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 had my first tournament this weekend in Alameda. A two day event, it was on the deck of an aircraft carrier. It was pretty nice; however, saying so isn't the intent of my post.

Question: In your experiences, how do tournament judges look on multi-wound units with diversified gear? That is, if you were to show up with one (or maybe three) five-model squad of diversified deffkoptas, would you likely suffer the wrath of a low score?

Why would you get a low score for selecting something that is in your army book?

It's up to the TO & his OPINION of how good said unit is, regardless of how well it synergizes with your army and how well you use it. This is why comp scoring is bad but I'm not going to rant again.

Ask the TO how much comp counts for and what will be taken into account, it's entirely you to them.

Composition reflects the "balance" of an army list. If the list is physically unusable it will have a low comp score for being lame, if the list is thematic it will be marked up for sticking to a coherent asthetic.

A list is expected to be competitive, but not "Win at All Costs", eg taking meltas isn't completely frowned on, but taking Vulkan and lots of meltas is... (ignoring the fact that the salamanders thematically use fire and melta up the wahzoo)

Using tricks like complex nob squads will mark you down, generally the concept is to cap the scores of people using cookie-cutter lists and to prevent the field from being flooded by a very small number of lists. In Australia where comp is a very big thing, don't expect to get more then a 2 if you have Vulkan He'Stan leading your force as he's considered overpowered, overused and Vulkan lists rarely deviate from their established norm.

There's a variety of goals of comp, and that's what is important to figuring out whether you'll be "dinged" down. Unfortunately, it's almost never supported by statistics and almost always (both "almost") built around simple opinion.

I would at least personally STRONGLY suggest you not build your list with comp in mind, but with your idea of fun in mind. Some people find it fun to be balls-to-the-wall competitive; some people find it fun to suspend their imaginations and copycat the fluff of the book with exact models (the types that can't imagine SM codex Termies to be Deathwing by painting them that way, and so are forced to use DA codex Deathwing, for example). Build the list the way it works for you, and if a tournament does not cater to a broad enough spectrum of people, and excludes your ideas of fun as a result ... well, don't attend.

MVBrandt wrote:...some people find it fun to suspend their imaginations and copycat the fluff of the book with exact models (the types that can't imagine SM codex Termies to be Deathwing by painting them that way, and so are forced to use DA codex Deathwing, for example)

MVBrandt, I think you have a lot of quality posts about tournies and comp... but that is one loaded statement right there!

To the OP- yes, I would expect to be dinged on comp for that. It's one of the things that can be taken advantage of in the current ruleset for power (not for theme) which is usually a huge target of comp.

This really shouldn't turn into another "Comp or no comp?" thread, as that's not what the OP is asking. It's whether or not you'd expect to get a lower comp score based on taking diversified units.

YES

RiTides wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:...some people find it fun to suspend their imaginations and copycat the fluff of the book with exact models (the types that can't imagine SM codex Termies to be Deathwing by painting them that way, and so are forced to use DA codex Deathwing, for example)

MVBrandt, I think you have a lot of quality posts about tournies and comp... but that is one loaded statement right there!

The extremes on both ends in that comment ... the in between gets messier

RiTides wrote:
To the OP- yes, I would expect to be dinged on comp for that. It's one of the things that can be taken advantage of in the current ruleset for power (not for theme) which is usually a huge target of comp.

This really shouldn't turn into another "Comp or no comp?" thread, as that's not what the OP is asking. It's whether or not you'd expect to get a lower comp score based on taking diversified units.

Thanks, RiTides. Though I love reading complaints (about others, not about me), I was about to redirect the conversation to its original intent. So would you say that multi-wound allocation cheese in general would be frown upon, or just the cheese that tournament organizers see too much of; e.g., nob bikers, etc.?

I was thinking of trying three squads like this (I already have the miniatures awaiting conversations):

1. TL Rokkits
2. TL Rokkits + Buzzsaw
3. TL Rokkits + Big Bomm
4. TL Rokkits + Buzzsaw + Big Bomb
5. Big Shoota

Would this score poorly for composition, in your measured opinions?

Bring what you want to bring and don't worry about it. Comp is subjective. It is based on either your opponent's or the judges personal opinion and you have no way of knowing what they will think is "cheese" or "themed."

Comp sucks. The ONLY fair system is to use a binary system: legal/not legal. That is absolutely objective and totally transparent.

Comp really is a nice concept, it is meant to try and make the competition fair for everyone. However, the good intentions don't translate into good effect on the table top. What ends up happening is personal bias and opinion giving wildly skewed results.

Here is a perfect example of comp failing in application.

A guy in my gaming group in San Diego has been playing the Dante/Sanguinor army with maxed out Sanguinary guard. Cool army, small, cheap, fast and easy to paint. But it's like a 30 model count list and really not very competitive. All the units have a 2+ save and FNP.

In our league, he pulls a guy with a pretty tame space marine list who happens to have 3 vindicators. The BA player uses descent of angels anyway, deepstrikes down in perfect formation to get vindicated, and gets wiped out by turn 3.

He gave the other guy a 0 on comp because he felt that the army was WAAC and unfun. The thing is, it was only unfun against his army because it was the perfect counter to his units. Plus he made a major feth up by putting himself in position to get butt raped.

Long story short, a nice guy, with a totally clear conscious dinged another guy simply because he had the perfect counter to his army. The guy wasn't intentionally chi[munking, but the system enabled him to do so. He felt obligated to do so.

Anecdotes aren't statistical evidence, but everyone who goes to tournaments knows a bunch of stories like this. Comp is a failed concept, it just doesn't work, at least not that I have seen. All it does is create negative emotions.

If your army is legal, it is fine. Judging a list based on theme is the worst type of comp as some themed lists are brutal while others are terrible.

Let people play what they want to play, how they want to play it. That is fun.

If you have an army that is weak, that is on you. If you get beaten, don't get mad at the other guy, take responsibility for your own actions and look to see how you can improve your game.

I prefer to just give everyone who beats me a 0.

Or if I think they might be a contender later on in the tournament who might win over all even though I beat them, that's another reason to give them a 0.
















I'm joking!

Hahahaha!

Unless you're a friend of the judges, expect to get marked down on comp. There are no consistent rules for what is supposedly 'good comp' or 'bad comp', and as far as I can tell it's just a system to let judges give people they like an advantage. If you take two squads or vehicles with the same equipment, that's terrible and abusive, duplication is EVIL but if you take one squad and give as many guys different equipment as possible, that's also terrible and EVIL. Trying to stick to a theme screws you over if it's orks not all having a uniform equipment loadout, or if it is guard having a uniform equipment loadout.

At first I thought your name was "bears of salvation."

And I was thinking, "feth yeah, that's awesome man. I totally get that, the bears will save us all."


But then...I was wrong.

And that's my story.

Reecius, clearly that example shows a person being a bit spiteful. However, this isn't player-judged comp the OP is talking about, it's judges.

While that is still really subjective, the original question is pretty simple- will diversified units get you dinged on comp?

The answer (imho) is yes... anything else belongs in another discussion! I would assume that anyone who just doesn't want to deal with comp just would attend a different event... but we can certainly have a discussion of what to bring if you are attending an event like this.

And as subjective as it is, some things are no-brainers... and I think diversified units would have to be one of them!

That's thing, he wasn't being spiteful! He was openly telling the story in a sense like, yeah, duh, three tanks is cheese!

Silly.

Diversified units aren't auto bad. Things like Nobs could very easily be justified as all wanting to be different. And besides, it's just smart play to increase the resilience of a unit. I don't see how it's different than screening, taking bubble wrap units, or hell, even taking cover.

Things like unit diversification just don't bother me at all. I see it as being smart and playing intelligently, but that is just my opinion.

I would love to see more variety and for the weaker armies to be able to compete outside of spectacular play and luck. I just don't think any system out there can do it. Even my little pet idea got shot down in about two seconds flat! Hahaha.

It is just not something that can be effectively implemented, IMO.

RiTides wrote:Reecius, clearly that example shows a person being a bit spiteful. However, this isn't player-judged comp the OP is talking about, it's judges.

While that is still really subjective, the original question is pretty simple- will diversified units get you dinged on comp?

The answer (imho) is yes... anything else belongs in another discussion! I would assume that anyone who just doesn't want to deal with comp just would attend a different event... but we can certainly have a discussion of what to bring if you are attending an event like this.

And as subjective as it is, some things are no-brainers... and I think diversified units would have to be one of them!

Threads would be pretty useless if all anyone were allowed to write in response is 'yes' or 'no'. Let discourse flow in a forum, its kind of the point.

I think diversified are a "Yes" answer, primarily because the most common form of it is the NOB BIKER MOb (Dramatic Drumbeat).

If the Nob Bikers hadn't been so abused in the tourney circuit then maybe diversified wouldn't be considered so much of power booster, like Relentless, powerful but uncommon on the real beatstick units.

Are there any other complex capable units that are multi-wounded?

Reecius wrote:
I would love to see more variety and for the weaker armies to be able to compete outside of spectacular play and luck. I just don't think any system out there can do it. Even my little pet idea got shot down in about two seconds flat! Hahaha.
It is just not something that can be effectively implemented, IMO.

I think the Throne of Skulls does this quit well as it basically rewards all armies equally and then one person gets lucky to be crowned overall champ.

Fearspect wrote:Threads would be pretty useless if all anyone were allowed to write in response is 'yes' or 'no'. Let discourse flow in a forum, its kind of the point.

The problem is, the "flow" of any topic mentioning comp in this forum has become "Comp SuxX0rz 1!ONE1!1"

That ground has been covered...

Just my $0.02, of course!

And Reecius, whether or not that guy thought he was being spiteful, that still is what that action is to me. As to diversified units- while it could make sense, the deffkoptas example listed above is clearly only giving that wargear to distribute wounds... which is a very viable and effective tactic. However, it's exactly that kind of tactic that comp tends to ding... and we're also looking at what a judge would do, not necessarily a player that has just lost (although granted the result could be the same )

Reecius wrote:Bring what you want to bring and don't worry about it. Comp is subjective. It is based on either your opponent's or the judges personal opinion and you have no way of knowing what they will think is "cheese" or "themed."

Comp sucks. The ONLY fair system is to use a binary system: legal/not legal. That is absolutely objective and totally transparent.

Comp really is a nice concept, it is meant to try and make the competition fair for everyone. However, the good intentions don't translate into good effect on the table top. What ends up happening is personal bias and opinion giving wildly skewed results.

Here is a perfect example of comp failing in application.

A guy in my gaming group in San Diego has been playing the Dante/Sanguinor army with maxed out Sanguinary guard. Cool army, small, cheap, fast and easy to paint. But it's like a 30 model count list and really not very competitive. All the units have a 2+ save and FNP.

In our league, he pulls a guy with a pretty tame space marine list who happens to have 3 vindicators. The BA player uses descent of angels anyway, deepstrikes down in perfect formation to get vindicated, and gets wiped out by turn 3.

He gave the other guy a 0 on comp because he felt that the army was WAAC and unfun. The thing is, it was only unfun against his army because it was the perfect counter to his units. Plus he made a major feth up by putting himself in position to get butt raped.

Long story short, a nice guy, with a totally clear conscious dinged another guy simply because he had the perfect counter to his army. The guy wasn't intentionally chi[munking, but the system enabled him to do so. He felt obligated to do so.

Anecdotes aren't statistical evidence, but everyone who goes to tournaments knows a bunch of stories like this. Comp is a failed concept, it just doesn't work, at least not that I have seen. All it does is create negative emotions.

If your army is legal, it is fine. Judging a list based on theme is the worst type of comp as some themed lists are brutal while others are terrible.

Let people play what they want to play, how they want to play it. That is fun.

If you have an army that is weak, that is on you. If you get beaten, don't get mad at the other guy, take responsibility for your own actions and look to see how you can improve your game.

thats a whole lotta writing that compeletely ignores the OP's question that was specificially repeated in the post RIGHT BEFORE yours and in which he specifically states he doesn't want a long diatribe about why people think comp is bad. i get it; you don't like comp. do anti-comp people have to repeat that (in excruciating detail.. unless you have a macro for your anti-comp speech) every time the word is mentioned? geez, i wonder how many long speeches about a lunch that was paid for by a sponsor ("comped") would get in off-topic simply people one side is so vigorous in their hatred of a facet of tournies that they don't even read the original post.

to answer the OP's question, yes you probably will get dinged on comp for that type of unit. for a tourney that specifically chooses to use comp, the multi-wound unit wound allocation rule is a frequent target of comp dinging as it has a huge potential to be exploited yet adds nothing to the game other than headaches. another is repitition of the same non-troop unit (or even troop unit if done enough). if you're combining the two (which you are suggesting), its almost guaranteed that you'll be docked points. i'd recommend taking only two units and not completely diversifing the units (leave two identical so you can point them out if they say you've completely min-maxed it).

I do not like comp either.

Anyway. . .the TOs will ding you on comp for anything they want--and maybe not ding the next guy.
I am not sure what the TOs in Alameda were going by, most of the Tyranids were using rather differing lists and of the three I saw (including mine) all got a 1. I did have a great time though.

For player scoring though, I did not rank anyone I played below 4/5 for comp; tending to give more to the folks whose lists worked better.


If you think it is questionable, it will probably get dinged.

If you think it is helpful to your list, you should bring it anyway.

@warboss- While I agree that we don't need to cover that again, Reecius has a thread farther down the page discussing a possible comp idea...

Also, think kirsanth is right on here!

warboss wrote:thats a whole lotta writing that compeletely ignores the OP's question that was specificially repeated in the post RIGHT BEFORE yours and in which he specifically states he doesn't want a long diatribe about why people think comp is bad. i get it; you don't like comp. do anti-comp people have to repeat that (in excruciating detail.. unless you have a macro for your anti-comp speech) every time the word is mentioned? geez, i wonder how many long speeches about a lunch that was paid for by a sponsor ("comped") would get in off-topic simply people one side is so vigorous in their hatred of a facet of tournies that they don't even read the original post.

Hahaha, then take me out back and tar and feather me! You are correct though, the OP did ask not to derail the thread, which I did. I missed that bit. Sounds like you have a bit of angst on the subject yourself, though!

However, it is a topic people feel strongly about. I would like to see a solution that makes everyone happy and discussion is the only way to get there, albeit in the correct place.

As stated though, unit diversification is completely legal, but some people dislike it. Chaos daemons do it with blood crushers as well. Nob Bikers (and Nobs in general) are infamous for it, although they were really only a flash in the pan. That list came and went very fast. People found ways around it.

In the end, comp tends to be utterly subjective. Unless, as Vhwolf said in another thread, the TO's are absolutely clear on what to expect coming into it, you can never know what you are getting, ESPECIALLY not with player judged comp.

RiTides wrote:@warboss- While I agree that we don't need to cover that again, Reecius has a thread farther down the page discussing a possible comp idea...

Also, think kirsanth is right on here!

i'm actually surprised he's the one that did it too. he practically got beat up and his lunch money stolen in his own comp system suggestion thread last week and had to flash his anti-comp badge several times to call off the attack ferrets. his post just happened to be a perfect example of off topic reflex anti-comp rhetoric (long winded and posted RIGHT after the OP specifically asked for that not to be and was trying to redirect the thread back on topic). i could theoretically get a half dozen people together that don't like the color blue and stalk the P&M forums for any mention of the color, swooping in to leave long posts about the evils of the color and how its related to mental illness/depression. "how do i highlight blue" BAM... derail the thread to the evils of blue. "here's my ultramarine army" POW! blue = the devil posts. they would be just as on topic as the evils of comp opinions presented as facts that crop up every time the word in mentioned in the same post as "tourney" but probably woudn't be tolerated yet the comp derails generally are until they resort to flames. either way, i'm done with the retort.

p.s. i actually like the color blue and have nothing against it.

The best place to ask if the list would get dinged would be to the person actually judging comp for the event.

warboss wrote:

RiTides wrote:@warboss- While I agree that we don't need to cover that again, Reecius has a thread farther down the page discussing a possible comp idea...

Also, think kirsanth is right on here!

i'm actually surprised he's the one that did it too. he practically got beat up and his lunch money stolen in his own comp system suggestion thread last week and had to flash his anti-comp badge several times to call off the attack ferrets. his post just happened to be a perfect example of off topic reflex anti-comp rhetoric (long winded and posted RIGHT after the OP specifically asked for that not to be and was trying to redirect the thread back on topic). i could theoretically get a half dozen people together that don't like the color blue and stalk the P&M forums for any mention of the color, swooping in to leave long posts about the evils of the color and how its related to mental illness/depression. "how do i highlight blue" BAM... derail the thread to the evils of blue. "here's my ultramarine army" POW! blue = the devil posts. they would be just as on topic as the evils of comp opinions presented as facts that crop up every time the word in mentioned in the same post as "tourney" but probably woudn't be tolerated yet the comp derails generally are until they resort to flames. either way, i'm done with the retort.

p.s. i actually like the color blue and have nothing against it.

Dude, I said I was wrong to derail the thread right above your post. Maybe you didn't see it, but jeebus, give it a rest!

And yes, I was being proactive trying to come up with a system that would help to bring people together to mutually enjoy a tournament, and was quickly shown that even a mild system could be manipulated and would cause endless arguments. I do hate comp because I don't think anyone should be told what they can and can't bring, it stifles creativity and fun.

Anyway, you obviously have strong feelings on the subject and seem to be coming at me combatively, but I will assume that since this is the internet, I am only imagining you being a dick and that you are not actually being a dick.

Reecius wrote:

warboss wrote:

RiTides wrote:@warboss- While I agree that we don't need to cover that again, Reecius has a thread farther down the page discussing a possible comp idea...

Also, think kirsanth is right on here!

i'm actually surprised he's the one that did it too. he practically got beat up and his lunch money stolen in his own comp system suggestion thread last week and had to flash his anti-comp badge several times to call off the attack ferrets. his post just happened to be a perfect example of off topic reflex anti-comp rhetoric (long winded and posted RIGHT after the OP specifically asked for that not to be and was trying to redirect the thread back on topic). i could theoretically get a half dozen people together that don't like the color blue and stalk the P&M forums for any mention of the color, swooping in to leave long posts about the evils of the color and how its related to mental illness/depression. "how do i highlight blue" BAM... derail the thread to the evils of blue. "here's my ultramarine army" POW! blue = the devil posts. they would be just as on topic as the evils of comp opinions presented as facts that crop up every time the word in mentioned in the same post as "tourney" but probably woudn't be tolerated yet the comp derails generally are until they resort to flames. either way, i'm done with the retort.

p.s. i actually like the color blue and have nothing against it.

Dude, I said I was wrong to derail the thread right above your post. Maybe you didn't see it, but jeebus, give it a rest!

And yes, I was being proactive trying to come up with a system that would help to bring people together to mutually enjoy a tournament, and was quickly shown that even a mild system could be manipulated and would cause endless arguments. I do hate comp because I don't think anyone should be told what they can and can't bring, it stifles creativity and fun.

Anyway, you obviously have strong feelings on the subject and seem to be coming at me combatively, but I will assume that since this is the internet, I am only imagining you being a dick and that you are not actually being a dick.

Don't be mad at him, he's one of those sick, sick people that actually like the colour blue. Mental illness is no joke!

Hahaha, perhaps I did take it too personally. It was just like, dude, you said what you wanted to say, I acknowledged that I was in the wrong to derail the thread when the OP asked for that not to happen, then he turns around and says it...again.

IMO yes you would get dinged for having a diversified multi-wound unit. I know it is allowed in the rules, but it was maxed out in an older codex and since then every codex has specifically limited that ability from being taken to the same effect. This hints at an "oops" on the part of GW rules.