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.

The end of the year is a good time to reflect on events and changes to 40k and the Tournament scene. Of biggest import were the new, 7e codex books, Eldar, SM and Tau. Biggest impact?

Well, so said the Spring Nay-Sayers. They crowed and whined about how devastatingly over powered the eldar book was going to be. D-weps handed out like candy.
Scatbikes galore. Dirt cheap LoW WraithKnights.

Nerfs were suggested. Like one ScatLas per Wind Rider unit. Ranged-D nerf *did* happen as ITC participants voted on it. Including yours truly.


I posit that the SkyIsFalling posters here on dakka and, I guess, elsewhere, were all wrong.

Not only wrong, but they did unnecessary and avoidable damage in chasing away casual players (a buddy of mine in particular) and thinning out our community. Part of our fun to to gripe about GW's prices and confusing rule writing (getting waaay better though, Skimmers vs. AP1 anybody?), but when new books drop, the positive that ought to have been discussed was tremendously negative. I'm an 11 year 40k veteran now. Grey Knights 5e might've come close.

There's months of data to look at now. I glaze over looking at Torrent of Fire ( a great resource ), so I'm going to stick with What-I-Know. Game Empire Pasadena's rtts have recorded data to look at. I recorded a lot of it. Here are the results:

Month - Winning Army & player

January - SM & IG - Jonathan (pleasantnoodles)
February - TWC - Chris
March - Eldar - Blackmoor
April - Necrons - Mike S.
May - Daemons (kdk?) (I wanna say one of the RQTF guys, but it's the one event I missed)
June - DA & IG - Brandon G.
July - Most every one went to BAO.
Aug GT - White Scars, lajollagrad, Cooper
Sept - kdk - Trevor of RQTF
Oct - SM - Tim S.
Nov - Team Tourney won by Team Zero Comp. White Scars, Tau, IG, KDK+Crons, DA
Dec - kdk - Allan D

None of the 2nd place players were eldar.

5 winners were power armor. 1 Elf. 1 Robot win. 3 KDKs or daemon ilk. Factor in the Team event on your own.

The upshot:
SM armies and players won most of the tourneys.
Eldar didn't have the walloping impact. Blackmoor does rarely show up, maybe 4 times this year. Myself and two other play elves. A teenager, who defeated Reece, and less frequent regular who constantly changes things up.

What does this data mean?

I played pure Tau once since the Craftworld book dropped, but Scatbikes, the WK and Aspect Host every other time, with varying allies or psy-goofery. I did poorly earning a WLD, 16 - 23 - 1. There were a couple GTs in there too.

Fer sure, it means 7e eldar have not dominated Game Empire Pasadena. At No Know Mercy, there was a 5 WK list and a 4 WK one. Neither placed high. Sisk won that with SM.

At BAO, an elf list did make the Top Table, wielded by dakka poster Tomb King. He was up against Allan Pajama Pants (daemons). But elves lost. According to the Rage Pundits last Spring, PJ ought to have been cheesed out of victory and Brett P. would be the name on everyone's lips.

Not the case, though.

The evidence shows that Eldar have not broken the game, dominated. And every clown who raged, started threads to ban the books, Chicken Littles, etc ... well, I ask that they hold their tongues (keyboards) next time, and give it a few months before flipping out.


Now, on to 2015's real problem, that need nerfing, and need banning:

It's these guys called Allan.

(Yep, from here on, I'm no longer serious, and it's pure comedic intent):

Blackmoor is the only elf player to win an RTT at GE this year. And the RQTF dude, nice, gregarious (and gives a good shoulder massage) but still, has schlepped up from San Diego to swipe prize yum-yum from us local boyz. Pajama Pants? 'Nuf said.

I propose these "Allans" (one L or two) have to play with a 33% reduction in points in their lists (and no Battle Co. style freebies) or have to play rounds 2 and 4 blind folded. With a time limit.

The evidence more than points out, as far as my part of the pond shows that these Allan guys are the game breakers and are in need of hobbling.

I'll be Copy/Pasting this thread to the ITC feedback and we should expect a Vote on how much to nerf them.

Further discussion: Has anyone else experienced a year dominated by eldar? Or did SM and KDK take most of your Top Spots? Was it the same guy, over and over? This, I would legitimately like to hear about for this thread. Citing events, armies and players (by handles or just first names) will be very helpful.

My intent, is to get more posters/players to understand, it's not the armies that contribute so much to a player's Win, as ... It Is The Player.

Thank you for you time and attention.

Brother Erekose
aka
Casey

jet fuel can't melt steel beams

The nerfs in GTs have never been about the top players and who wins. The top players will always get to the top, because they are....good. So any discussion about the correctnes of the nerfs based upon a few winners in some GTs is doomed to fail IMO.

The nerfs have been about the big majority at the GT. So if you want numbers you must look broader.

The real question though is "are the GTs with nerfs having big numbers of atendees ?" and " are players at GTs with nerfs having fun". Look to LVO for a answer.

Had to read that a couple of times to get through all the slang, contractions and in-joke references to a small crowd of mates somewhere in America..

So, Eldar aren't OP because the 'top' tournament players in somebody's group playing other OP 'competitive' lists can beat them?

I agree with Tyfus - would be much better to judge by the broader picture than just the effect within an isolated tournament crowd.


.

Broadly the same comments from me. The top percentile are generally Death-stars or other mechanic abuse, the sort of stuff that doesn't care if you have a generally strong codex, it only cares if you can specifically nullify their specific gimmick mechanic.

My experience at the 6 tournaments i've attended this year is that the eldar players had a disproportionately high win rate. They also had much more representation this year than i've ever seen before.

Last place at almost every single tournament i attended this year went to a Marine player - does that mean the SM book is terrible? Statistics mean nothing when the scope is that narrow.

Just because Eldar struggle against invisible flying daemons summoning more daemons doesn't mean they aren't OP.

 ArbitorIan wrote:
Had to read that a couple of times to get through all the slang, contractions and in-joke references to a small crowd of mates somewhere in America..

Yeah. It was a bit self indulgent and targeted for some local blokes, but the last part was for our world community.

 ArbitorIan wrote:
So, Eldar aren't OP because the 'top' tournament players in somebody's group playing other OP 'competitive' lists can beat them?

I agree with Tyfus - would be much better to judge by the broader picture than just the effect within an isolated tournament crowd.

Exactly. Thus the last, part of my post, after the orange joke. I'm started this thread to solicit similar data, like a store's year of RTT results, etc. Something we can all look at ... and with my intent, still say to the Sky-Is-Falling ninny-hammers, "You were wrong. Eldar didn't break the game. They didn't dominate like you'd predicted." And not just to count coup, but to hopefully establish mindset or regard for future Codex releases, that the hate, vitriol and negativity can be skipped next time.

To that end, I'm wondering if other folks had the same experience (Eldar had little impact). Concrete citation would be nice.

Anyone care to report a 'larger picture'?

@ NickAtkins
Got some concrete numbers?

Ok, here are some statistics for you.


Eldar is the #1 Ranked army overall in Europe - http://www.tabletoptournaments.net/t3_armies.php?cid=0&gid=3

At NOVA 2015, Eldar was the #1 winningest army at 57.3% (2nd was Daemons at 56.5%) - http://www.torrentoffire.com/7287/nova-2015-recap

Overall, Eldar is the 3rd Most Winning Army as compiled by Torrentoffile behind Imperial Knights (1) and Skitarii (2).

Eldar was the most successful army at the ATC 2015, taking 7 out of the top 10 spots (including 1st place) and 11 spots out of the top 20.

One thing of note is that most of above tournaments do not use the ITC format. Rather, they run a more "violent" Eldar, though NOVA did not allow the Wraithknight in its event.


As for the ITC format, at the LVO 2015, Eldar was the 5th winningest army, behind Grey Knights (1), Daemons (2), Imperial Knights (3) and Necrons (4) - http://www.torrentoffire.com/6683/lvo-army-statistics

 Brothererekose wrote:
Well, so said the Spring Nay-Sayers. They crowed and whined about how devastatingly over powered the eldar book was going to be. D-weps handed out like candy.

[...]

I posit that the SkyIsFalling posters here on dakka and, I guess, elsewhere, were all wrong.

[...]

At BAO, an elf list did make the Top Table, wielded by dakka poster Tomb King. He was up against Allan Pajama Pants (daemons). But elves lost. According to the Rage Pundits last Spring, PJ ought to have been cheesed out of victory and Brett P. would be the name on everyone's lips.

[...]

And every clown who raged, started threads to ban the books, Chicken Littles, etc ... well, I ask that they hold their tongues (keyboards) next time, and give it a few months before flipping out.

[...]

Something we can all look at ... and with my intent, still say to the Sky-Is-Falling ninny-hammers, "You were wrong. Eldar didnt' break the game. They didn't dominate like you'd predicted."

You're not going to get many serious responses when you wrap your complaint-post up in that much sarcasm and attempted humor (which in itself appears to just be a poorly-veiled attempt to insult anyone who thinks Eldar are a powerful Codex); but it looks as though jy2 took the time to give you the numbers you're after.

 jy2 wrote:
As for the ITC format, at the LVO 2015, Eldar was the 5th winningest army, behind Grey Knights (1), Daemons (2), Imperial Knights (3) and Necrons (4) - http://www.torrentoffire.com/6683/lvo-army-statistics

It's worth inserting a reminder that 7E Eldar had not released as of LVO 2015. Wave Serpent spam armies were obviously still a big deal, but they weren't this book. 7E Eldar were also not legal at Adepticon (I think the Codex released the week before, if I recall).

 jy2 wrote:
Eldar was the most successful army at the ATC 2015, taking 7 out of the top 10 spots (including 1st place) and 11 spots out of the top 20.

This is a rather important note for anyone talking about "un-nerfing" Eldar--ATC ran a completely open, un-changed version of the Eldar Codex and army construction rules. It was hilarious. You basically had to pick a person on your team to be thrown into the enemy Eldar woodchipper every round (or mirrormatch your own Eldar against them if you wanted anything resembling a decent game, which was our strategy the whole way).

It's also worth noting that, due to the team construction rules, this was an event where the possible population of any given army was capped and completely equal--at 20%, given 5-member teams. In a perfect world, you would actually expect the ATC results to be more equal, given that there are no huge population bumps of any given army. For instance, in any edition of 40k, Space Marines always outperform their actual "competitiveness" at tournaments because so many people play Space Marines, and that fact remains largely unaffected by balance swings. Let's say 8th Edition comes out and Dark Eldar are the most overpowered army in existance--if 5 Dark Eldar players and 80 Space Marine players enter a tournament, it's still pretty likely Space Marines will win, and they'll definitely come out looking better than they probably should have.

So at a tournament where there was an artificial cap on the number of Eldar players (forcing them to be equal in number with essentially all the other competitive Codexes), but all restrictions upon them were removed, they absolutely obliterated the rankings.

 Brothererekose wrote:
At BAO, an elf list did make the Top Table, wielded by dakka poster Tomb King. He was up against Allan Pajama Pants (daemons). But elves lost. According to the Rage Pundits last Spring, PJ ought to have been cheesed out of victory and Brett P. would be the name on everyone's lips.

And as for this one in particular--did you see this game? Did you even read TK's battle report (which is here, on dakka)? Do you know either of the players involved? Because I do; and I've heard them both say they knew whoever was going second was winning that game, regardless of any perceived imbalance regarding Eldar or whatever else. It was just the reality of the ITC format and the way their particular armies matched up. It was hardly a gold standard by which you should be passing judgment on the current state of competitive 40k.

DJ3 wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:
Well, so said the Spring Nay-Sayers.
[...]
Something we can all look at ... and with my intent, still say to the Sky-Is-Falling ninny-hammers, "You were wrong. Eldar didnt' break the game. They didn't dominate like you'd predicted."

You're not going to get many serious responses when you wrap your complaint-post up in that much sarcasm and attempted humor (which in itself appears to just be a poorly-veiled attempt to insult anyone who thinks Eldar are a powerful Codex); but it looks as though jy2 took the time to give you the numbers you're after.

I agree that I'll get some chain-yankers, but then again, jy2 comes in with solid numbers to redeem Humanity (sincerely).

No veiled insult to the Sky-Is-Falling guys; they were straight out insults. Whether Eldar, Tau, SM, GK ... any codex. That poop storm that came about last spring hurts the hobby and I'd like those to see the errors of their ways ....

@jy2
Thanks, Jim.

DJ3 wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:
At BAO, an elf list did make the Top Table, wielded by dakka poster Tomb King. He was up against Allan Pajama Pants (daemons). But elves lost. According to the Rage Pundits last Spring, PJ ought to have been cheesed out of victory and Brett P. would be the name on everyone's lips.

And as for this one in particular--did you see this game? Did you even read TK's battle report (which is here, on dakka)? Do you know either of the players involved? Because I do; and I've heard them both say they knew whoever was going second was winning that game, regardless of any perceived imbalance regarding Eldar or whatever else. It was just the reality of the ITC format and the way their particular armies matched up. It was hardly a gold standard by which you should be passing judgment on the current state of competitive 40k.

I cite it not as a gold standard, but what I know ... and have asked the community for more info, which jy2 has supplied nicely.

And given what Jim has posted, it seems that I'm rather wrong. Eldar players *have* quite dominated, huh?

I read TK's batrep back in July and have quite forgotten the details. PJ is an acquaintance (not buddy nor friend) introduced at BAO 2013 before he lost to Liz. I doubt he knows my name, but prolly remembers me by sight, as the skinny guy who drinks a lot and is loud. TK has given me eldar advice here on dakka, so no, I don't 'know' him per se either. I readily believe you, when you say that TK and PJ stated Going 2nd would Win. I talked briefly with PJ on his win ... but can't remember if we talked about the game so much as all his new FaceBook Friend requests

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
All this taken in, I'd still like to assert that the vitriol from last spring is still UNjustified, despite jy2's citation, and that when a new book drops, the community needs to do what is best:
Alter your meta to deal with changes and the latest and best, like 6e WaveSerpents, Riptides, 5e GK PysFle-Man Dreadnaughts, Star Cannon spam (3rd ed for you kids), Rhino Rush, etc.

And try not to bring down one aspect of the community who got handed that new, yummy unit/formation.

For the record, I'm not OneAspectoftheCommunity. I own and like playing all my armies: Dark Angels, SM, bugs (sold 'em though), Tau, SW, Eldar, Chaos SM & Dark Eldar (ah, 5th edition ) and daemons.

So, I'm not an 'eldar' player looking to defend this book, so much as a 40k fan trying to Look-Back, and reassure the Chicken Littles that ThingsWereNotThatBad and to not lose their cool over *any* book's release.

DJ3, thank you, respectfully, for your respectful and insightful post. Sincerely.

Glad to be of service.

My thoughts on Eldar are that they are still strong. To me, strong isn't necessarily always winning GT's. Strong is to consistently do well in tournament play. If the army consistently ranks among the top 3-5 in tournament play, then IMO it is a top-tier army.

Eldar have completely dominated all of my playing time, appearing in 100% of the games I played this year. With any luck, things will change for this next year.

The biggest demographic shift in terms of factions in my local meta has been towards Necrons and Skitarii. At the last small tournament I attended, out of ten people who attended three brought Necrons (I was one of two Eldar players). The funny thing was that they pretty much all brought the exact same list (Reclamation Legion + Canoptek Harvest +Judicator Battalion) with some individual variation. Even still, it was pretty clear who the best player was out of the three who brought Necrons.

I find it very funny that people base an army's power level entirely based upon how well it performs at GT-level tournaments. By this comparison, Eldar are a middle-of-the-road army, and Space Marines are the most overpowered. It's the same thing we heard about Tau.

I feel the ITC nerfs with regards to Eldar, Tau, and other broken mechanics were justified, and have born themselves out in terms of of tournament play. At the top tables, games are decided more on player skill than anything else. What TO rulings should do is provide a fair playing ground for everybody else at the tournament, and I feel that the ITC has had a banner year in that regard.

 Brothererekose wrote:
And given what Jim has posted, it seems that I'm rather wrong. Eldar players *have* quite dominated, huh?

 jy2 wrote:
My thoughts on Eldar are that they are still strong. To me, strong isn't necessarily always winning GT's.

But it's also important to remember that you have to view Eldar's current place in the meta through the lens of the fact that virtually all tournaments have crafted their army construction rules/FAQs/etc to account for the Eldar Codex's power level.

D had been a part of main-40k since 7E released, and Superheavies had been since Escalation, and neither were widely restricted (outside of maybe a token "no titans") until Eldar. Lists with 5 Imperial Knights were legal at last year's Adepticon.

The Wraithknight outright changed the game. If we didn't all switch army construction rules to account for it (only 1 Superheavy/points cap on Superheavies/no duplicate Formations/Stomp nerfs/ranged D changes/etc), Eldar would be dominating tournament results, just like they did at ATC.

The thing is, I absolutely agree with the vast majority of what you're saying, I just think you're landing at a weird place in getting upset about it--the internet always freaks out about the new thing. That's just a fact. Getting upset at the internet for freaking out about the new thing is like leaving your steak on the ground and then getting mad at your dog for eating it. It was kinda inevitable.

I'm involved in tournament organization and I always take a very conservative stance on rules interpretations and army construction. I'll always be the one advising to stick as close as possible to the base game and to hold back on any perceived nerfs that seem to be targetted at one particular Codex or unit--this is why I'm frequently an outspoken opponent to the ITC FAQ where they explicitly do those things by design. I thought changing army construction rules just to nerf Eldar was a huge mistake at the time, because of the collateral damage--Superheavy caps hurt Knight armies, which were already an established thing, and 1-Formation caps make Battle Companies illegal.

But then I started practicing for ATC against 4/5-Wraithknight lists and realized we're exactly where we need to be.

The fact is, the vast majority of people haven't ever played against a 4/5-WK list (particularly one played by a good player), because that kind of list isn't legal anywhere, so why would they bother practicing with it?

So that's the request I put out to anyone who thinks the current meta design of tournaments over-emphasizes Eldar's power level: go find the best Eldar player you know, and have him play an unrestricted WK list against you (we personally found that 4 was the sweet spot for ATC, with the extra points full of Jetbikes). It's a very, very different thing than playing against the Eldar lists we've all been seeing in tournaments, because tournaments are currently designed in such a way as to prevent Eldar from bringing the very best they can, for good reason.

DJ3 wrote:
Getting upset at the internet for freaking out about the new thing is like leaving your steak on the ground and then getting mad at your dog for eating it. It was kinda inevitable.

this is a great line in a great post

 ArbitorIan wrote:
Had to read that a couple of times to get through all the slang, contractions and in-joke references to a small crowd of mates somewhere in America...

I concur, the first post reads like gibberish, no offence

Am I the only one who would play Eldar for fun and stick to the fluff? I don't trawl through army lists making painstaking evaluations of every bit of equipment. I just buzz off owning and reading a Codex and dreaming of having a blast playing against other, like-minded players.

If I played Eldar I'd forge a narrative: maybe they're Guardians who became front-line soldiers to defend a desperately outnumbered Craftworld, and find themselves considerably outmatched, or a small elite insertion force of Aspect Warriors trying to kill the enemy Warlord. I certainly wouldn't blow two hundred quid on Wave Serpents just because they've got OP rules. I play to tell a story, make friends and have fun, not pack my opponent's mouth, anus and other openings with cheese.

This is why I avoid tournaments and the people who play them.

That was awesome !

 NoPoet wrote:

 ArbitorIan wrote:
Had to read that a couple of times to get through all the slang, contractions and in-joke references to a small crowd of mates somewhere in America...

I concur, the first post reads like gibberish, no offence

Am I the only one who would play Eldar for fun and stick to the fluff? I don't trawl through army lists making painstaking evaluations of every bit of equipment. I just buzz off owning and reading a Codex and dreaming of having a blast playing against other, like-minded players.

If I played Eldar I'd forge a narrative: maybe they're Guardians who became front-line soldiers to defend a desperately outnumbered Craftworld, and find themselves considerably outmatched, or a small elite insertion force of Aspect Warriors trying to kill the enemy Warlord. I certainly wouldn't blow two hundred quid on Wave Serpents just because they've got OP rules. I play to tell a story, make friends and have fun, not pack my opponent's mouth, anus and other openings with cheese.

This is why I avoid tournaments and the people who play them.

I mean, there's nothing wrong with that, but why are you posting in the "Tournament Discussions" sections of the site if you don't like Tournaments?

He never said that he does not like tourneys .

Dozer Blades wrote:He never said that he does not like tourneys .

NoPoet wrote:
This is why I avoid tournaments and the people who play them.

???

 Brothererekose wrote:
The end of the year is a good time to reflect on events and changes to 40k and the Tournament scene. Of biggest import were the new, 7e codex books, Eldar, SM and Tau. Biggest impact?

Well, so said the Spring Nay-Sayers. They crowed and whined about how devastatingly over powered the eldar book was going to be. D-weps handed out like candy.
Scatbikes galore. Dirt cheap LoW WraithKnights.

Nerfs were suggested. Like one ScatLas per Wind Rider unit. Ranged-D nerf *did* happen as ITC participants voted on it. Including yours truly.


I posit that the SkyIsFalling posters here on dakka and, I guess, elsewhere, were all wrong.

Not only wrong, but they did unnecessary and avoidable damage in chasing away casual players (a buddy of mine in particular) and thinning out our community. Part of our fun to to gripe about GW's prices and confusing rule writing (getting waaay better though, Skimmers vs. AP1 anybody?), ... ....

The amusing thing about Skimmers versus AP1 is that the rule was a very rare example of mathematical precision writing, but the majority of players rejected the RAI because they think that a higher roll on a die should be better.

The Top 2 finishers at Warzone: Atlanta, a 74 man GT were both Scatter bike heavy Eldar. Just because Eldar is not winning all the events does not mean they are not extremely powerful. They are not unstoppable, but I have played in a lot of tournaments this year and eldar are CLEARLY the most powerful army in 40k right now.

That being said, 7th ed 40k is still extremely diverse and there are a lot of powerful builds out there now.

Also, just because they're the most powerful army overall doesn't mean that certain builds don't beat them. The aforementioned Invis/Flying Daemon Summoning does good work, Centstar played well generally can kill off the big threats before they get rolling (especially WS with the Hunter's Eye), and Drop Pod Skitarii/War Conv can do really well with their massed special weapons being effective against the Eldar meta lists.

But that's not to say the Daemon, SM/GK/Imperial, and AdMech books are stronger. A specific build or specific combo that focuses on countering the meta build does not change the overall effective power level of the units in a book.

Basically, it just means that if you're serious about doing well in a tournament, you have to be able to deal with a WK and Bikes, or more WKs if the event allows it. If you can, it's more even. If you can't, well you're SOL unless you luck out and never pull Eldar. The fact that they basically dictate what lists go far and which ones don't should tell you all about power levels.

axisofentropy wrote:

DJ3 wrote:
Getting upset at the internet for freaking out about the new thing is like leaving your steak on the ground and then getting mad at your dog for eating it. It was kinda inevitable.

this is a great line in a great post

To be more concrete, AxisoE, it is not so much "Getting upset at the internet for freaking out about the new thing", as I am hoping to prevent/curb the reactions that actually called for bans on the entire codex (poster Thrakka or something like that) and nerfs like 1 Scat-Las per unit, etc.

Before a few weeks' of data has been gathered.

Which means I shake my head at the too quick poll of ITC participants and nerf on the Tau (was that the 5 vote difference? 600 to 605?).

DJ3 wrote:
The Wraithknight outright changed the game. If we didn't all switch army construction rules to account for it (only 1 Superheavy/points cap on Superheavies/no duplicate Formations/Stomp nerfs/ranged D changes/etc), Eldar would be dominating tournament results, just like they did at ATC.

I'm not quite on the topic of list construction restriction. But to address this, 4 Imperial Knight lists changed the meta too, or "outright changed the game". IHMO. Briefly, so did Flyrant Bug Circus.

I agree with a lot of ITC's choices of units that are banned and limited, especially the one LoW. Unless I tool a list to beat 4 Imperial Knights, I'm likely to lose (and have) with my TAC tournament lists, usually with ITC missions in those tourneys. But they haven't dominated the field at my FLGS, I think a 16+ player field every RTT this year.

DJ3 wrote:
The thing is, I absolutely agree with the vast majority of what you're saying, I just think you're landing at a weird place in getting upset about it--the internet always freaks out about the new thing. That's just a fact. Getting upset at the internet for freaking out about the new thing is like leaving your steak on the ground and then getting mad at your dog for eating it. It was kinda inevitable.

I like this line, too.

Sticking with this, dogs are trainable, and people have brains that can over come their stupidity. The well trained dog will wait on going after that dropped steak.

So, I'm hoping to sew seeds of Training, "Do Not Rage Quit 40k, do no make call to Ban whole armies."

Stuff like that.

DJ3 wrote:
...But then I started practicing for ATC against 4/5-Wraithknight lists and realized we're exactly where we need to be.

The fact is, the vast majority of people haven't ever played against a 4/5-WK list (particularly one played by a good player), because that kind of list isn't legal anywhere, so why would they bother practicing with it?

So that's the request I put out to anyone who thinks the current meta design of tournaments over-emphasizes Eldar's power level: go find the best Eldar player you know, and have him play an unrestricted WK list against you (we personally found that 4 was the sweet spot for ATC, with the extra points full of Jetbikes). It's a very, very different thing than playing against the Eldar lists we've all been seeing in tournaments, because tournaments are currently designed in such a way as to prevent Eldar from bringing the very best they can, for good reason.

I have fought 4 WKs, with 2 Farseer Bikes, Viper & Scat Bikes filling in the rest. I killed two WKs and the Farseers & Bikes, but conceded by 4th with only an exarch and a scat-bike unit. Although, I don't think he was the Best Eldar player anywhere. Just one of the Wolf Brothers out of Reno, NV.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Requizen wrote:

Dozer Blades wrote:He never said that he does not like tourneys .

NoPoet wrote:This is why I avoid tournaments and the people who play them.

???

Yeah. Like a vegetarian coming to a BBQ discussion forum and saying he avoids barbecues and the people who attend them.

Free Speech

 Brothererekose wrote:

DJ3 wrote:
...But then I started practicing for ATC against 4/5-Wraithknight lists and realized we're exactly where we need to be.

The fact is, the vast majority of people haven't ever played against a 4/5-WK list (particularly one played by a good player), because that kind of list isn't legal anywhere, so why would they bother practicing with it?

So that's the request I put out to anyone who thinks the current meta design of tournaments over-emphasizes Eldar's power level: go find the best Eldar player you know, and have him play an unrestricted WK list against you (we personally found that 4 was the sweet spot for ATC, with the extra points full of Jetbikes). It's a very, very different thing than playing against the Eldar lists we've all been seeing in tournaments, because tournaments are currently designed in such a way as to prevent Eldar from bringing the very best they can, for good reason.

I have fought 4 WKs, with 2 Farseer Bikes, Viper & Scat Bikes filling in the rest. I killed two WKs and the Farseers & Bikes, but conceded by 4th with only an exarch and a scat-bike unit. Although, I don't think he was the Best Eldar player anywhere. Just one of the Wolf Brothers out of Reno, NV.

I mean, they're not impossible to beat. But you winning against one with some unspecified army that may or may not have been built specifically to fight against it in one game does not mean that army is balanced in any way, shape, or form. The numbers posted in this very thread speak for themselves. An army does not need 100% win rate to be overpowered - just ask any Starcraft player (or any competitive game, for that matter), it just needs to be stronger to the point that the only way that people beat it is through luck, extreme outplaying, or pure counter. A person coming with a TAC list playing blind into multiple Wraithknights with Scatbike spam holds very little chance of winning against them unless they just luckily happen to be playing a counter army. And that's bad.

Requizen wrote:

 Brothererekose wrote:
I have fought 4 WKs, with 2 Farseer Bikes, Viper & Scat Bikes filling in the rest. I killed two WKs and the Farseers & Bikes, but conceded by 4th with only an exarch and a scat-bike unit. Although, I don't think he was the Best Eldar player anywhere. Just one of the Wolf Brothers out of Reno, NV.

I mean, they're not impossible to beat. But you winning against one with some unspecified army that may or may not have been built specifically to fight against it in one game does not mean that army is balanced in any way, shape, or form. The numbers posted in this very thread speak for themselves. An army does not need 100% win rate to be overpowered - just ask any Starcraft player (or any competitive game, for that matter), it just needs to be stronger to the point that the only way that people beat it is through luck, extreme outplaying, or pure counter. A person coming with a TAC list playing blind into multiple Wraithknights with Scatbike spam holds very little chance of winning against them unless they just luckily happen to be playing a counter army. And that's bad.

Unless I'm misreading your post, I think you misread mine.

No, I lost to that 4WK list, conceding by Turn 4. It was the KnowNoMercy GT in Sacramento, Calif. with Unbound List building, last Oct. And I didn't go into it blind, there'd been thread talk about multi WK lists way before the event happened (if I've read *that* part of your post correctly).

And I make no claim that Eldar are balanced or middle tier. They are Top Tier, with KDK (and friends) along with SM for my Top 3 picks.

Again, this thread isn't about defending eldar; it's about preventing or dulling the Rage Quit stupidity that happened last spring.

text removed.
Reds8n

Ultimately it would be nice if the ITC would make the common sense calls, like multiple Wraithknights, and put the more borderline issues up for vote only after a few months actual play time.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
Ultimately it would be nice if the ITC would make the common sense calls, like multiple Wraithknights, and put the more borderline issues up for vote only after a few months actual play time.

C'mon, OwCNC, you gotta make me spell out how your ABC Afterschool Special moment should play out?

You and Reece need to sit down to Tea (chamomile), with your cucumber sandwiches (crusts cut off), and talk about your feelings. I think a four string quartet will help the mood, and lightly colored sun hats so you won't get too hot in the California Sun. And there ought to be an Out-of-Work actor somewhere who can do a decent Jeeves or Carson to help steer the conversation to a reconciliation.


@MODs, reds8n
PM OwCNC and ask him if he'd like this taken down. Then I'll do it. Don't ask Reece though, I'm just acting as an intermediary in a lovers' spat and he'd deny reaching out.

 Brothererekose wrote:

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
Ultimately it would be nice if the ITC would make the common sense calls, like multiple Wraithknights, and put the more borderline issues up for vote only after a few months actual play time.

C'mon, OwCNC, you gotta make me spell out how your ABC Afterschool Special moment should play out?

You and Reece need to sit down to Tea (chamomile), with your cucumber sandwiches (crusts cut off), and talk about your feelings. I think a four string quartet will help the mood, and lightly colored sun hats so you won't get too hot in the California Sun. And there ought to be an Out-of-Work actor somewhere who can do a decent Jeeves or Carson to help steer the conversation to a reconciliation.


@MODs, reds8n
PM OwCNC and ask him if he'd like this taken down. Then I'll do it. Don't ask Reece though, I'm just acting as an intermediary in a lovers' spat and he'd deny reaching out.

Reece and I can differentiate (the teacher in you loves that I used professional jargon there I know it don't lie) between me being miffed about the ITC and being friendly in real life. If Reece and I sit down to talk about anything IRL it's going to be over beer and it would probably be libertarian politics not 40k

 OverwatchCNC wrote:
If Reece and I sit down to talk about anything IRL it's going to be over beer and it would probably be libertarian politics not 40k

Anarchism, you mean. Hippie.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Can we get back on topic, though:
When the next book, White Dwarf, etc. drops, can readers make a concerted effort to help the nay-sayers and Chicken Littles (and I mean targeting those dudes all over the various boards), to come up with concrete experiences, and numbers, to make a more, "Let's really try it out, multiple times and have our tourney officials try things unrestricted first for a month or two?" approach to new stuff.

For poster 'NoPost' and other Beer and Pretzels guys (non tourney players), you can of course, regulate garage, basement and pick up games as you see fit.

But this is concerning Tourneys, and the impact tourney posters have on how books and specific units play out in the tourneys, and stopping rage-quitting Tom-Foolery from hampering the game, before we've had chances to figure out if ~300 point WKs break the game (at one each or four).

Or if AP5 Tau units getting Ignores Cover from Multiple Spectrum Suite, along with a Riptide, 2 Strike Team (AP5 guns) and 4 Crisis Suits (let's say all AP2) and an IonHead tank ... all to wipe out ... one unit of whatever.

One. Unit. Cause the all gotta target the same unit. For non-tau players, a 10 man MEq will vanish with the IgnoresCover/TL toys, from just one Crisis Team, 5 to 6 guys, dual PRs or PR/FB (plasma/melta), not needing help from Fire Warriors or any other unit. To kill. One Unit.

Target Locks? A couple Plasma Rifles or Fusion Bs here or there. P'shhaH!

Srsly.

@OwCNC
love u