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.

Comp seems to be a big thing where i play, i was wondering what other peoples thoughts were on comp. Do you love it beacsue you think it balances tournys or do you hate it because it limits what a codex can do?

I have no idea what your talking about....

I think he means Competition. I personally avoid them because you get the occasional rule-lawyer in a casual game, but you get a ton of them at tourneys (at least in card game ones, and by the looks of this site, in 40k too).

wow ok, Comp is a socre out of 5 you get at tournaments. If you have a cheese list someone may mark you down as 0/5 comp, if it is a friendly/fun list you would get 5/5 or anywhere in between depending on how harsh you list is.

Comp has been showing up more and more in the tourneys I've been attending lately, the CoC (contest of champions) a yearlong escalation tournament uses comp. The guys at great escape games put on a great tournament series, are very organized, and host 80 to 100 people @ the bi monthly tournament. The comp seems to balance out the armies at lower points cost, and at the higher points cost they open it up a bit and makes for some very fierce competition, the opponents are numerous with wonderful looking armies, and good guys to play against we all have a pretty good time. My two friends and I traveled from Reno, NV to Sacramento, CA over donna pass in a blizzard to get some games in. We all did well one of my friends, General Oadius played a miserable game/slowplayed by a miserable nid player who offered up ridiculous shenanigans Which kind of ruined his day unfortunately, my other friend shotdownmind who was the only other dark elder player at the tournament placed third overall out of 82 won all three of his games, full comp PTS no deductions, a good paint score, all three personal objectives, and a few favorite opponent votes which is excellent. I myself went 3-0 playing two space wolves and a grey knights army, the first game was space wolves and the dark elder had plenty of pain tokens at the end of the game, the second game was grey knights walking army with one dred/multimelta the dark elder walked through that army like a hot knife through butter ending on turn 3 tabled, and my third space wolf opponent was tabled at the beginning of five. I also scored all three personal objectives, got a good paint score and one fav opponent, unfortunately I made a mistake building my 1500 list and took a huge hit on comp, not thinking I would get dinger for the court of the archon as an HQ, putting me way over and leaving me in 18th overall, POOP! So take my advise if you want to win tournaments and pay attention to every aspect of the tournaments rules which I totally bonered!

I once played a tourney with a guy who did not say a single word during the entire game. Thank goodnes I know the rules well and was paying A LOT of attention to his rolls. I dont think we even made eye contact. He was just starring at the board then his list then the dice then the board and so forth. He gave me a :-(

Comp as we use it for this tourney is the composition of your army so it's not so cheesy!

I like the idea, I had a revelation today. After getting into the hobby around this time last year I realized I have spend about $2k in the game. I have an army of Dwarfs (2k pts, 50% assembly completed), Ogres (2.5k pts 25% assembly completed), Skaven (1.5k 5% assembly completed), Orks (2k pts 25% completed), CSM (1k 10% completed). I come here and look at what is the flavor of the month and I go with it. I have been blessed with a good job that allows me to do it, meanwhile there are 18-20 year old kids in my store spending their spare cash for the month on a box of terminators or whatever and putting love and work into them. So I'm going all out on trade forums after my local bazaar, narrow it down to 2 armies from fantasy and 2 from 40k I really love and just work on them and enjoy the fluff/painting/conversion aspect of the hobby and not the win at all costs end of it.

Comp scores are good if the comp scoring system in use is good. Sometimes I look at comp scores and LOL.

I have never seen a comp system that didn't hurt fluffy/underpowered armies at least as much as cheese armies, or that wasn't completely subjective and subject to munchkining. It's not something that belongs anymore.

The only decent Sportsmanship system I've seen is where each player gives a ticket to their favorite opponent and the player(s) with the most get a best sportsman prize on par with best general.


That said, it had its place once, however flawed it was, and especially in WHFB, but what people consider overpowered today is nothing compared to the brokenness of stuff in previous editions, we have nothing like 2E Eldar Warpsiders for instance or Virus Bombs, etc. 40k has no equivalent of a Teclis or Archaon in terms of raw power or ability to dominate a game.

There's a tournament forum on this board.

I'm not a fan of comp, since I believe the system of building a list should inherently balance the game for competitive play, regardless of player. Comp scoring is an artificial balance that IMO isn't needed if the game is inherently balanced.

Unfortunately, GW has the inability to maintain consistent balance within a single book, much less across the entire system, causing the game(40K more than Fantasy) to become a game of lists more than skill, so for GW tournaments it's still a necessary evil in most environments.