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.

Tournaments at my LGS are skewed to counter competitive lists and empower less favorable lists.

The latest upcoming tourney has written bonuses stated to purposely penalize those who min/max their lists (i.e. 6 man las/plas units were specifically targeted). They have offered bonuses to those who bring full sized troop choices and also for those who bring more troops than the minimum. In a 1500 point tourney this seems rather biased to me. Especially since the tourneys have historically been if more lopsided towards objectives games than the standard game choice options are.

Is this normal? If so how do you build for this?

Why not a Tournament thats a little different. Working out new lists, tactics and playing out of the ordinary Army Lists is more fun than the usual spam. Melta-vets (my shame), venom spam and draigowing all have their place but variety makes the hobby stronger. It also means you can dust off those models ythat are less competitve choices, in my case Ogryns and Stormtroopers I am looking at you.

An occasional tournament wouldnt be an issue. This is the fourth consecutive 40k tourney that is biased in this fashion.

This is common enough. Many tournaments like this are around.

Just build a troops focused list with diversity of units.

For example, take 2 10 man tac squads in rhinos, take 2 5 man squads in razorbacks, and take a few non-standard choices, like land speeder typhoons, or attack bikes, or a captain + command in another razorback.

Or you can go with a battle company formation... captain, command squad, 3 tac squads, 1 assault squad, and 1 dev squad.

Plenty of options with marines.

Haeslich wrote:(i.e. 6 man las/plas units were specifically targeted).

Sounds like they're still playing last edition, then...


If the local player pool prefers that sort of tournament, then they would be silly not to run them that way, though. So the real question would be: Do the majority of the people playing in them actually enjoy the format, or is it just something they're playing in because it's all the store is offering and they have nowhere else to play?

I'd say it's the normal mindset. Just build a list and stop using internet builds and spam. Too many play just the most OP combinations and then trade their armies when it gets weaker.

I have run thunderfire cannons, landspeeders with assault cannons, command squads on bikes and not, and more. You would be surprised how often running a non-standard list unlike anything that has won a tourney or on the internet works.

Comp via Mission objectives.

'ard boyz which is seena s the most competative version of how the game can be played is notorious for having comp-based missions which explicitly are designed to hamper the current top metabuild. It is not uncommon for other tourneys to do similar.

Often you will see one mission designed to screw MSU, one designed to screw Deathstars and another designed to screw Shooty Gunlines. It is an effort to force people to take some of everything so one bad mission doesn't risk crippling your entire army. If you are a one trick pony, then you may be handed an auto-lose mission. Thats the risk you take.

Not sure this is uncommon. Seems pretty standard but I have to admit the basic straight forward NOVA missions which took a lot of the guesswork out of the way the games were played I think helped make things real. But there will always be room for wacky missions IMHO.

I'm sorry... how again is Ard boyz a measuring stick for competitive play? Minus that I do agree, it is not uncommon for TO's to develop tournments based on the population at a store regardless if its LGS vs GT vs whatever.

Adapt if you want to play there. There are plenty of full sized units that are very very effective. Look at the Chaos Space Marine book. Its still has some regular MEQ flavor to it, but 10 man squads prove very effective pending lay out. I do just fine with my 10 man unit of Bezekers, and 10 man unit of CSM cc/bolt pistol squads.

njpc wrote:I'm sorry... how again is Ard boyz a measuring stick for competitive play?.

Have you read their press release or been to one of their events?

I do not consider it competitive at all due to the inconsistency of the rules, standards enforced and the bullcrap missions, but for many it is their only exposure to tourney play. And GW claims it is for 'hard' players.

I feel the indy events much cleaner and better run which leads to more legitimate results which makes it more 'competitive' for me. If the results are faulty or the integrity of the event is flawed, I don't see as much value in the wins.

insaniak wrote:

Haeslich wrote:(i.e. 6 man las/plas units were specifically targeted).

Sounds like they're still playing last edition, then...


If the local player pool prefers that sort of tournament, then they would be silly not to run them that way, though. So the real question would be: Do the majority of the people playing in them actually enjoy the format, or is it just something they're playing in because it's all the store is offering and they have nowhere else to play?

The latter, by far. Only game in town.

Work with the store. Offer to run a tournament of a different format. Write it up, present it to the manager. Drum up support. Run the tournament. If they see more support for a different format, they may run more of what you like.

You use the term 'bias', which isn't really true. It's just a different format of a tournament. Lots of room for different formats and types of events.

Play Dark Angels.
Drop this list on the table:
Belial; TH/SS
Chaplain, Terminator
Upgrade Squad: TH/SS Apoth, TH/SS banner, TH/SS CML,
TH/SS, LC
Troop: PF/SB CML, PF/SB x2, CF/SB, PW/SB SGT
Troop: TH/SS CML, TH/SSx2, LCx2
Troop: TH/SS CML, TH/SS x2, LCx2
Land Raider Crusader, Melta
Land Speeder, Multi Melta, TML x2
Thats right at 1500. 22 Terminators in a fluffy makeup all scoring and hard as nails.

Then dare them to gig you for using one of the oldest Codeci curently in use.

Game the system IMO. No matter what set of rules they lay out there will be a way to exploit them. Find that way and break the system. They will be forced to either try to specifically plug the hole you've found, probably pissing off someone else just playing legit in the process, or will be forced to abandon a comp system altogether.

That is of course, assuming you have the time, energy and skill to find, abuse and exploit the holes and go on to win big.

Dkellyj has the right idea.

Carnage43 wrote:Game the system IMO. No matter what set of rules they lay out there will be a way to exploit them. Find that way and break the system. They will be forced to either try to specifically plug the hole you've found, probably pissing off someone else just playing legit in the process, or will be forced to abandon a comp system altogether.

Or they could look at the list and say "Excellant, now that's how an army should be made".

A lot of tournaments change the rules up a bit, and then you're free to make the best army you can within those rules, and the TO is happy as long as you show up with a legal army.

That doesnt sound like a tournament, more like an excerise in stroking the organizers ego on what he thinks the game should be.

Really when faced with these "special" types you either dont go, or you break their system, you break their system so bad you make them never want to run a stupid tournament again

Basically it is just another Comped tournament. Nothing new or strange about it that is how almost all of the tournaments were run until Aard Boyz started up. Your options are
1 Don't go if you just don't want to play by their rules.
2 Go and use whatever you want any way and don't get a few bonus points. Depending on how many points it is it might not even make a difference.
3. Go and make as good of an army as you can that gets you all of the bonus points. This is what people have done for most of the years of tournaments.
4. Offer to run an event yourself and run it the way that you think is best. All they can do is say no and if people like the way you do it better then you will see more people there.

Hope that helps.

vhwolf wrote:Basically it is just another Comped tournament. Nothing new or strange about it that is how almost all of the tournaments were run until Aard Boyz started up. Your options are
1 Don't go if you just don't want to play by their rules.
2 Go and use whatever you want any way and don't get a few bonus points. Depending on how many points it is it might not even make a difference.
3. Go and make as good of an army as you can that gets you all of the bonus points. This is what people have done for most of the years of tournaments.
4. Offer to run an event yourself and run it the way that you think is best. All they can do is say no and if people like the way you do it better then you will see more people there.

Hope that helps.

I think we are going with a combination of 2 and 4. They typically award 8 points for a massacre. I will build my typical min/max beatstick list, and use it to roll those who have built a watered down list to milk the bonus points. One massacre will make up for anything I have lost in the way of bonuses. Only caveat is the last few tourneys they have added extra bonuses for skewing lists in the direction they want you to go to each scenario as well.

Only other option I see is to make the 90 mile drive to Houston and play in their tournaments. They are typically top level competition, but at least the layouts do not penalize me for trying to squeeze everything out of my codex that I can. The bonus list specifically names (6 man las/plas units) who they are trying to nerf. Since I am the only regular Space Wolves player that I see there, it's hard not to take that personal. Especially considering I have never won a tournament at this store, or placed in the top 3, I think it's a bit unfounded.

vhwolf wrote:Basically it is just another Comped tournament. Nothing new or strange about it that is how almost all of the tournaments were run until Aard Boyz started up.

LOL, 'ard boyz is a comped tourney. It is exactly like the tourney OP is describing.

No it's not. As noted, the only version of "comp" AB has is scenarios designed to mess with certain types of armies.

Actual Composition scoring, points added to your aggregate tournament points, based on a rubric judging the unit selection of your army, is a different mechanic. And as vhwolf said, was extremely common in past years. GW used various defined rubrics at their old Grand Tournaments (late 90s through early 2000s) and Rogue Trader events, then moved to a more subjective opponent-rates-your army method, then finally dropped it entirely in recent years when they stopped having official events/when their only event became AB, which was designed specifically as a no-holds-barred event, an evolution of their earlier Gladiator tournaments.

Mannahnin wrote:No it's not. As noted, the only version of "comp" AB has is scenarios designed to mess with certain types of armies.

Actual Composition scoring, points added to your aggregate tournament points, based on a rubric judging the unit selection of your army, is a different mechanic. And as vhwolf said, was extremely common in past years. GW used various defined rubrics at their old Grand Tournaments (late 90s through early 2000s) and Rogue Trader events, then moved to a more subjective opponent-rates-your army method, then finally dropped it entirely in recent years when they stopped having official events/when their only event became AB, which was designed specifically as a no-holds-barred event, an evolution of their earlier Gladiator tournaments.

Mission-based comp is still comp. 'Ard Boyz mission are compier than any other tourney currently out there. Even most of the COMP tourneys have more balanced missions than 'ard boyz.

Punishing metabuilds via arbitrary comp, or making mission objectives designed to make those metalists lose or unable to win are the same thing. Did we all forget 'any unit that can move over 6"' mission? If I get 'comp' points for maxing troops or 'kill/victory' points in the mission for maxxing troops, it accomplishes the same result. COMP. I find that 'arb boyz has been forcing people to take every army slot and take it deep in order to not cough up 3+ VPs because all your fast attack get wiped out. I would rather suffer some comp points and then allow the game to be played as normal without having to worry about my deffkoptas dying and instalosing the mission because I took a single deffkopta.

COMP is a live and well in GWs current events.

A) There is an obvious mechanical difference between giving someone points for taking particular units, and designing missions which screw particular builds. From a purely mechanical standpoint the two are substantially different tacks.
B) How does giving an opponent a few points for killing off a given slot force you to take multiples of that slot? You need to win to advance anyway. If your opponent gets a few bonus points tacked onto his Loss it doesn't hurt you.
C) While there's a common rhetorical equivocation of comp and mission designs which push players toward particular builds, in this case it's really stretching it. Making missions which punish/make things tough for particular types of common army builds was a feature of the old Gladiator tournaments which predated the general removal of Comp scores. Gladiator was all about unusual and unbalanced missions which forced players to improvise, adapt, and overcome. Ard Boyz has maintained that tradition, to some extent. While one can try to argue that any kind of tournament factor which pushes people toward or away from a given build or set of builds is "Comp", I think after a point that becomes meaningless. If the tournament has little LOS-blocking terrain, do you accuse it of being a Comped tourney, because it favors shooty builds?

nkelsch wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:No it's not. As noted, the only version of "comp" AB has is scenarios designed to mess with certain types of armies.

Actual Composition scoring, points added to your aggregate tournament points, based on a rubric judging the unit selection of your army, is a different mechanic. And as vhwolf said, was extremely common in past years. GW used various defined rubrics at their old Grand Tournaments (late 90s through early 2000s) and Rogue Trader events, then moved to a more subjective opponent-rates-your army method, then finally dropped it entirely in recent years when they stopped having official events/when their only event became AB, which was designed specifically as a no-holds-barred event, an evolution of their earlier Gladiator tournaments.

Mission-based comp is still comp. 'Ard Boyz mission are compier than any other tourney currently out there. Even most of the COMP tourneys have more balanced missions than 'ard boyz.

Punishing metabuilds via arbitrary comp, or making mission objectives designed to make those metalists lose or unable to win are the same thing. Did we all forget 'any unit that can move over 6"' mission? If I get 'comp' points for maxing troops or 'kill/victory' points in the mission for maxxing troops, it accomplishes the same result. COMP. I find that 'arb boyz has been forcing people to take every army slot and take it deep in order to not cough up 3+ VPs because all your fast attack get wiped out. I would rather suffer some comp points and then allow the game to be played as normal without having to worry about my deffkoptas dying and instalosing the mission because I took a single deffkopta.

COMP is a live and well in GWs current events.

While I agree with you that what Aard Boys does pushes people to certain army build styles it is not comp in the sense the OP was talking about. GW's goal in Aard Boyz is to try to get people to buy more models period so they will try anything to entice you to buy more models. Even in the first three years of Aard boyz you did not have missions that really gave points for killing specific force org slots but with 5th edition and less creative staff writing scenarios that is what they have fallen back to to give bonus points for the missions. So its not really comp per say but a combination of trying to make some money and just bad creative talent on the part of whoever gets stuck with having to make the missions each year.