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.

This is like going fishing with a hammer. Sure, the hammer is easy and you can hit things hard with it, but its not really gonna help with the defined goal of fishing.

I would argue that it's not so much a hammer as a very well programmed guided missile aimed at very specific things. lol Good luck with it. Your heart is definitely in the right place in posting it for feedback!

This may have been targeted at DE, but it also kicks SoB square in the junk too:

Dracos wrote:What do you think of this comp system:

Start 20/20, deducting cumulatively for each applicable infraction:

-1 for the fifth troop choice
-1 for the sixth troop choice

Not an issue for SoB, but why punish those who are taking Troops?

-1 for a third FA choice (includes Allied FA choices)
-1 if the third FA choice is a triplicate (same Force Org ‘type’)

Being that this is one of SoB better slots and with only two choices in FA to begin with, this hurts.

-1 for a third Elite choice (includes Allied Elite choices)
-1 for a fourth Elite choice (which must happen due to Allies)
-1 if the third Elite choice is a triplicate (same Force Org ‘type’)

This doesn't hurt SoB that badly because their Elites are sub-par.

-1 for a 2nd HS choice (includes Allied HS choices)
-1 for a 3rd HS choice (includes Allied HS choices)
-1 for a 4th HS choice (which must happen due to Allies)
-1 for a duplicate HS choice
-1 for a triplicate HS choice

This kills SoB as well with our only shooting past 24" in these slots in one of two units: Exorcists or Retributors.

-1 for more than 300 points of HQ
-1 Additional for each full 100 of HQ over 300

This isn't too bad, unless someone is running Battle Conclaves which already got hit with the nerf bat of 6th with the changes to assault and non-assault transport vehicles.

-1 for Less than 300 points of troops
-1 Additional for less than 200 points of troops

Our troops are terrible and for good reason should be avoided. And we only have one choice. At least we can't ever get the second penalty as our two troops are 250 minium.

-1 for more than 800 points of troops
-1 Additional for more than 1000 points of troops

Non-issue for SoB, but why punish those taking troops again?

-1 for more than 300 points of FA
-1 Additional for each full 150 of FA over 300
-1 for more than 300 points of Elites
-1 Additional for each full 150 of Elites over 300
-1 for more than 300 points of HS
-1 Additional for each full 150 of HS over 300

Once more these kill about the only decent SoB lists as our Troops really are that bad. They are the tax we pay to take the decent stuff in our FA/HS options. Straight kick in the junk.

-1 for more than 150 points of dedicated transports
-1 Additional for each full 150 of dedicated transports over 150

It was said earlier that with Rhinos/Razorbacks being so cheap that this wouldn't be a problem for most SM. Well, with SoB it is. Can't even get two Immolators with those restrictions, and SoB could easily require the 5 Rhinos it would take to meet those limits because we simply have no other options for getting our units where they need to be without them. Without making a list point for point just off the top of my head I have SoB at -11 points for 9/20 just for a basic list. I'll probably actually do up a list proper to see for real.

I would not play at an event with these comp rules in place. It's not like SoB are exactly upper tier either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sample 1500 SoB List:

HQ:
St. Celestine 115

Troops:
BSS, Flamer, MM, Combi 150
Rhino 35
BSS, Flamer, MM, Combi 150
Rhino 35

FA:
Dominions, 2 x MG, Combi 100
MM Immolator 80
Dominions, 2 x MG, Combi 100
MM Immolator 80
Dominions, 2 x MG, Combi 100
MM Immolator 80

HS:
Exorcist 135
Exorcist 135
Exorcist 135

Comes in at about 1430 if my numbers are right allowing for a little bit more gear like Searchlights/dozer blades/etc.

Under this comp table, this list would receive, wow, -11 points for 09/20. No thank you.

The point I've been trying to communicate is that yes this will punish the "power lists" severely, but the collateral damage to everyone else is crazy. Some armies can build a perfectly playable army with 20/20, but many have to bend over backwards as to hit 20/20.

Keep the feedback coming. I offer a challenge to provide 20/20 lists for your own army!

Thanks for the contributions so far!

--HQ--
Emperor's Champion, AAC - 140

Marshal, Terminator Armour, Storm Shield, Lightning Claw, Bionics - 150

--Elites--
5x Terminators, 2x Cyclone Missile Launchers, Tank Hunters, 3x Chainfists (because why not? )

--Troops--
Lasplas-squad - 101

Lasplas-squad - 101

Lasplas-squad - 101

Lasplas-squad - 101
TLLCback, smoke, EA, Searchlight - 99

--Fast Attack--
Land Speeder Typhoon - 70

Land Speeder Typhoon - 70

Land Speeder Squadron - 2x Land Speeder Typhoon - 140

--Heavy Support--
Trilaspred, Searchlight - 146

1499 points, 20/20. So I herd you like gunlinez??

Thanks AlmightyWalrus!

 Dracos wrote:
The point I've been trying, and been absolutely vilified for, is that yes this will punish the "power lists" severely, but the collateral damage to everyone else is crazy. Some armies can build a perfectly playable army with 20/20, but many have to bend over backwards as to hit 20/20.

Keep the feedback coming. I offer a challenge to provide 20/20 lists for your own army!

Thanks for the contributions so far!

Challenge accepted! It can be done but with a list that sucks.

20/20 Comp 1500 SoB List

HQ:
St. Celestine 115
Kyrinov 90

Elites:
Ecclesiarchy Priest w/ Eviscerator 70
Repentia Squad w/ 5 more members 175

Troops:
BSS, 10 more members, MG, MM, Combi 275
BSS, 10 more members, MG, MM, Combi 275

FA:
Seraphim, 2 x Hand Flamers 120
Seraphim, 2 x Hand Flamers 120

HS:
Penitent Engine Squadron w/ 2 additional Members 255

Comes in at 1495 with what should be 20/20 comp. No shooting past 24" and only Bolters and MM at 24". The best things about this list are St. Celestian, the Seraphim, and Kyrinov in that order. If the goal of the event is comp, then right on with this list. But if it is to win, then just move right along.

I think they are adding in another penalty for the 2nd fast attack now, -1. Not official, but after I posted the IG double vendetta 20/20 list they responded that it would be 18 or 19 due to more restrictions on fast attack.

I think its going to be -1 for 2nd fast attack, and -1 for a duplicate fast attack.

 Dracos wrote:
I think they are adding in another penalty for the 2nd fast attack now, -1. Not official, but after I posted the IG double vendetta 20/20 list they responded that it would be 18 or 19 due to more restrictions on fast attack.

I think its going to be -1 for 2nd fast attack, and -1 for a duplicate fast attack.

And this is the slippery slope that is comp. If Vendettas are the problem, why not just ban them? Or disallow fliers as a whole? Or go back to playing 5th?

With any comp system, and this was said earlier, there will always be a way to game it so that it severely hinders some while barely touching others. It is one of the many reasons I'm dead set against comp scoring. Why are the organizers of this event so worried about it?

They abolished it last year, and got serious negative feedback about it. Right now, I can't tell if they want the Comp system because its actually needed to balance the playing field, or if its just a reaction to negative feedback.

 Dracos wrote:
They abolished it last year, and got serious negative feedback about it. Right now, I can't tell if they want the Comp system because its actually needed to balance the playing field, or if its just a reaction to negative feedback.

Tell them to grow a spine and stop making changes just because people whine that they lost a game. And given their desire to hurt DE (which aren't a top-tier army) it sounds like it's exactly that: someone doesn't like losing, so they assume that whoever won the tournament had to be using an overpowered and unfair list, rather than just being a better player.

 Dracos wrote:
Keep the feedback coming. I offer a challenge to provide 20/20 lists for your own army!

Why bother. In an event like this I'd just take an optimized power list even if it's a 0/20 and crush my opponents so overwhelmingly that it makes up for the lost comp points. And even if it loses I still keep my pride and don't grant legitimacy to a broken system run by clueless TOs.

 Dracos wrote:
I think it actually was specifically targeting Dark Eldar. Last year the top 2 finishers in battle points were DE, and venoms are being called out specifically as being undercosted comparably with Vendettas.

edit: I'm pretty sure that's why the transport thing is there, to try and limit/punish DE vehicles

That's absolutely insane. Not only are DE not overpowered, even if they were the answer would be to make specific changes to address the unbalanced DE units (for example, a 10% increase in the point cost of the Venom), not to impose the same comp scoring on every army regardless of whether it makes any sense. The whole "one size fits all" approach is just stupid, it fails to accomplish the desired goal AND it hurts lists that weren't winning effectively even without comp scoring.

 Peregrine wrote:
That's absolutely insane. Not only are DE not overpowered, even if they were the answer would be to make specific changes to address the unbalanced DE units (for example, a 10% increase in the point cost of the Venom), not to impose the same comp scoring on every army regardless of whether it makes any sense. The whole "one size fits all" approach is just stupid, it fails to accomplish the desired goal AND it hurts lists that weren't winning effectively even without comp scoring.

That is the conclusion I came to rather quickly, I even suggested a measured approach against only units they deem offending, so that there is not as much collateral damage. I've been demonized for making suggestions and even though I put this in their requested "feedback" thread, I've been told essentially to STFU (even directly by another local organizer).

I was beginning to think I was being an ass for being critical to the point of suggesting the system will not achieve its purpose.

This comp system is insane.

I tried to come up with a Decent Necron list under it, and I couldn't except for an almost pure Silvetide list.

The spots that hurt he most were the Dedicated Transport Points, Points on FA, Points on HQ, and the 1 Heavy support slot.

Tyranids get hit hard when it comes to the HQ, even though a player should get 20/20 if he is bringing Tyranids anyway...

 Dracos wrote:
That is the conclusion I came to rather quickly, I even suggested a measured approach against only units they deem offending, so that there is not as much collateral damage. I've been demonized for making suggestions and even though I put this in their requested "feedback" thread, I've been told essentially to STFU (even directly by another local organizer).

So stop playing in their events and encourage everyone you know to do the same (and if there's another store in the area, take your business elsewhere as well and inform the owner that you're doing so). The people running these tournaments are obviously suffering from that wonderful mix of cluelessness, incompetence, and a massively inflated ego. The only real hope of getting through to them is to kill attendance at their events and force them to either change or die.

And of course if you really want to make changes start running your own events and do it right.

These organizers are not tied to a store directly, but have a few FLGS sponsors. I guess now I'm trying to decide whether my objection to the system would best be communicated/heard by attending and being very negative on their surveys about it, or just not attending. Leaning towards not attending as that's $80 cheaper.

 Dracos wrote:
These organizers are not tied to a store directly, but have a few FLGS sponsors. I guess now I'm trying to decide whether my objection to the system would best be communicated/heard by attending and being very negative on their surveys about it, or just not attending. Leaning towards not attending as that's $80 cheaper.

Convince as many people as you can, not to attend, and make sure they all cite the reason being the comp to the TOs.

Unfortunately, I think non-attendance will somehow be seen as "then the system worked", and I'll just be marginalized as a power gamer. It wouldn't be so bad if this wasn't THE local event. There arn't even more than a couple others all year around in this area. Slim pickings means they don't really have to be competitive to get people to come.

 Dracos wrote:
Unfortunately, I think non-attendance will somehow be seen as "then the system worked", and I'll just be marginalized as a power gamer. It wouldn't be so bad if this wasn't THE local event. There arn't even more than a couple others all year around in this area. Slim pickings means they don't really have to be competitive to get people to come.

That's why you convince people to stop attending their event, and start running events of your own that don't use comp scoring. Feel free to advertise yours as "tired of all that comp ? Come to an event run by a better TO!".

That may yet be something I do in the future. Right now I've got my hands full with doing some TO type stuff for my provincial chess club, I can't run everything


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thanks for the feedback though, I think I got what I needed from this thread. Thanks Dakka!

Why not show them this thread directly so they kniw it's not just you objecting? Show them that their system being broken is a widely held opinion, and they need to fix it.

Agreed. Link this thread, and link their thread so the TO's can communicate directly with the player base at large.

Should be interesting to see them try and justify a comp scoring system like this.

If someone makes a composition tournament the , the limits should be done per codex . there should be different modificators to FA/HVY/Elite/Troops/HQs . a nid player shouldnt be punished for taking troops , but stuff like vendettas should be a -1 , even if you take one. But of course that requires a lot of work from the tournament organizers and in depth knowladge of what is played in tournaments at given points.

My quick comments:
1) Remove all restrictions on using troops. Generally Comp is supposed to reward people who bring their "Core units" to the field, not punish them for doing it. TO's are too much in the 5e midset, MSU is not optimal strategy anymore.

2) Dedicated transports section makes having LR worse than two Night Scythes. Main problem with "spamming" dedicated transports is usually related to them being undercosted (GK psybacks, Night Scythes) so assigning penalty by points cost is actually worse than doing it by amount.

3) Elites, Fast Attack and Heavy support should have 100% equal treatment. For example, what rationale do the TO's have for giving negative points for duplicate Heavy support choices, but not for multiple FA choices. I guess TO's believe that Wraiths and Vendettas are both poor units and no-body would ever consider taking more than 1 anyway.

4) With the ability to squadron units, IG can pretty easily make "power" list while still scoring very high on comp, as has been show. TO's must have some answer on how to handle squadroned units that take single FOC slot.

5) System penalizes armies like SW and Necrons that must pay for Sergeant equivalents from HQ. Now, this might be on purpose, SW (at least with allies) being top tier and Necrons the king of the 6e.

Mainly the problem with this comp is that it is pretty obviously designed with agenda of "Army type X was too good last year, how do we reduce it effects now".

If their goal is to even the playfield (and reduce the amount of netlists), first thing they should do is to limit amount of fliers somehow, especially the extremely undercosted ones like Vendettas and Night Scythes.

As with pretty much any comp system, there's a lot here that is going to have a lot of collateral damage and do zero to harm certain power lists (or require relatively little modification), and you'll have a much less diverse array of armies, with certain armies and builds much better able to cope than others.

Imperial Guard love this sort of thing because due to the way platoons and squadrons work they can work around or mitigate a lot of these without losing out on too much in the way of capabilities, and I'd expect IG to do very well at such an event. Tyranids and Eldar on the other hand, if they try to stick with the comp system, are going to get hammered because they do not have certain capabilities in their Troops units and have to max out certain FoC slots to manage, say, adequate anti-tank ability.

The generalist armies like IG and Space Marines won't have too much trouble adapting to this event. Armies like Eldar, Dark Eldar, Necrons, and Tyranids will either face ruination on comp or ruination if they stick to the comp guidelines.

What I came up with for DE. A number of these options I would never normally take, but I was essentially forced to in order to get a 20/20 comp score. Comes out to 1496

DE
HQ (180pts)
Archon: agoniser, shadow field, plasma grenades
Haemonculus: liquifier, mindphase gauntlet

Elites (233 pts)
5 Incubi: Klaivex
4 Trueborn: 4 blasters

Troops (620 pts)
10 Warriors: 2 splinter canon + raider w/splinter racks and flicker
10 Warriors: 2 splinter canon + raider w/splinter racks and flicker
10 Warriors: 2 splinter canon, 1 blaster
10 Warriors: 2 splinter canon, 1 blaster

Fast Attack(298 pts)
5 Scourges
6 Reavers: 3 heat lance, cluster caltrops

Heavy (165 pts):
Razorwing: splinter canon, flickerfield

Highlights
6 Dark lances
3 heat lance
4 blaster
82 to 117 poison
63 models.


Exactly 150 was spent on transports.

====

If the system is updated to add "-1 for second FA" then I'm not sure where to go. Maybe increase the Incubi size or add another Haemonculus? Either way it would be a waste of points; I may as well just take a 1000 point army to the 1500 point tournament; or, more likely, ignore comp completely and take the hits for increased troop counts and transport costs.

As it stands, flyers will definitely be a problem with the above. Assuming an average 12AV then it's likely that the DL's will down < 1 flyer per round. Going against say a Necron army that completely ignored comp would be disastrous. Considering comp is only 10% of the total potential score, I'd say ignoring comp would be the right thing to do.

====

Final comment on this. It sounds like their last tournament was with 5th edition. Considering the amount of meta changes that occurred when 6th was released basing comp scores on the results of a tournament using a previous rule book edition is misplaced at best.