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 started playing some warhammer battles 1v1 and 2v2 using the Swedish comp system as following:
We agree that every army will have the same comp score for all players, and we try different elvels. For exaple, we play a few battles at 13-14 score, some others at 16-17, others at 5-6, others at 0-1. I've found that most of these battles are very close and you can't tell the winner until the 6th round.
Have you ever tried it? Any opinions?

I like sweedish. A lot of people don't. To me sweedish says "Take whatever you want, but you're gonna pay for it". Also not everyone agrees with all the decisions. I don't thin taking Queeks stormvermin should double the penalty, they aren't cost-efficient at all & most tournament players I know would never use them.

If you want to run double HPA, go for it. You'll pay for it, but go ahead.

If you want to run without any magic in an elf list, cool. Here's a bonus.

Now I know you can't take negative armies but you could always amend it to be able to.


As for you're specific Idea it seems like you want to do that for a circuit or a league? If so that's cool It'll force people to vary up their armies and I'd love to see more variation. I think it keeps the game fresh and teaches you new things & perspectives.

I found this comp to be interesting. My WoC army ends up with a score of 32... I mean I themed it but I didn't know I had made it that weak... I like to use it and while good I am still challenged every game.

I had to look it up. I must say I think its great.

 Matt1785 wrote:
I found this comp to be interesting. My WoC army ends up with a score of 32... I mean I themed it but I didn't know I had made it that weak... I like to use it and while good I am still challenged every game.

32 is absurd. Did you remember to divide?

9 for my WE list and 5 for my lizardmen...which is funny as I consider my WE list considerably stronger than my lizzies which are strongly based on "I like how that model looks."

Where can I find something like this for 40k? That system is often to a lot of abuse.

My dark elf list got to a -25 before dividing...

Nope I forgot to divide, also started at 200 instead of 300. I score a 13. Well that's better then. Overall I think it's a cool system. Unfortunately I don't get to see many events that use it... Not many Fantasy events at all actually. Oh well.

How do you guys think this could be adapted for 1k lists? We do a 4 player FFA Triumph and Treachery at 1k points each every week after work, and I'd be curious to see how it could be adapted.

 Evertras wrote:
How do you guys think this could be adapted for 1k lists? We do a 4 player FFA Triumph and Treachery at 1k points each every week after work, and I'd be curious to see how it could be adapted.

It doesn't need adapting. It works for all points levels.

 thedarkavenger wrote:

 Evertras wrote:
How do you guys think this could be adapted for 1k lists? We do a 4 player FFA Triumph and Treachery at 1k points each every week after work, and I'd be curious to see how it could be adapted.

It doesn't need adapting. It works for all points levels.

Fair enough. Suppose it's all relative anyway.

The Daemons of Chaos comp needs some serious re-thinks.

I'm really not a fan. It's just another system that replaces Warhammer with MYhammer. There's a certain style of play that the drafters (or the community who's built it) doesn't like, and that's stamped all over the comp system.

Huge units get comped, so everybody runs things a little bit smaller. Super heroes get comped, so people run semi-superheroes instead. And at the end of the day it doesn't really help the bottom tier armies since it does nothing to fix the internal imbalances that are holding them down.

Want to even the playing field? Let Tomb Kings march like Vampires and allow their signature to affect combats. Drop the price of BM rares by 100 and let them use rulebook ambush. Allow Bretonnians to take BRB items at BRB prices and put standard equipment (i.e. shields) onto BSBs. That'll do more than any other comp will for evening things out.

 Matt1785 wrote:
I found this comp to be interesting. My WoC army ends up with a score of 32... I mean I themed it but I didn't know I had made it that weak... I like to use it and while good I am still challenged every game.

You're suppossed to start with a score of 30, and it goes down as you add units. How did you reach 32?

I don't think there are enough things you can use that add points to get you to 32!

I like the scoring system, it makes sense, however I don't like it when tournaments comp you to take a certain score on it, if I wanna write a -1, let me play against other -1's

therealsuperman wrote:
I don't think there are enough things you can use that add points to get you to 32!

I like the scoring system, it makes sense, however I don't like it when tournaments comp you to take a certain score on it, if I wanna write a -1, let me play against other -1's

You can play my -25 if you want!

therealsuperman wrote:
I don't think there are enough things you can use that add points to get you to 32!

I like the scoring system, it makes sense, however I don't like it when tournaments comp you to take a certain score on it, if I wanna write a -1, let me play against other -1's

I imagine it's more of a practical issue. If there's 30 people at a tournament, and 5 different brackets due to wildly fluctuating comp scores, that's maybe 6 people per bracket and likely 2-3 in some. Urf.

It's certainly not the simplest system in the world, but it's certainly a good one which allows you to take pretty much whatever you want and still remain on a near-level playing field.

My only issue is when you have two armies whose respective comp scores are really far apart, i.e. one on 0 and the other on 20. These often become boring battles where the strong army stomps the weaker and/or the weaker one just clings on and wins due to its absurdly large VP bonus.

 The Shadow wrote:
It's certainly not the simplest system in the world, but it's certainly a good one which allows you to take pretty much whatever you want and still remain on a near-level playing field.

My only issue is when you have two armies whose respective comp scores are really far apart, i.e. one on 0 and the other on 20. These often become boring battles where the strong army stomps the weaker and/or the weaker one just clings on and wins due to its absurdly large VP bonus.

This issue is somehow resolve in tournaments.
It's easy to have a VP advantage, play defensively and lose by a small difference, but win overall (ie I have a 18 score, my opponent 11, i lose7-13, I win overall 25-24), but in a tournament with 3-4 battles, it's hard to preserve the initial advantage. This puts me in a dilemma: can I start with a weak arme and lose by small differences, or should I bring a stronger army but pursue victory if needed?
Finally, if both playeres in a friendly game agree to same score, let's say between 9-10 for both armies, this will probably lead to a balance game. Both opponents will be forced to leave strong combos/units outside, but also forced to use some less strong, but still quite strong.

I think the Swedish comp is great for generating a baseline of how hard your list is, but I still feel that it is too biased in certain areas and doesn't evolve to the meta enough to be completely accurate

Experiment 626 wrote:
The Daemons of Chaos comp needs some serious re-thinks.

And gets tweaked every time the Swedish is updated

I love Swedish comp and am thrilled to see it creeping into US events, if just for initial pairings and the like. Ideally, I'm not sure how far I'd like it to be taken ... I'm not a real fan of adjusting BP for differences in comp, I'd rather see it provide a gentle-yet-firm hard comp on an event. Like bring whatever you want, just no lists under 10. Hell, you could do no lists under 5 and you'd still improve the variety per book!

- Salvage

16

I share PirateRobotNinja's opinion. It just exchanges the usual netlists with swedish netlists.
Also, it's prone to abuse just as normal Warhammer is.

Vetril wrote:
I share PirateRobotNinja's opinion. It just exchanges the usual netlists with swedish netlists.
Also, it's prone to abuse just as normal Warhammer is.

Okay. So a comp that doesn't allow Dark Elves or Warriors to abuse their book's writing is bad?

Mkay. I guess I'll just go to an uncomped event with my warlock bus fast cav death magic list. Complete with a 1+ wall. Then I'll stomp face.


Sure any comp is open to abuse, but it's down to the writers to take the feedback on and fix the issues. Something that I admit the writers do, even if I'm not a fan.

Plus, there are a million worse comp packs out there. ETC for a start.

No; my point is that you won't bring what you usually bring. You will bring something else, which goes well with the swedish comp, and still kicks ass.

Vetril wrote:
No; my point is that you won't bring what you usually bring. You will bring something else, which goes well with the swedish comp, and still kicks ass.

That's the whole point of tournaments. You don't go to a tournament with a list designed to be weak. You go with the strongest options available to you and your book. It's not the Swedish comp's fault. It's the very nature of competitive play.

 thedarkavenger wrote:

Vetril wrote:
No; my point is that you won't bring what you usually bring. You will bring something else, which goes well with the swedish comp, and still kicks ass.

That's the whole point of tournaments. You don't go to a tournament with a list designed to be weak. You go with the strongest options available to you and your book. It's not the Swedish comp's fault. It's the very nature of competitive play.

I agree, Friendly gaming is one thing and the comps help to make the game more enjoyable for both players, but at a tournament, you should be playing to win. The point is to Win all your games, you play to have a good time of course, but you are really there to WIN. You could stay home spend less money had have fun playing games. That being said some of the Broken stuff should be left out, If all armies where even, the best of each could battle it out on even turns, the problem is they are not, some of the Armies can push the rules and the mechanics of the game in their favor. This has backed off some with all the new books, The gap between top and bottom is nowhere near what it was a few years ago, But there still a few that are leaps and bounds above others. And I would hate to have it where everyone has to play the same list and the same army if they want to play at the top table,

I have yet to find the best comp systems that allow you to bring what you want and every think will equal out, and I am not sure I want there to be, every army should have a hard counter. And soft counter, and a bunch in the middle. This keeps it interesting. If everyone plays the same thing it get old really quick.

 thedarkavenger wrote:

Vetril wrote:
No; my point is that you won't bring what you usually bring. You will bring something else, which goes well with the swedish comp, and still kicks ass.

That's the whole point of tournaments. You don't go to a tournament with a list designed to be weak. You go with the strongest options available to you and your book. It's not the Swedish comp's fault. It's the very nature of competitive play.

So what does the swedish comp achieve, apart from altering the meta in a way the comp writer likes?

Vetril wrote:

So what does the swedish comp achieve, apart from altering the meta in a way the comp writer likes?

Nothing. That said I am ok with comp in tournaments if it's varied. I would enjoy doing a no comp, etc comp, sweedish comp and changing up the comps to change the meta for different tournaments. However no comp can ever eliminate min/max WAAC players.

Though min/max WAAC players are what tournaments are for. They are for THEM, to find the best player not the fluffiest player.