games of warhammer 40,000. In fact, for a long, long time the 'official' tournaments run by Games Workshop included a comp system, so were games played in those tournaments somehow not warhammer 40K?

If you think comp systems are stupid, archaic, etc, that's your prerogative and its fine. But to say a tournament using some form of comp system is somehow 'not 40K' is useless rhetoric designed to make the players and organizers who actually like comp systems feel that they are somehow stupid, weak or lesser gamers for doing so.

tastytaste wrote:So you are saying I can take a baseball (certain list) to a softball game and it would be ok? The basic FoC is part of the games basic rules this comp system is asking players to change that to suit the comp system. That is changing how the game is designed to be played. That is why I chose softball over say football because while the difference is not great it is still there.

And missions that punish units that move over 6" or giving your opponent 5 extra KPs if you don't take fast attack choices don't alter 'how the game is meant to be played'? By your statement, 'ardboyz is a comp event and always has been as the missions force people to change the units they take and force changes to army organization and force org. I see no difference between 'ard boyz wacky mission comp and comp like this rubric. People have been setting arbitrary rules to change how people build lists in events for years and it is part of the game and GW has always promoted it in the past. As long as it is transparent, you can prepare for it, I see no difference.

I guess I don't care if you want to call it Circle-Jerk 40,000... it looks like it'll be fun to me, and apparently enough other people to make it a thing.

Since not even the rulebook defines "real" 40k to be mean restricted to the rulebook, at some point definitions of "real", like nearly all defintinions of reality, simply turn into "the way I see it."

So, yes. This is not 40k "the way you percieve it."

But reality is far more complex than you realize.