Battle at Blobs ParkHomeRegisterLog in
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 
Rechercher Advanced Search
Latest topics
» Challenge accepted!!
Thu Jul 30, 2015 2:48 am by aroy

» club night/ just hanging
Wed Jan 28, 2015 3:05 pm by ginger

» Highlander 40k 1850 tournament at Flashback Comics
Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:36 pm by MaddMike6

» Highlander 40k format
Thu Oct 30, 2014 9:54 pm by MaddMike6

» going to outside the box this weekend
Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:21 am by scooter

» Warhammer Quest - Board Game
Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:09 pm by scooter

» going to NOVA
Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:02 pm by scooter

» 2014 BFS GT Oct 10-12 40KGT/X-WING/Malifaux Nyack NY
Mon Sep 01, 2014 12:39 pm by pissclams

» fantasy game at Dropzone on saturday
Fri Aug 22, 2014 11:05 am by scooter


Share | 
 

 Balancing 40k

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
AuthorMessage
artax



Posts : 10
Join date : 2010-03-30

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:33 pm

I *LOVE* that the thread starter is now referring to people as Power Gamers.

Honestly, at this point, since you broke out that term, I don't think there's anything you can say that I can take with a shred of credibility.

If people get so butt hurt over an army list, then perhaps they shouldn't be playing in that event, let alone the game. Period. It's childish to drop out of an event because of a certain army list. (See Vaden the Hobby Breaker and the Quitter as examples of this situation.) Trying to tailor events to the douchebags that drop out is poor practice.

Needless to say, the "GAY" painting requirements (or lack thereof) and Composition Criteria are things I'm not interested in and will not go to a single event that utilizes either of these. I will not be the only person.

Oh, and since apparently what armies I have matters, let me list them for you: Chaos Marines, Dark Eldar, Eldar, Tyranids, Marines, Deathwing, and zomgz.. Imperial Guard.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:41 pm

artax wrote:
I *LOVE* that the thread starter is now referring to people as Power Gamers.

Honestly, at this point, since you broke out that term, I don't think there's anything you can say that I can take with a shred of credibility.

If people get so butt hurt over an army list, then perhaps they shouldn't be playing in that event, let alone the game. Period. It's childish to drop out of an event because of a certain army list. (See Vaden the Hobby Breaker and the Quitter as examples of this situation.) Trying to tailor events to the douchebags that drop out is poor practice.

Needless to say, the "GAY" painting requirements (or lack thereof) and Composition Criteria are things I'm not interested in and will not go to a single event that utilizes either of these. I will not be the only person.

Oh, and since apparently what armies I have matters, let me list them for you: Chaos Marines, Dark Eldar, Eldar, Tyranids, Marines, Deathwing, and zomgz.. Imperial Guard.

see apparently you can't read, in several previous post i tried to make it very clear that some gammers want comp some don't, so if you don't F*** off and don't play in any comp events we host i can however assure you that we will hold equal or more non comp-events than we do comp events, so chill out, and i'm with you painting scores are gay, but some people don't want to have to play ard boys level lists and there entitled to some attention too, odd to that in the pan cake break fast and the last frag tournament people who quit all played guard is this a some bizarre anomaly or is IG perhaps over powered
Back to top Go down
TimW



Posts : 186
Join date : 2009-08-15

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:41 pm

I've beaten nobz before...that's right, nobz bikers.... Laughing

I love smack talking! I ain't that great but I do have to say that 40k is WAAAAY more balanced than fantasy. Even with the new codices and the old ones. Necrons are fine, Tau are fine, daemon-hunters are, well, struggling...but they still look cool doing it.

IG Leafblower lists are a pain in the ass, yes, you just have to be smart. A good player with a well-crafted list with lots and lots of deployment options (deep-strike, outlfank, scout, infiltrate) will be able to hold out and even beat the leafblower.

Problem is, people don't adjust their tactics and strategy to whom they are playing...
Back to top Go down
http://tauofwar.blogspot.com
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:52 pm

TimW wrote:
I've beaten nobz before...that's right, nobz bikers.... Laughing

I love smack talking! I ain't that great but I do have to say that 40k is WAAAAY more balanced than fantasy. Even with the new codices and the old ones. Necrons are fine, Tau are fine, daemon-hunters are, well, struggling...but they still look cool doing it.

IG Leafblower lists are a pain in the ass, yes, you just have to be smart. A good player with a well-crafted list with lots and lots of deployment options (deep-strike, outlfank, scout, infiltrate) will be able to hold out and even beat the leafblower.

Problem is, people don't adjust their tactics and strategy to whom they are playing...

sir i would like to play you then, and i agree 40k is far more balanced than fantasy i just though it would be a good idea to make some amendments to prevent people from playing the same old ard boy lists, ie leaf blower nob bikers duel-lash and vendetta melta spam, i feel that or restrictions that prevent those list would make the torny feel really fresh and differn't
Back to top Go down
artax



Posts : 10
Join date : 2010-03-30

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:55 pm

rofl, Brent. I don't need you to tell me not to play in them, I TOLD you I wouldn't. Herp Derp.

My reading comprehension is quite fine, thank you. I appreciate your concern.

Regarding Painting scores, They're important as painting is PART of the hobby, but they should not be so extreme that they throw off the tournament entirely. Along the same lines, *requiring* someone to paint their army for a tournament is just dumb.

No, it's not an anomaly, It's just that those people who are so butt hurt over the Imperial Guard army, refuse to even attempt to play them. This is THEIR problem, and does not actually address any existing issue with the codex.

Regarding Scott B from March Massacre, he HAD the opportunity to take it to Vaden, if he played the army right, but instead of actually trying, he Played his army like a fool, and ended up choosing to walk away. The "Leafblower" didn't beat him. Scott B. beat himself by being a sup-par general.
Back to top Go down
artax



Posts : 10
Join date : 2010-03-30

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 5:56 pm

Sorry, the issue you're trying to address does not lie within a codex being borked, but rather the "GAY" players that choose to tailor their gaming around armies they don't like.

Fix them.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:00 pm

artax wrote:
Sorry, the issue you're trying to address does not lie within a codex being borked, but rather the "GAY" players that choose to tailor their gaming around armies they don't like.

Fix them.

sir do you honestly propose that the IG codex is not over powered
Back to top Go down
Baneon



Posts : 415
Join date : 2009-09-16
Age : 40
Location : Pasadena, MD

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:03 pm

Brent wrote:
Baneon wrote:
Seriously stuff like this is just starting to really Piss the F! out of me. Between the whining and bitching about painting requirements and in both cases it's come from the same source. Explain that to me? Your honestly going to sit there and !@#$ about 40k balance and your freaking playing a Nob Biker list? Really? Step up and look in the freaking mirror, that face staring back at you is the gd problem. Learn to adjust or just don't play. Stop trying to artificially create a global issue so you can fix it. And seriously, stop referring back to Fantasy to help bolster your arguement. They are two completely different game systems. The only really non competitive army lists in 40k are Necrons and Tau and that's due to their age and has nothing to do with "OMGZ LETS ALL PANIC ABOUT THE NEW ARMY BOOKS". You could argue that Eldar and Eldar with ball gags aren't competitive but you can have semi-competive lists that either spam attacks or points denial. And yes I play Imperial Guard and you know what I think I've won maybe 3 games against tournament level opponents with them so far and I run 3 Valks/Vends 4-5 chimeras and Hydras and all the good stuff (mech IG), you know why? They have adjusted to deal with the list like you have to do with any type of competitive game out there. You don't see the kids playing MTG whining and trying to 'tier' the newest magic set, they Tech up and find counters and adjust their play style. Just because you've won a tournament doesn't mean you sit back your laurels and get to declare yourself the king of the mountain, there's always something there to knock your ass back down to the bottom to work up again.

So in effect if you aren't playing Tau or Necrons you really don't have any room to !@#$ and complain about tournaments.

/soap box

here these are for you, why are all the power gamer so set in there ways, you don't have to play in compt events so back off maybe some people want to run there dark eldar, but you people just cry and whine "i don't want to loose my unfair advantage i don't want to have to write a new list, i hate having fun" we at the inner circle will provide events that address the wants and requests of all the gamers in the area not just you, and some people want to play in events that don't have some d-bag running squadrons of vendettas, that was one of the biggest complaints about the pan cake breakfast, some one who will remain nameless was so aggravated by it that they dropped out of the event, ard boys is ard boys, other events can be about what ever we want to make them about, and if no one sighs up we won't do it again but it may be a huge success and people may love it so chill out and let people play the way they want to



there ultra absorbent since you seem to be having a high flow day

That's pretty freakin funny coming from the nob biker cheese dick that started all this crap. I'm not nor have I ever been a power gamer, I regularely get rolled on tournaments and you don't see me pitching a fit that stuff is unbalanced or things need to be changed. Why don't you take your little napkins and stuff your pie hole for once and stop talking long enough to pay attention to what people are saying. I said I ran 3, count em 3 Valks/Vends, not squadroned not anything. Single choices that are usually right up in the battle line dropping off guard with flamers. You keep running your 'special' events and much like your "Shades of Grey" tournament you'll have more problems and more people saying nah I'll pass then you'll have people applauding your efforts. Your fighting a battle that doesn't need to be faught over a subject that while a concern isn't really earth shattering that you need to right a whole document or tournament system to adjust.

Just cause I curb stomped your ass one time in fantasy I'm a power gamer. Congratulations Brent you got me, I'm such a power gamer that I took a fluffy VC army to adepticon and went 2-1-4 for the whole weekend. Sounds pretty power gamey to me so your right. Oh but wait I play Imperial Guard! I must be on the band wagon, never mind I spent a year building the army, wanted to model/use them like Panzergrenadiers I'm a cheese monkey for using models that fit my theme. Oh but wait lets ignore the many thousands of points of Eldar I've had since 3rd edition or the Necron's that I've loaned to my brother. I'm just a flavor of the month douche that goes for whatever's the current winning army like....nob bikers, or Lash Sorc, Obl Spam, Vulkan Melta Spam, I mean I can go on but I think you get my point. There are always going to be lists out there people whine about, your going to be pushing a huge ass boulder up hill forever if you try to adjust tournament play for the new hotness. It's a losing battle.
Back to top Go down
artax



Posts : 10
Join date : 2010-03-30

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:06 pm

The armylist is fine. Over-powered is such a loaded term, I'm not going to use it.

Should GW have made the Valk or Vendetta, a little more expensive, sure, but they didn't. It's no use trying to insert your own brand of balance, because you don't like the way GW did theirs.

People make lists that other people don't want to play, because they're "OP." Like I've said before, ADAPT. If you don't want people to bring Valk Spam to a tournament, then don't hold one. It's just that simple. Any attempts at "softening" a tournament through the use of composition-neutering or painting requirements or house rules, is foolish, and counter-productive. Anyone attempting to do so, should not be holding that "tournament."
Back to top Go down
Baneon



Posts : 415
Join date : 2009-09-16
Age : 40
Location : Pasadena, MD

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:14 pm

TimW wrote:
I've beaten nobz before...that's right, nobz bikers.... Laughing

I love smack talking! I ain't that great but I do have to say that 40k is WAAAAY more balanced than fantasy. Even with the new codices and the old ones. Necrons are fine, Tau are fine, daemon-hunters are, well, struggling...but they still look cool doing it.

IG Leafblower lists are a pain in the ass, yes, you just have to be smart. A good player with a well-crafted list with lots and lots of deployment options (deep-strike, outlfank, scout, infiltrate) will be able to hold out and even beat the leafblower.

Problem is, people don't adjust their tactics and strategy to whom they are playing...

Thank you! I agree heartily on all accounts.

And to address Brent. Okay Brent so you want to limit the IG to 3 armor 12 or less tanks. Which would affect...Chimeras, Hellhounds, Bane Wolfs, Devil Dogs, Sentinals, Vendetta's, Valkyries, all the Ordinance choices and Hydra Flak tanks man that's like half the book. Which 'supposedly' force guard to play on foot...okay I just wouldn't play them but not for the reason you just thought. Why would I want to play a tournament with a horde of BS 3, T3, S3, LD7 mooks with flash lights and a crappy armor save? That's asking someone to come punch me in the face. Where's the balance here? Your taking an army book and neutering what makes it an army...the ability to field lots of tanks is a main stay of the guard, it's what makes them competitive.

I don't know, you can do what your want I don't have to agree with you and neither do any of the other members. I can tell you that your barking up the wrong tree.

Edit: Oh you know me Brent, big fat bald guy with a goatee who talked to you about your podcasting when you were starting. You know, the guy who makes a point to give you crap whenever I can. And you keep referring to my lady's parts and I'm gonna start taking it personal like.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:25 pm

Baneon wrote:
TimW wrote:
I've beaten nobz before...that's right, nobz bikers.... Laughing

I love smack talking! I ain't that great but I do have to say that 40k is WAAAAY more balanced than fantasy. Even with the new codices and the old ones. Necrons are fine, Tau are fine, daemon-hunters are, well, struggling...but they still look cool doing it.

IG Leafblower lists are a pain in the ass, yes, you just have to be smart. A good player with a well-crafted list with lots and lots of deployment options (deep-strike, outlfank, scout, infiltrate) will be able to hold out and even beat the leafblower.

Problem is, people don't adjust their tactics and strategy to whom they are playing...

Thank you! I agree heartily on all accounts.

And to address Brent. Okay Brent so you want to limit the IG to 3 armor 12 or less tanks. Which would affect...Chimeras, Hellhounds, Bane Wolfs, Devil Dogs, Sentinals, Vendetta's, Valkyries, all the Ordinance choices and Hydra Flak tanks man that's like half the book. Which 'supposedly' force guard to play on foot...okay I just wouldn't play them but not for the reason you just thought. Why would I want to play a tournament with a horde of BS 3, T3, S3, LD7 mooks with flash lights and a crappy armor save? That's asking someone to come punch me in the face. Where's the balance here? Your taking an army book and neutering what makes it an army...the ability to field lots of tanks is a main stay of the guard, it's what makes them competitive.

I don't know, you can do what your want I don't have to agree with you and neither do any of the other members. I can tell you that your barking up the wrong tree.

Edit: Oh you know me Brent, big fat bald guy with a goatee who talked to you about your podcasting when you were starting. You know, the guy who makes a point to give you crap whenever I can. And you keep referring to my lady's parts and I'm gonna start taking it personal like.

ok the tank limiting thing was actually joko's idea so don't attack me on that one, but i will say that guard ability to take heavy vehicles in squadrons breaks the game of 40k whether they be russ or valkerys it ruins the game for allot of other player, and i also would like to reiterate that i have little problem playing in events cause i have a broken army and i place in the top 3 in the last event i played in and have been in the top rakes of several torny going into the last round with my marines before, however i have the hindsight to know that people are getting sick of the same lists and the same people winning the events we host so if we want to keep getting 30 or more people we have to shake things up and keep them interesting, so if you don't have any thing positive to contribute just back off and chill out, or you may die of a heart attack or anal rupture years before your time
Back to top Go down
joko12



Posts : 1084
Join date : 2009-09-25
Age : 30
Location : Glen Burnie Battle Bunker

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:27 pm

I think comp tournaments are fun I don't see why thats a bad thing to practice cause there are a lot of big tournaments that have comp in them. So why not just try it out and see how it goes???
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:30 pm

joko12 wrote:
I think comp tournaments are fun I don't see why thats a bad thing to practice cause there are a lot of big tournaments that have comp in them. So why not just try it out and see how it goes???

well i'm glad to see that some one gets what we are trying to do here, i just want to run a fun event with as little douche bagery as possible
Back to top Go down
TimW



Posts : 186
Join date : 2009-08-15

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:34 pm

Brent dude, let's play! You bring your nobz bikers and I will bring my Tau. Just gotta set up a time.

This thread has gotten a little off-topic by the way.

Should we limit IG lists in Tournaments? Probably not. Limitations generally cause people to a) not come and b) whine. Two things I do not want happening at a Tournament.
Back to top Go down
http://tauofwar.blogspot.com
TimW



Posts : 186
Join date : 2009-08-15

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:35 pm

I'd be for a comp tournament rather than one that gives more points to certain armies and limits what players can field.
Back to top Go down
http://tauofwar.blogspot.com
Baneon



Posts : 415
Join date : 2009-09-16
Age : 40
Location : Pasadena, MD

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:42 pm

Bah that's not going to happen, I'm part Scottish we aren't having fun if we aint having a good rou at someone. Yes this irritates the piss out of me just for the sheer fact that I don't think it's necessary but I aint gonna keel over and die from in. That's like BOLS level of stupidity or something. I am willing to step back and admit that I haven't physically played in any recent 40k tournaments in the past few months so I haven't seen this huge influx of guard spam armies in the bunker /shrug.

*I'm going way back here to my Decipher days*
Is it just me or is the mentality for tournament goers changed since I was a HUGE tourney geek. I mean when I went to a tournament I brought my a game, best/worst combo I could think of deck teched to the 9s to beat the current META. I mean when I went to play I brought it. I expected to stomp or be stomped. If I didn't place in the top 3 I wasn't happy and went back to the drawing board to fix what didn't work. Admittedly I don't do that anymore, I not dead focused on beating my opponent into the dirt nor can I afford to keep a large variety of armies/models/builds circulating through my pocket book but still the principle is there. IF you go to a tournament, you better be aware of what the current META scene is like and adjust to it. IF your going hoping to win you've better have tested your list 30 times THAT WEEK against everything you could find and no what your going to do verse anything else your likely to face. Is that just me? Am I alone here?

As for constructive okay, here's what I think would work better for what your intending. Now the assumption I'm making here is that people are complaining about AirCav Guard? I don't really see someone dropping 555 points into a squadron of Leman Russ variants as an issue in 2k...I mean really they aren't scorring units and you can pop a LR right? And really you can't take away the ability to squadron up Hydra's, they are dirt cheap and take a heavy slot. Hell nerf Vends, I might just take 3 squadrons of 3 hydras and laugh Smile

Right suggestion sorry, side tracked. Happens in my old age, mind wanders SQUIRREL!
Special scenario, one round. I have some ideas but would like your input first. And you have to remember, this has to be fair. Kinda DB to target just one army for the beat stick but we let Lash Sorc lists and crud romp around with no down sides. What this does is forces the player to know how to adjust to the game being played and not rely on Net lists. They have to know how to play their army.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:43 pm

TimW wrote:
I'd be for a comp tournament rather than one that gives more points to certain armies and limits what players can field.

that is one of the ideas on the table, but people have said that they don't want comp scores because it's to subjective to the judge reading the list, and when are you going to come up i'll play you just let me know when it will be fun
Back to top Go down
Baneon



Posts : 415
Join date : 2009-09-16
Age : 40
Location : Pasadena, MD

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:44 pm

TimW wrote:
I'd be for a comp tournament rather than one that gives more points to certain armies and limits what players can field.

As would I, the comp system lets people adjust themselves to the tournament. Where as more points is just kinda bad. And you might penalize someone who isn't running squadrons or vendettas and then where would you be?
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:49 pm

Baneon wrote:
Bah that's not going to happen, I'm part Scottish we aren't having fun if we aint having a good rou at someone. Yes this irritates the piss out of me just for the sheer fact that I don't think it's necessary but I aint gonna keel over and die from in. That's like BOLS level of stupidity or something. I am willing to step back and admit that I haven't physically played in any recent 40k tournaments in the past few months so I haven't seen this huge influx of guard spam armies in the bunker /shrug.

*I'm going way back here to my Decipher days*
Is it just me or is the mentality for tournament goers changed since I was a HUGE tourney geek. I mean when I went to a tournament I brought my a game, best/worst combo I could think of deck teched to the 9s to beat the current META. I mean when I went to play I brought it. I expected to stomp or be stomped. If I didn't place in the top 3 I wasn't happy and went back to the drawing board to fix what didn't work. Admittedly I don't do that anymore, I not dead focused on beating my opponent into the dirt nor can I afford to keep a large variety of armies/models/builds circulating through my pocket book but still the principle is there. IF you go to a tournament, you better be aware of what the current META scene is like and adjust to it. IF your going hoping to win you've better have tested your list 30 times THAT WEEK against everything you could find and no what your going to do verse anything else your likely to face. Is that just me? Am I alone here?

As for constructive okay, here's what I think would work better for what your intending. Now the assumption I'm making here is that people are complaining about AirCav Guard? I don't really see someone dropping 555 points into a squadron of Leman Russ variants as an issue in 2k...I mean really they aren't scorring units and you can pop a LR right? And really you can't take away the ability to squadron up Hydra's, they are dirt cheap and take a heavy slot. Hell nerf Vends, I might just take 3 squadrons of 3 hydras and laugh Smile

Right suggestion sorry, side tracked. Happens in my old age, mind wanders SQUIRREL!
Special scenario, one round. I have some ideas but would like your input first. And you have to remember, this has to be fair. Kinda DB to target just one army for the beat stick but we let Lash Sorc lists and crud romp around with no down sides. What this does is forces the player to know how to adjust to the game being played and not rely on Net lists. They have to know how to play their army.

what ever we do i do want to make the game more fair and i don't want to target IG , i wanted to address all the classic ard boys lists, you can pm me if you had a scenario idea and wanted any input, and if you wanted to you can get involved in constructing the errata we are discussing producing
Back to top Go down
Jonny



Posts : 155
Join date : 2009-08-16
Age : 24
Location : Glen Burnie

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:04 pm

TimW wrote:
Problem is, people don't adjust their tactics and strategy to whom they are playing...

Well in a tournament you can't just adjust your army to who you are playing against, you have to make a list that is either well balanced enough to take on all armies, or a min-max list and hope you don't go up against the paper to your rock. Again, this might just be my ignorance talking, but I find it hard to believe that you can make an army list in every single army that can go up against almost every other army in the game and have a chance at winning.
Back to top Go down
Sorrow



Posts : 53
Join date : 2009-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:05 pm

Hi Smile

First thing, the nerdrage in this thread is hilarious. Brent, I didn't know you had it in you.

Second, artax is gay

Third, artax is also right.
A couple of loaded words have been thrown around a lot in this thread, overpowered, and cheese, to name a couple, without actually stating what qualifies these terms.

As a gamer, I don't really believe in cheesy, overpowered lists. There are strong, nasty lists and there are weak lists, sure. However there is a counter to literally everything, and just because you ended up bringing a rock army to three guys' paper, doesn't automatically mean that paper is overpowered. It means bring a better list.

I like how Quitter earned his title against Hobby Breaker, and then my good friend Chris brings a very similar list against him and has a good game. Maybe it wasn't the fact that Quitter brought Rock, so much as he wasn't a good player and had no idea what to do against Vaden.

I agree that a good enough and smart enough player can overcome slight disadvantages in lists. You make it sound like any moron can roll up a leafblower list and easymode to victory - but I would say that is not the case. Also I would agree that the IG list is no more overpowered than any other 5th edition codex. If you've been having trouble, maybe you've just been doing it wrong.

Anyways. Let the nerdrage continue.

-Leigh



Last edited by Sorrow on Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Sorrow



Posts : 53
Join date : 2009-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:12 pm

Also, sorry to double post but on a slightly different note:

I believe that comp tournaments are fine, as they test a general's abilities to play with what's available in a more limited setting instead of just bringing what they would always bring. It's still a tournament, and as such it's still about winning, and you can't/shouldn't pretend otherwise.

Brent, you mentioned that comp scores are subjective to the judge reading the list, there is an easy fix to that. When you advertise the tournament, use an objective scoring checklist.

__ more points spent in troops than in other catagories
__ no triplicates in heavy support, elites, or fast attack
__ no unit over 25% of the armies total points cost

or give points assignments like:

HQ: 15%
Elites: 15%
Troops: 40%
FA: 15%
HS: 15%

There are ways to do it that aren't subjective, and the two i suggested certainly aren't perfect, just what i came up between MW2 games.

-Leigh
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:33 pm

Sorrow wrote:
Also, sorry to double post but on a slightly different note:

I believe that comp tournaments are fine, as they test a general's abilities to play with what's available in a more limited setting instead of just bringing what they would always bring. It's still a tournament, and as such it's still about winning, and you can't/shouldn't pretend otherwise.

Brent, you mentioned that comp scores are subjective to the judge reading the list, there is an easy fix to that. When you advertise the tournament, use an objective scoring checklist.

__ more points spent in troops than in other catagories
__ no triplicates in heavy support, elites, or fast attack
__ no unit over 25% of the armies total points cost

or give points assignments like:

HQ: 15%
Elites: 15%
Troops: 40%
FA: 15%
HS: 15%

There are ways to do it that aren't subjective, and the two i suggested certainly aren't perfect, just what i came up between MW2 games.

-Leigh

hmmmmm something to think about
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:35 pm

Sorrow wrote:
Hi Smile

First thing, the nerdrage in this thread is hilarious. Brent, I didn't know you had it in you.

Second, artax is gay

Third, artax is also right.
A couple of loaded words have been thrown around a lot in this thread, overpowered, and cheese, to name a couple, without actually stating what qualifies these terms.

As a gamer, I don't really believe in cheesy, overpowered lists. There are strong, nasty lists and there are weak lists, sure. However there is a counter to literally everything, and just because you ended up bringing a rock army to three guys' paper, doesn't automatically mean that paper is overpowered. It means bring a better list.

I like how Quitter earned his title against Hobby Breaker, and then my good friend Chris brings a very similar list against him and has a good game. Maybe it wasn't the fact that Quitter brought Rock, so much as he wasn't a good player and had no idea what to do against Vaden.

I agree that a good enough and smart enough player can overcome slight disadvantages in lists. You make it sound like any moron can roll up a leafblower list and easymode to victory - but I would say that is not the case. Also I would agree that the IG list is no more overpowered than any other 5th edition codex. If you've been having trouble, maybe you've just been doing it wrong.

Anyways. Let the nerdrage continue.

-Leigh


guard are over powered, this is beyond debate, you own an IG army don't you
Back to top Go down
joko12



Posts : 1084
Join date : 2009-09-25
Age : 30
Location : Glen Burnie Battle Bunker

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 9:03 pm

ha
Back to top Go down
Jonny



Posts : 155
Join date : 2009-08-16
Age : 24
Location : Glen Burnie

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 9:15 pm

Damn, that sucks. I kind of wanted to play Guard, but I guess not since it will make me a powergaming douche-bag.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 9:53 pm

Jonny wrote:
Damn, that sucks. I kind of wanted to play Guard, but I guess not since it will make me a powergaming douche-bag.

it''s not having IG that makes you a douche it's taking 6 vendettas that makes you a douche
Back to top Go down
Sorrow



Posts : 53
Join date : 2009-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 10:55 pm

neither of those makes you a douche, it means you know what gives you the most bang for your buck, even if it is a glaringly obvious choice.

No, Brent, I don't own IG, neither do I dislike playing against them. My armies are either Chaos Marines on the Khorne side or Space Marines, neither of which really counter IG that hard.

To me it sounds like you focus too hard on winning, and lose quite frequently (at least to IG) - thus prompting the nerdrage and a foolhardy attempt to fix something that isn't broken.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:04 pm

Sorrow wrote:
neither of those makes you a douche, it means you know what gives you the most bang for your buck, even if it is a glaringly obvious choice.

No, Brent, I don't own IG, neither do I dislike playing against them. My armies are either Chaos Marines on the Khorne side or Space Marines, neither of which really counter IG that hard.

To me it sounds like you focus too hard on winning, and lose quite frequently (at least to IG) - thus prompting the nerdrage and a foolhardy attempt to fix something that isn't broken.

oh sir it is broken, even if you head is to far up you own A** to see that it is, and please note that i am addressing an issue not based on my own experience but my observations as a tournament organizer
Back to top Go down
darwinn69



Posts : 34
Join date : 2009-11-11

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:12 pm

So is this comp tournament going to have a painting requirement?
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:26 pm

darwinn69 wrote:
So is this comp tournament going to have a painting requirement?

there is no comp tournament, this was just a theoretical concept for possible future events, people just get so defensive when ever people want to try to make things different i guess some people just can't handle change
Back to top Go down
BrianF



Posts : 72
Join date : 2009-08-23
Location : Columbia, MD

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:34 pm

People that try to "fix" 40k normally screw it up as bad or worse then GW. We all know that some armies perform better then others, but you have to remember GW is a model company, not a tournament one. If you want more balanced tournaments go play something like M:TG, you don't even have to paint anything.

The only way to make a tournament balanced in 40k, is if everyone is playing with the exact same models.

I would much rather play in games/tournaments that I know what the rules will be, not a game were people arbitrarily decide what is I can/cannot have.
Back to top Go down
Sorrow



Posts : 53
Join date : 2009-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 12:04 am

Brent wrote:
darwinn69 wrote:
So is this comp tournament going to have a painting requirement?

there is no comp tournament, this was just a theoretical concept for possible future events, people just get so defensive when ever people want to try to make things different i guess some people just can't handle change

making things different for everyone is one thing. A blanket change to force orgs for example... However... a house rule nerfing imperial guard is nothing short of stupid.

I know I'm new to these forums, are personal attacks allowed? I just want to know the rules before wading into this bullshit.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 12:10 am

Sorrow wrote:
Brent wrote:
darwinn69 wrote:
So is this comp tournament going to have a painting requirement?

there is no comp tournament, this was just a theoretical concept for possible future events, people just get so defensive when ever people want to try to make things different i guess some people just can't handle change

making things different for everyone is one thing. A blanket change to force orgs for example... However... a house rule nerfing imperial guard is nothing short of stupid.

I know I'm new to these forums, are personal attacks allowed? I just want to know the rules before wading into this bullshit.

i opened up the tread with the intention of finding a fair way to adjust the system to prevent people from running generic ard boys list is all, but people can't help but freak out
Back to top Go down
darwinn69



Posts : 34
Join date : 2009-11-11

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 12:12 am

You know, I could type something up in response, but frankly I don't really care that much. This isn't a discussion, its you trying to make a point and blasting anyone who doesn't agree. I'll just link to someone else due to lazyness:

http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2010/04/perils-of-composition-broken-comp.html

Make your rules, organize the tournament and I'll take a look and decide if I want to show up.

P.S. Nob Bikers suck in 5E. They had a narrow window of about 6 months where no one knew what to do against them and they won everything. Then everyone figured it out and now they loose.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 12:28 am

darwinn69 wrote:
You know, I could type something up in response, but frankly I don't really care that much. This isn't a discussion, its you trying to make a point and blasting anyone who doesn't agree. I'll just link to someone else due to lazyness:

http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2010/04/perils-of-composition-broken-comp.html

Make your rules, organize the tournament and I'll take a look and decide if I want to show up.

P.S. Nob Bikers suck in 5E. They had a narrow window of about 6 months where no one knew what to do against them and they won everything. Then everyone figured it out and now they loose.

the irony here is that i didn't attack any one who didn't attack me first, and if every one knows how to beat biker why have i only lost with them once? and the guy that wrote that, while a fine gentleman, run one of the most broken guard list i've seen at an IC event, it's kinda like having hitler defend ethnic cleansing, no i'm not trying to poison the well here but i'm saying the man may have a bias, and once again, many people see the balancing issues in the game, all the people i know that play the game do anyway, so you people that hate comp don't have to play, so once again i would ask you to not post if you don't have constructive input not just angry whining about how your not a douche cause you run the hardest list you can

bottom line you people need to chill out, if you don't like an event we run don't play and we can decide if comp events work after we run one, it may be a huge success it may fail but we won't know till we try out some things
Back to top Go down
joko12



Posts : 1084
Join date : 2009-09-25
Age : 30
Location : Glen Burnie Battle Bunker

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:43 am

I dont see why everyone is getting so upset.

Brent if you changed the title to comp in 40k maybe people would not be crying so much.

All Brent is trying to do is have a comp tournament. Its not a big deal. Why is everyone getting so upset. There are tons of comp tournaments all over. Why not try it.

Stop attacking him, and just see what happens. Run a comp tournament in 40k Brent and see what happens you can bet I will be there playing in a comp 40k tournament because I like the game. Even if you don't think that IG or any army is broken if you like the game you will show up.

Otherwise stop crying about it. Like brent Said out of the last like bunch of tournaments most of the players are playing IG and thats fine sweet congrats. But Brent is just trying to make a change. NO ONE has OFFERED ANY input on the intital statement on this post and thats how to run a more fair tournament other then me and Sorrow.

Everyone needs to chill stop attacking him if you don't think there needs to be a balance then shut up no one cares what you think.

Just chill and let other people talk about what the post is supposed to be about. Too many people get way to far off of topic!!!

Go back to the begining ignore all the little internet insults and talk about the real issues A comp tournament if you have nothing postive to say then don't say anything and let things run its course not that hard to do.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:58 am

thank you sir, now to the mater at hand as i see it there are three distinct options here points adjustment, army or unit, rules and adjustment, and forced org adjustment, or there is the comp score but as i see it the keeps a cheese list from winning but not ruining some one else's day and since the point of this event would be to make the game more enjoyable i am in favor of some kind of adjustment
Back to top Go down
Sorrow



Posts : 53
Join date : 2009-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:03 am

I'm sorry, I could not comprehend from this thread that the intent was to brainstorm a comp tournament. If that is your purpose, I would offer ideas for it. From the start of the thread though, it seemed like you were trying to impose your anti-IG prejudices onto people with implied IC house rules. Perhaps more people felt the same way I do.

I would definitely sign up for a comp tournament, I think it's fun to play against different lists than people usually bring. Not to say that the lists in comp tourneys are any weaker, but they are definitely different.

edit:

Also, "fair tournament?" Is that a tournament where every player has an equal chance to win? If that's what you meant, Joko, there is no such thing as certain players will always be better generals, therefor more likely to win, than others. Limiting comps doesn't change the outcome, just the tools used to bring it.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:08 am

my main desire is to run an even that is devoid of your classic arb boys lists that is all, so if you have any ideas on how to have a themed list type event post them here or pm me
Back to top Go down
artax



Posts : 10
Join date : 2010-03-30

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:15 am

The problem here is that the issue isn't so much about Brent wanting to run a comp tournament, but rather a thinly, wait, not-so-much veiled attempt to neuter an army because he takes issue with them.

Which, quite frankly, is dumb. Plain and simple.

Argue it all you want, but crying (and that's really all it is) about IG being OP, is about as pointless as me trying out for a spot in the NBA.

Truth be told, I don't think there IS a way to have an event devoid of the "ard boyz factor." What you think may be the solution to it, I guarantee, will only cause people to get more creative in their list making. Trust me, I've seen it happen.

FAIL Gamers put on a "friendly" tournament with a composition restriction, and I know for a fact that people built lists around those restrictions.

Simply put, people are too crafty for an organizer to even attempt to out-wit them with comp. restrictions.
Back to top Go down
Brent



Posts : 472
Join date : 2009-08-14
Age : 33
Location : hidden

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:19 am

artax wrote:
The problem here is that the issue isn't so much about Brent wanting to run a comp tournament, but rather a thinly, wait, not-so-much veiled attempt to neuter an army because he takes issue with them.

Which, quite frankly, is dumb. Plain and simple.

Argue it all you want, but crying (and that's really all it is) about IG being OP, is about as pointless as me trying out for a spot in the NBA.

Truth be told, I don't think there IS a way to have an event devoid of the "ard boyz factor." What you think may be the solution to it, I guarantee, will only cause people to get more creative in their list making. Trust me, I've seen it happen.

FAIL Gamers put on a "friendly" tournament with a composition restriction, and I know for a fact that people built lists around those restrictions.

Simply put, people are too crafty for an organizer to even attempt to out-wit them with comp. restrictions.

one you must have missed the post about only being positive, and two if comp forces people to be creative i have achieved my goal, that is exactly what i want people to have to make up new lists and think
Back to top Go down
artax



Posts : 10
Join date : 2010-03-30

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 3:23 am

Your reply makes me think of one thing.

\facepalm.

You don't want "boring" 'ard boys list, but rather.. creative ones? Regardless of how cut-throat they are?

That seems counter-intuitive.
Back to top Go down
Sorrow



Posts : 53
Join date : 2009-12-10

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 7:42 am

Brent, try altering the force organization charts.
Back to top Go down
Baneon



Posts : 415
Join date : 2009-09-16
Age : 40
Location : Pasadena, MD

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:15 am

I'm with Sorrow I took this thread as an attempt to house rules IC tournaments against IG players versus Brent wanting to run a comp 40k tourney thus my reaction. I'm vehemently against House Rules as you might have seen, they serve very little purpose other to alienate people away from the hobby and IC should be about getting people into the game not driving them away or confusing them with specialist rules that don't apply to anywhere but our little location.

Is there a comp system for 40k like WPS? Might take a look out there for something to modify instead of trying to build one up from Scratch. There's INAT but I think that's just a FAQ not an actual comp document.

**SCENARIO**
This is what I was thinking but there are obvious glaring holes in it.
-=Saboteurs=-
Your opponent has sent Saboteurs into your base camp and disabled your vehicles, it'll take time to repair the damage but with the advantage gained they've sprung to attack. All non-dedicated transport vehicles are damaged and will not show up on the battle field till the beginning of turn 3 and will deploy like coming from reserves. Due to the difficulty of the saboteurs reaching the vehicles near their squads, dedicated transports are exempt from this rule. Dedicated transport is defined as a vehicle bought as part of a squad, any vehicle bought as it's own force org slot will be affected.
Back to top Go down
darwinn69



Posts : 34
Join date : 2009-11-11

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:54 am

Their is no widely accepted comp system for 40k because most competitive gamers agree that 40k is not so unbalanced that it warrents comp. Austrilla uses some system for all their big events, but most competitive gamers from AUS agree that their system is horrible.

Even without comp, every army has at least one viable competitive build that can win any tournament. The big difference is some older codexes like Dark Eldar have only one build, while newer codexes like space wolves have 4.

If you read the article I posted you'll see that good players will just find a way to get around the comp system and put the most broken thing down on the table anyways. I did that in the fantasy comp system at Adepticon, and MVBrants example was a 40k comp run by another club. Ultimatly comp doesn't fix anything, just makes the more flexable armies better.

That being said, if you insist on running a comp tournament then the only way to do it without unintentionally screwing yourself is to use a well published scoring system to determine a comp score for every army. Then you take that comp score and use it for pairings only, that way people with the stronger armies play each other for 3-4 rounds and have a better chance of knocking each other out.
Back to top Go down
avatar8481



Posts : 733
Join date : 2009-08-13
Age : 35
Location : Games and Stuff

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:14 am

Quote :
That being said, if you insist on running a comp tournament then the only way to do it without unintentionally screwing yourself is to use a well published scoring system to determine a comp score for every army. Then you take that comp score and use it for pairings only, that way people with the stronger armies play each other for 3-4 rounds and have a better chance of knocking each other out.

At that point you're not even really running comp you're just running an accelerated swiss system tournament. You essentially replace player rankings with army rankings and assume (wrongly) that army list correlates to likelihood of victory. Or you conflate player skill with army selection (as Brent has done).

Accelerated Swiss works in Chess (where it comes from) because the only variable IS player skill, it would work in 40k only if you either ignored army list and only ranked player's relative rankings across a large sample size (say a whole summer/year worth of tournaments) or you use army/codex and just accept that it's a terrible proxy for actual ranking.
Back to top Go down
TimW



Posts : 186
Join date : 2009-08-15

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:22 am

Play more games, get more practice, be 100% on top of your game, try new things, be smart, create a balanced and flexible list, deep-strike, outflank, surprise your opponent and those "cheesy armies" that your opponent found on the internet aren't that hot anymore.
Back to top Go down
http://tauofwar.blogspot.com
Baneon



Posts : 415
Join date : 2009-09-16
Age : 40
Location : Pasadena, MD

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:23 am

Comp pairing on the first round then swiss? Seen that done in WHFB.
Back to top Go down
darwinn69



Posts : 34
Join date : 2009-11-11

PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   Fri Apr 09, 2010 9:37 am

I agree, it's just an accelerated pairing system and it's far from perfect. BUT it's better than trying to pretend you are smarter than GW and "fix" a game that isn't really broken. I would post arguments about why comp isn't necessary and flat out bad, but frankly I don't want to get into an stupid internet debate on a stupid topic thats based on a flawed premise.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Balancing 40k   

Back to top Go down
 
Balancing 40k
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 8Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Inner Circle Gaming Club Forum :: Inner Circle General :: Inner Circle General Discussion-
Jump to: