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.

So we're all aware that some lists are more powerful than others. Often times I'll see lists described as either competitive or non-competitive, but that doesn't give a great idea of a list's relative power level. After all, there are "competitive" lists that don't stand up to the tournament winner lists but let you at least survive a round or two in a tournament. Then there are the the various shades of non-competitive lists out there. It occurs to me that it might be nice to have some method of ranking lists across five or so different tiers to give a general idea of their power level. I'd love to play "low tier" games against my opponent from time to time where the scariest infantryman on the table is a chaos lord with a power sword or where people can bring that cool-but-weak model they love without feeling bad about it. The problem is that figuring out a way to actually rank lists without an unhelpful amount of bias seems rather difficult to pull off.

Any thoughts? Maybe something like tournament comp rules adjusted for casual games could help?

Generally speaking, just discuss with your opponent ahead of time the type of game you'd like to play. There's SO MANY potentially broken things in 40k that the moment you take away one, you add in another. It's the nature of the game that there are extremely efficient combinations, and players will search for these. As such, it ultimately comes down to you to ask for the type of game you want to play.

If it's a casual game you want, talking with an opponent ahead of time should be your primary focus for having a good time.

Now this system isn't perfect, it isn't for everyone... but try it out and see what you think.


A number of tournaments in Australia are starting to use a comp system.
http://communitycomp.org/


This system essentially uses a second points system (comp points) in addition to the normal army building points, to get an approximate 'power level' of a list.

So if you want a very light list, you could give yourself a limit of 5 CC points. A list that's getting towards very powerful tournament level would be 20 points.

The system itself allows for low CC lists to play high CC lists by adding an additional Comp Score to the Overall Score. A player wanting to do very well at a tournament needs to play with low CC lists. You could factor this in to friendly games using a handicap based on the difference between your CC score and your opponent's CC score.


It does require a lot of planning ahead of time: and it does have a few issues where some things aren't costed correctly; but overall it can create a really enjoyable game where people are rewarded for not taking uber-powerful lists.