AAR for Local Tournament (17 NOV)

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Warning Frater! This thread became really long and rambling... read wall of text at own risk.

 

I will be doing a separate thread this week in the Liber Victorum subforum with extremely detailed Battle Reports of all three games. I'll be writing them up in my full Observe-Orient-Decide-Act format, so I'll be doing them up one at a time and will probably take me over a week. I have one photo from each game showing deployment so you can see the terrain elevations, and then I'll be recreating each game through screen-captured Vassal. Top-down recreations make games far easier to follow when describing the OODA process.

 

But...this thread is the WHAT thread. The batrep thread will be the HOW thread. Also, the batrep thread will be descriptive without opinions. But this-- this thread is the Editorial page, my catharsis where I'll throw my opinions around like they matter or something :P . This thread will allow me to provide coverage of how the Tourny was laid out, some feedback, and unfortunately, some sour grapes about the whole experience. Hopefully some Tournament Organizers will read this After Action Review and avoid some of the things I'll be commenting (whining? :D ) about.

 

First off, I had a fun time. That needs to be said. Of all the other lower comments I've got, I do have to say that The Most Important Rule was in full effect, and I did enjoy myself thoroughly. Considering my friends and I drove 3 hours to get to this Tourny, I'm pretty glad about that.

 

So on to some details. The Tournament was 20-players (advertised as 16-slot bracket but they upped it) on 10 tables at 1500pts level. I have a thread over in the army list subforum prepping for this event since it's my first 6th Edition tournament and I was very excited about it. I've played in many local tournys in 5th but have been too busy since 6th arrived. This is the list I decided on, with tons of great help from the B&C Frater-- the thread really hashes through an examination of Blood Angels at the 1500pt level without using Mech.

 

250: Mephiston

125: SW Runepriest- JP

90: Sanguinary Priest- JP, Axe

225: 10 Assault Marines- 2 MG, Axe (aka Black Squad)

210: 10 Assault Marines- 2 MG (aka Red Squad)

220: 10 Grey Hunters- 2 PG, Axe, Banner, Pod

150: 3 Attack Bikes- 3 MM

230: Stormraven- TLMM, TLAC, HBs

 

Now what was interesting was the field of other players who came to play. These are listed in no particular order except by how I remember them, but here's what people brought:

1. BA-SW (Me of course)
   
2. Blood Angels-IG (My Friend)- 2 ASM (1 Pod/1 JPs), 2 Devs, IG Full-Blob w/Primaris+Librarian, ADL-Quad
   
3. Chaos Daemons- 5 Flying Princes, 2 min-Flamers, 3 min-Plaguebearers ;)
   
4. Chaos Daemons- 24 Flamers/ 24 Screamers :) whatever man, go home. No one wants you here.
   
5. Necrons- 4 Flyers, Wraiths, 2 AnniBarges
   
6. Necrons- 1 Flyer, 60 Infantry, 1 Spyder, 1 Scarabs
   
7. Tyranids- Swarmlord, 2 Tervigon, Lots of Gargoyles, misc small gribblies
   
8. Tyranids- Flyrant, 2 Tervigon, 2 Gants, 2 Yrmgarls, 2 Trygon
   
9. Chaos Marines- 2 Heldrake, 2 Slaanesh Sorcs, NoiseMarines/MoS CSM to fill
   
10. Chaos Marines- 9 Nurgle Oblits, 4 Rhinos w/Plague Marines
    
11. Orks- Not sure compo, looked hybrid-ish? (Tons'OBoyz+Kans+Lootas)
    
12. Tau- 2 Stealthsuit units, 1 HQ+Crisis Suit Unit, ADL-quad, Firewarriors to fill (maybe Broadsides? unsure)
    
13. Space Wolves- 15 ML Long Fang, ADL-Quad, Grey Hunters to fill
    
14. Blood Angels- Raven, LR Redeemer+Termies, Biker-Librarian, some ASM, other stuff unknown
    
15. Blood Angels- Dante, 3 Priest, Raven, some ASM, other stuff unknown
    
16. Salamanders- Vulkan, Thunderfire, Vindicator, other stuff unknown
    
17. Salamanders- Vulkan, LR Crusader+AssaultTermies, 1 ASM, 2 Tacs, other stuff unknown
    
18. Imperial Guard- Vendetta, some Heavy Weapons? other stuff unknown
    
19. Eldar? Honestly can't remember
    
20. Honestly can't remember
    

So an interesting spread. I'm frustrated I don't know who the last two armies are, I seriously didn't see them and obviously they didn't make a big impact. I somehow remember seeing at least one Eldar mini randomly, so they were there potentially, but the last one is a total mystery. I'm surprised beyond all belief that Grey Knights didn't show up, but to be frankly honest, that final Army might have been GK and I just didn't see them.

 

Now one thing that made me really laugh was the Flamer-Screamer spam dude. During downtime between matches nobody was talking to him, nobody was even friendly to him. I'm not sure if he was local or not, but to show up to a local tourny where generally 'the point' is to have tough competitive games while still making friends. Grand Tournaments are where you'll never see your opponents again, so there's no need to curtail your listing so really anything goes for those. But this dude obviously was trying to slam the auto-win button as hard as he could. Too bad he only placed 2nd (won all three of his games of course, but I'll get to scoring in a moment). Bottom line is that the dude did not meet any friendly faces that day. I don't feel sorry for him either lol.

 

The rest of the spread seems about par for Local Tournament. The guy running 5 Flying Princes was really friendly and an A+ player, so I talked a lot with him about good stuff like the current state of 40k meta. He wished me the best of luck, since he admires Blood Angel players who haven't abandoned their Codex just because 6th Edition hit them really hard. So that felt pretty good to me, and we got to chatting about how melee armies face uphill battles in every game nowadays. He likes the underdog mentality just as I do (he runs Eldar also) but he's prepping for a GT and so hence he was trying out the 5 FMC list. Ah well- he got 5th place overall (only loss was against Flamer-Screamer spam Guy! lol)

 

Now here's where my sour grapes come in.

 

There was no list turn-in to the Organizers. And there was no oversight to even make sure players were using the same list in every match. Now, normally this is fine since common Tournament etiquette says you bring a mobile-sideboard with the models for your list. No extras. Nothing should be with you except the stuff on your list. Well see this is where I take beef. Because the Chaos Marine player with 2 Heldrake also had 2 Maulerfiend and a bucketload of other minis on his sideboard. Also, he had a thick binder full of lists with him rather than the simple triplicate copies of the one list you're using that day. The final nail in my suspicion logic is that my friend who drove 3 hours with me played against this guy. My friend gave him his list (BA-IG all Infantry) and somehow amazingly that guy was running a dual Drake, Noise Marine spam, Brand-of-Scalathrax pure-Ignores Cover anti-infantry list. The guy's list was so perfect for beating my friend that he surrendered on Turn3. All the while two unused Maulerfiends and misc other CSM sat on his sidetable 'unused'. Now, I cannot confirm the guy changed his list when he played his other opponents-- I wasn't aware of his shenanigans until after the tourny talking to my friend about him since I certainly did notice the Fiends and asked about them.

 

Who knows? Maybe the guy was on the level. But if it looks like a fish and smells like a fish... Unforgivable.

 

For the matches, it was Rulebook Missions. A win gave 15pt, a Tie gave 10pts and Loss was 7pts. Warlord/Linebreak/FirstBlood only factored to decide your Win-Tie-Loss. After determining your Win, then each mission had 3 additional bonus points conditions, which as you'll see, are pretty random and gave unexplained bonuses for things you couldn't control well. Mostly because the TO did not publish the missions ahead of time, he refused saying it'd be a surprise.

 

So Mission 1 was Purge the Alien on Vanguard Strike deployment. Random Game Length, not to exceed 6 turns however.

• +1 Bonus if you have more Scoring Units in the Enemies Deploy Zone at end of game.
  
• +2 Bonus if you kill a Scoring Unit while Night Fight is active.
  
• +1 Bonus if you brought a Fortification, or you destroy a Fortification.
  

So what happens if neither you nor your opponent have a Fort!? That's just bad Tourny design, I mean even if you table your opponent you won't get that bonus point (yes, they ruled it that way). Disadvantage with no way to affect it is stupid. Also, what if you never even have Night Fight show up? Bad bad bad design, random bonus points that you have no control over is just terribad.

 

Mission 2 was Emperor's Will on Dawn of War deployment (why!? Such a bad Tourny mission... gah) set at 6 turns flat.

• +1 Bonus for destroying Opponent's highest point Unit
  
• +1 Bonus for your Highest Point Unit surviving
  
• +1 Bonus if you have more Scoring Units in the Enemies Deploy Zone at end of game.
  

While Emperor's Will might just be the most boring and terrible Tourny mission ever, at least the Bonus Points are reasonable. I can't tell you how many Wins in the tourny were decided by First Blood in this round though (bad mission is bad).

 

Mission 3 was Relic on Dawn of War set at 6 Turns flat. Relic unable to be placed in terrain, ask TO to shift any center-terrain (this was required on several tables...)

• +1 Bonus for Killing Opposing Warlord
  
• +2 Bonus for a Heavy Support within 3" of Enemy's Objective
  
• +1 Bonus if you have more Scoring Units in the Enemies Deploy Zone at end of game.
  

Dawn again!? Why no Hammer&Anvil? It's Relic anyway!... blah fine ignore what is now a third of 40k gaming. Not to mention Relic is the other horrible idea for a Tourny Mission. Seriously- the mission is boring. There's no strategic play. Giant fraggin bonus for Player who goes first. 8/10 times it's simply a freakin smash in the middle, I hate this mission with a passion even though I'm really good at it. Also, the TO retracted that +2 bonus because he said originally the mission was supposed to be Big Guns? (strange though because BigGuns has no Enemy's Obj, just D3+2 Neutral Obj... but whatevs) So he retracted that bonus since The Relic is not an Objective. It is simply a thing whose holder gets 3 VP (so you can't even contest it when within 3" of holder).

 

Ok well I've got to get sleep, but I'll be adding my actual 3 matches in the Reply. I'll tell you their lists, who won and roughly why, and some loose thoughts but I'll be saving the details for the Battle Report thread.

 

I'll end on a positive note: I had fun, I did. I'm sure my sour grapes make me sound like an ungrateful WAAC player, but sincerely I'm not. I just have a deeply ingrained sense of fair play. I can't really have fun unless I feel its a level playing field. And 20-players is a touch too big to run as loosely as the TO did in this case. No list turn-in is my biggest gripe... because it also means there was no list validation to ensure legality and correct points cost. MORE ON THAT LATER......

[Ushtarador]

Looking forward to those reps! :) Sounds like a very random tourni, can still be fun though if the people are friendly and there's not really anything on the line.

The daemon-dude obviously didn't get the point and the chaos player sounds like a total douche, why can't those people stick to online pc games or something like that :/

[Godhead]

Sounds like a lot of sour grapes. I also enjoy the daemon hate. I hope you managed to have a decent time at this event though.

[Sokhar]

I'll agree with most of your sour grapes. Those mission bonuses are cracktastic, just completely random and arbitrary. Not a fan. The Chaos player with the extra models being lugged around is odd. I wouldn't rage based on just the information you provided, but its a bit suspect. In his defense, with no list turn-ins (and seriously, what kind of tournament does that?), its possible he was still deciding on his list the morning of the tournament.

 

With no Hammer and Anvil, I could go either way on that. If there's limited floor space, I think that's a bad deployment type for a lot of tournaments. Typically tables are right next to each other, or with limited room between them, and you really need access to the "head" and "foot" of the table to play that deployment type. Unless you rotate the board (which would have them sticking out really far from whatever they're set upon), that can be problematic. So I'm not surprised a tournament passed on that deployment type. However given how whacky this tournament sounds, I'm not sure that it was really a practical concern that dictated the deployments.

 

The one thing I'll disagree with is hating on the Daemons player. Yeah, its a really nasty list he brought, and probably wasn't much fun to play. But its a tournament. Local or not, you're paying an entry fee to play. For casual gaming and leagues, I can understand frowning on an ultra-powerful list. But if people are putting money on the line (even if its not much), I think anything is fair. I don't feel bad for bringing a tough list, and I'm not going to get mad at someone for doing the same.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Sounds like a lot of sour grapes. I also enjoy the daemon hate. I hope you managed to have a decent time at this event though.

I know I know lots of complaining comments, I'm sad because I do sound like I'm coming across pretty grumpy. Its not because I had bad games either-- in fact all three of my games were pretty excellent. I did have fun and I'd go there again for tourny's in the future-- the meta seemed pretty fun and versatile, about on par for a friendly local tournament. Only those Daemon players brought cheesy lists, although 9 Nurgle Obliterators is pretty unfriendly-- but so is Mephiston (newbie opponents hate Meph so hard), so I ain't gonna critique Composition on anyone but Daemon Spam.

 

Further notes I missed were about the Terrain! Now, every table had plenty of terrain, and it was all well spread out on the tables. It seemed the TO followed the old guideline of 25% of total table surface. Now one thing which was extremely interesting was that the rarest terrain type was Area Terrain-- there were almost no forests or rubble piles or craters or things like that. They were there, but that terrain type was the minority. The majority type was Ruins, followed closely by Line-of-Sight denial Impassable Terrain, which is really weird since that is usually pretty rare type usually. There were plenty of styrofoam 'hills/plateaus' which were 3" per-level, so yet more LoS denial available that way. And there were no water-features at all on any table, but that's fairly normal.

 

... The Chaos player with the extra models being lugged around is odd. I wouldn't rage based on just the information you provided, but its a bit suspect...

 

...With no Hammer and Anvil, I could go either way on that. If there's limited floor space, I think that's a bad deployment type for a lot of tournaments...

 

...For casual gaming and leagues, I can understand frowning on an ultra-powerful list. But if people are putting money on the line (even if its not much), I think anything is fair. I don't feel bad for bringing a tough list, and I'm not going to get mad at someone for doing the same.

Yea Sokhar you are right, that CSM dude could have been legit, I'll just never know. The fact that he brought a list with Zero that right Zero anti-tank in it versus my friend makes it slightly worse. Who brings an Army with no AT and all of its shooting Ignores Cover? I mean he could have been playing against the meta or banking on some such or another, trying to play such a Nemesis List. Not impossible, just improbable. In my mind I'm sure I'll never know if he was actively cheating or not.

 

I understand about the Hammer and Anvil. Some of the guys did discuss the limited floor-space argument, so I feel you're probably right. I guess I'll just ignore that deploy-type in my playtesting when preparing for a Small Tournament in the future.

 

I apologize if it sounds like I'm mad at the Daemons player. I'm not mad at all, merely resigned to the fact that he enjoys the game differently than my friends and how We enjoy the game. Not being a sore loser, not at all. I have no hard feelings whatsoever if he wants to spank me with no chance to fight back. But he can't expect me to befriend him afterwards. Army Composition is Pandora's Box. If you like to win, then winning is actually pretty easy. But making good Friends is usually better than store-credit as a trophy. It's about your values as a person, and Why You Play the Game.

 

I've read David Sirlin's online book (link: http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/prologue.html). But there comes a point where you have define yourself as a person and as a player. Myself, I know I will never be anything higher than a competitive level Scrub by Sirlin's definition. And I'm completely fine with that.

 

Sirlin says True Champions have no fetters, no boundaries. He espouses that all game systems are subject to Total War.

 

However, Sirlin is only a genius when it comes to winning at gaming. His book is amazing, if you really want to dedicate your life to becoming Top Tier of any given gaming system. But I've heavily studied Military History and as a student of Actual War (as opposed to just games), I can tell you something.

 

HOW you Win is just as important as Winning at all.

[Morticon]

Gonna throw in my 2 cents for the love of Emperors Will.

 

Its a little more difficult now in 6th on account of first blood, but personally this was my favourite mission in 5th. Its still one of my favourites for 6th. This mission forces you to either play for the win, or settle for the draw. In big (5/6game) tournies, you can get away with it, but for 3 game tournies you just cant settle. I believe this type of mission helps create greater meta-balance by favouring mobile/aggressive armies, and disadvantaging static gunline/alpha armies. And for that, I'm sure thankful. If you play to a draw, or are unable to dislodge an opponent from their holding position then that may be a list design issue. Alternatively, positioning of your objective is SUPER important. The amount of times ive just seen people put them as far away from each other as possible is crazy.

Finally, if you come up against the alpha army from hell, and there is no way to get to your enemy without being blown into smitherenes, or youre up against a death star unit you have no way to beat, then a mission allowing you to hunker down and still pull a draw is a blessing. I really feel this is the mission that separates the men from the boys in gaming terms. Though, as noted above, I think now with the 6th ed bonuses we need to get first blood or make sure we get the other objectives whilst keepin the warlord alive

[Sokhar]

I hate Capture and Control. but part of that probably owes to the local Deathwing player that loves to play for the draw. He'd infuriate me in 5th ed, just stacking terminators on top of his objective and obligating me to kill every last one of them. I sorta agree that you kinda have to play ballsy to win this mission (or at least in 5th you did), and I always play for the win. So it was always "Go big or go home."

 

It vexed me in 5th because it was a major challenge, but one that I didn't mind much. I really don't like the mission at all in 6th because First Blood is such an overwhelming advantage. If you get FB, then the game is largely decided for you, barring your opponent handing your rear to you on a platter. Keep your warlord alive, and it doesn't really matter what the other guy does. Or kill his, and then it doesn't matter at all. Either play to block linebreaker or play to get it as well. Just get First Blood and play for the draw. If you don't go first or you have either a weak shooting army or a poor first round of shooting, you're pretty deep in the hole.

 

The addition of even just a single neutral objective would really help in this scenario, even if it were only just 1-2 points. Something so that you had a plan B for if you miss out on First Blood. Otherwise you better play for the slaughter (which is still usually a sound plan, but not a lot of my tournament games end in that result).

[CitadelArmyGuy]

So, onwards for results of Game 1! As I said, I'll be giving my match overviews but during this week I'll be making up the blow-by-blow of all battle.

So first up was Purge the Alien on Vanguard Strike against Tyranids Big-Bugs. His List was hand-written and difficult to read but I went through line-by-line with him to make sure I knew what he had taken.

265: Tyrant- Wings, Hive Commander, 2x Scything, ToxinSacs. Received Iron Arm and Endurance (ie the perfection combo...ouch)

184: 8 Ymgarl Genestealer

171: 7 Ymgarl Genestealer

185: Tervigon- ToxinSacs, Catalyst

185: Tervigon- ToxinSacs, Catalyst

50: 10 Termagant

50: 10 Termagant

210: Trygon- ToxinSacs

210: Trygon- ToxinSacs

So fortune favored the Opponent. Melee Flyrant with Iron Arm and Endurance is the stuff of nightmares for sure, especially for a list like mine who had much of its combat power tied to melee as well. Fortunately, my Runepriest rolled up Prescience and.... Enfeeble. Alright now we've got a game :)

DEPLOYMENT PHOTO:

So as I said, highlights only:

• No Night Fight. Nids player deployed first and went first. Flyrant flies to midfield hiding behind tower.
  
• BA Turn1:
  • GH-Pod kills 8 Gants. Would have been 10 for First Blood but Catalyst gave FnP...
    
  • All my units move away from Flyrant behind the tower.
    

  [*]Nid Turn2:

  • Flyrant fails Iron Arm but gets Endurance; Swoops towards Meph since a Glide would leave him 18" away.
    
  • All his reserves arrive, Ymgarls in center and my left flank, both Trygons in center.
    
  • One Ymgarls charge Black Squad killing 3 ASM.
    
  • One Tervigon punishes the GH but they survive.
    

  [*]BA Turn2:

  • Failed to cast Enfeeble on Flyrant.
    
  • Stormraven arrives and deals 3 wounds to Flyrant.
    
  • Bikes shoot remaining 2 Gants for First Blood.
    
  • Mephiston charges nearest Trygon, no powers get through Shadow in the Warp. Meph deals 3 wounds anyway, but no Force Weapon rolls make it through SitW either :( . Trygon deals 3 wounds to Meph.
    
  • Red Squad fully rescues Black squad from Ymgarls.
    

  [*]Nid Turn3:

  • Runeweapon blocks both Iron Arm and Endurance.
    
  • Flyrant Vector Strikes Raven, no damage.
    
  • Far-Trygon moves up.
    
  • Tervigons finish GH, but one has 4 wounds left.
    
  • Mephiston easily pops Near-Trygon (SitW too far away), but then dies to mass rending of other Ymgarls.
    

  [*]BA Turn3:

  • Prescience on Red Squad.
    
  • Stormraven, meltaguns from both Red & Black Squads, and the MM Attack Bikes kill remaining Trygon (All 6 wounds).
    

  [*]Nid Turn4:

  • Flyrant Perils his last wound and dies (No FnP either, Runeweapon had blocked it).
    
  • Tervigons smash drop-pod.
    
  • Remaining Ymgarls charge Red Squad and kill 5 ASM, but lose 3 in return (Prescience Overwatch+Melee helped me) leaving 4.
    

  [*]BA Turn4:

  • Enfeeble on Ymgarls.
    
  • Attack Bikes shoot some Gants.
    
  • Stormraven deals 4 wounds to kill wounded-Tervigon.
    
  • Black Squad fully rescues Red Squad.
    

  [*]Nid Turn5: No Night Fight.

  • Remaining Tervigon and Gants hide in building.
    

  [*]BA Turn5:

  • Red and Black Squad move to midfield.
    
  • Raven hovers, takes 2 wounds from Tervigon.
    
  • Attack Bikes kill some more Gants.
    

  [*]Nid Turn6: Rolls to continue, one more turn. No Night Fight.

  • Tervigon moves to Red & Black squad, fails assault range.
    

  [*]BA Turn6:

  • Prescience on Red Squad.
    
  • Attack Bikes finish Gants.
    
  • Raven and meltaguns from Red & Black squad kills Tervigon.
    

So there you have it folks. Game 1 resulted in a Tabling win for Blood Angels. I would not have Tabled him if he had generated even one new Gant brood from a Tervigon, but since it was Kill Points mission he never did because he didn't want to create new easy-to-kill units.

Even though I won by Tabling, I only received 16 Tourny points because there were no Fortifications or Night Fight involved in our game.

[AngelsWithBaals]

Excellent posts as always, can't wait for the batrep and OODA breakdown.

[spartan249]

:P... no loving for the grey knights... what gives lol.

 

You know, I'm starting to think I should try making a GK list that uses eldar allies (farseer) just to see if I can get away with shutting down all powers on the table (including mine). Could be a hopeless proposition, but I am sick of iron arm flyrants and enemy blessings.

[knife&fork]

Not fond of the daemon bashing going around lately.

 

Complaining about people bringing effective armies to a non comped tournament makes little sense. It's a very predictable mono-build and it will go the way of other 'unbeatable' builds like draigowing, nob bikers, dual lash, seer councils, 'cron airforce.... and so on.

 

Adapt and overcome people.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

Not fond of the daemon bashing going around lately.

 

Complaining about people bringing effective armies to a non comped tournament makes little sense. It's a very predictable mono-build and it will go the way of other 'unbeatable' builds like draigowing, nob bikers, dual lash, seer councils, 'cron airforce.... and so on.

 

Adapt and overcome people.

Except those 'other' unbeatable lists are quite manageable. Also, the above mentioned lists are all appropriately priced (minus Necron Air but they have unique movement restrictions which create an interesting weakness).

 

I feel much of the distaste from Flamer/Screamer spam is due to the fact they aren't innate to their Codex. They are nothing more than a blatant marketing ploy by GW in order to promote their re-scuplted minis. So not only is the combo disgusting via rules on the table, their very origin is unpalatable.

 

Again, I refer to my personal comment about "How you Win" contrasted against Sirlin's theme that "Scrubs will always complain about codes of honor."

 

I proudly proclaim to be a tough Scrub. I fit the perfect definition of Sirlin's definiton of Scrub: (quotes from his free online book)

"The scrub ... usually believes that he is playing to win, but he is bound up by an intricate construct of fictitious rules that prevents him from ever truly competing. These made-up rules vary from game to game, of course, but their character remains constant. ...

This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can’t counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn’t I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. That is true by definition of playing to win. The game knows no rules of “honor” or of “cheapness.” The game only knows winning and losing.

 

A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which one tries to win at all costs is “boring” or “not fun.” Who knows what objective the scrub has, but we know his objective is not truly to win. Yours is. Your objective is good and right and true, and let no one tell you otherwise. You have the power to dispatch those who would tell you otherwise, anyway. Simply beat them.

 

I keep referring back to Sirlin's book because if you really want to win, you have to cast all aspersions aside.

 

You will never complain about Flamer-Screamer spam. You will instead buy them and play as them yourself. You will hop from flavor-of-the-month constantly, with no Codex Loyalty whatsoever.

 

If you want to win, then winning is easy. I agree with everything Sirlin says, because it is logical and brutally honest. However deep Sirlin's genius goes however, there comes a point where you have to draw a line. I'm sure Sirlin has plenty of friends in real life. But he also did not choose 40k as his game of choice, his expertise is Street Fighter but he also describes Chess and Magic the Gathering.

 

 

Because here is Sirlin's comments about choosing a game system. Quote:

"I recommend a game that allows all players to start with equal materials and advantages. For example, a fighting game allows players to start with different characters, but all players are free to choose any character they like before the match begins. ... Seek out games that do not artificially stack the deck, but instead reward only the player-skill that one takes into a game."

 

As you can see, Warhammer 40k is a farce when it comes to true game balance. If you have the most money, you can buy the most OP armies you want. 40k is not a level playing field. Opening up the Allies system helped round the edges off Codex Power-level Meta but still, the average gamer who bought Black Templars (etcetc) in their heyday and can't afford to switch armies is at an inherent disadvantage.

 

I contend that Warhammer 40k is a joke as a balanced Tournament-worthy game. So then why even attend tournaments in the first place? Because Tournaments are like Conventions, which allow us to indulge in our favorite game and bring together like-minded People in one place to enhance enjoyment of the hobby. Face to Face interaction is something this day and age of computer and video gaming severely lacks.

 

So if you are going to Tournaments to be a part of Community, and you are playing opponent's Face to Face, then you should behave like it. Rules of Engagement and Codes of Honor are pretty easy to develop and maintain, if you are a considerate person. Codes of Honor are the death of Playing to Win, and Sirlin is quite correct in that assertion.

 

But are you Playing to Win at a game, or Playing to Win at life? If we attend Tournaments for Community not Balance, then why would you not bring lists which will improve everyone's enjoyment of the game rather than selfishly improving just your own through win-domination?

 

 

I'm ok with losing. I swear I am. And I know why I lose when I do-- because I have an abritrary set of rules which makes me avoid Flavor of the Month. I'm at peace with that.

[Chaplain Admetus]

Those bonus objectives are really unbalanced. If neither you nor your opponent has a fortification, it really leaves you at a disadvantage. Ditto night-fight if you were rolling for it individually before the game.

 

I never really got why some people go all-out to win like those auto-win daemon lists...I'd much rather play and lose a really tight game than steamroll my opponents round after round. Yes, you'll win, but to me at least it would feel like a hollow victory. Heck, look at game 4 from my ToS report last month - lost the game on the very last dice roll and wasn't even mad because the game was epic.

 

Re: the chaos player - I'd be wary of being too quick to judge. Its plausible that he turned up undecided on what list to play so brought all of them, and all his stuff, then decided when he got there. I do that all the time - my standard army is in the top/middle tray of my figure case, but I have 15-odd death company, Dante, Sanguinary guard, a backup tactical squad, a Vanguard squad, Mephy, some plasma cannons, a reclusiarch and 5 more assault marines in there in case I want to mix things up. Ditto vehicles - normally umpteen spare rhinos and a drop pod kicking around. Even George and his friend make the trip occasionally. If its somewhere you play semi-regularly, ask around and see who else played him if you're suspicious.

[DaemonPrinceDargor]

CAG, you are my hero mate. Well said, my thoughts exactly.

[spartan249]

Unlike all those other gimmick based armies, flamer/screamer armies simultaneously have literally codex based weaknesses and a strong match-up against any other equivalent pointed force (if we didn't notice, they are very cheap for their capabilities). This means that they are an all-comers list that requires you to tailor to face it. Really?

 

I don't complain about stupid stuff in 40k often, but I think this instance is justified.

 

GW has never cared about making a truly solid competitive game, and this is the latest symptom. Maybe they're just not wired to understand balance for the sake of sales, but if they really can't see that making a concerted effort to fix all these balance issues first will go a long way in revitalizing 40k...

[Nicodemus Doloroso]

CAG, you are my hero mate. Well said, my thoughts exactly.

 

Seconded. I agree completely.

[DominicJ]

If you want to win, then winning is easy.

 

Thats exactly my view.

My girlfriend, who once, consented to roll the dice during me playing me at Battle Fleet Gothic, could win with (showing my age here) an Empire gunline, a bretonian errantry list, or a draigo wing or whatever.

 

So what exactly have you proved?

That you are capable of reading somone elses list, buying and assembling the models, turning up on the day and rolling the dice?

If that level of accomplishment boosts your self esteem, wow

[Ushtarador]

Usually if inexperienced players copypaste those imba lists from the web for tournaments, they still don't end up winning against "weaker" lists because they simply lack skill and don't really know what to do with their list. I've seen it at the last tourni, my mate faced standard necrons and GK shooty spam with his quite unconventional IG-list (3 Exterminator-Russes amongst other things), and he easily crushed both of them.

The fact that daemons still almost always win with those lists convinced me that they are quite over the top :/

[CitadelArmyGuy]

I apologize for repeatedly quoting from Sirlin, but the man is simply dead-on for so many elements of Tournament Gaming.

 

I would contend that Flamer-Screamer Spam is now equivalent to 'Akuma' in Sirlin's book. Link here for the full thing LINK, but I feel the need to quote to relevant part:

“It’s Too Good!”

 

Only in the most extreme, rare cases should something be banned because it is “too good.” This will be the most common type of ban requested by players, and almost all of their requests will be foolish. Banning a tactic simply because it is “the best” isn’t even warranted. That only reduces the game to all the “second best” tactics, which isn’t necessarily any better of a game than the original game. In fact, it’s often worse!

 

The only reasonable case to ban something because it is “too good” is when that tactic completely dominates the entire game, to the exclusion of other tactics. It is possible, though very rare, that removing an element of the game that is not only “the best” but also “ten times better than anything else in the game” results in a better game. I emphasize that is extremely rare. The most common case is that the player requesting the ban doesn’t fully grasp that the game is, in fact, not all about that one tactic. He should win several tournaments using mainly this tactic to prove his point. Another, far rarer possibility is that he’s right. The game really is shallow and centered on one thing (whether that one thing is a bug or by design is irrelevant). In that case, the best course of action is usually to abandon the game and play one of the hundreds of other readily available good games in the world.

 

Only in the ultra-rare case that the player is right and the game is worth saving and the game without the ultra-tactic is a ten times better game—only then is the notion even worth fighting for. And even in this case, it may take time for the game to mature enough for a great percentage of the best players and tournament organizers to realize that tactic should, indeed, be banned. Before an official ban takes place, there can also be something called “soft ban.” Let’s look at an example.

 

The Two Excellent Examples of “Super Turbo”

 

Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo, or “Super Turbo,” is a wonderful example of bannings in fighting games. As of this writing, the arcade game is ten years old and still played in tournaments. In fact, there are one or two tournaments per week in this game in Tokyo alone. The game is quite mature, and there is a decade of data about the game’s balance.

 

Many versions of Street Fighter have "secret characters" that are only accessible through a code. Sometimes these characters are good; sometimes they're not. Occasionally, the secret characters are the best in the game as in the game Marvel vs. Capcom 1. Big deal. That's the way that game is. Live with it. But Super Turbo was the first version of Street Fighter to ever have a secret character: the untouchably good Akuma. Most characters in that game cannot beat Akuma. I don't mean it's a tough match--I mean they cannot ever, ever, ever, ever win. Akuma is "broken" in that his air fireball move is something the game simply wasn't designed to handle. He is not merely the best character in the game, but is at least ten times better than other characters. This case is so extreme that all top players in America immediately realized that all tournaments would be Akuma vs. Akuma only, and so the character was banned with basically no debate and has been ever since. I believe this was the correct decision.

 

Japan, however, does not officially ban Akuma from tournaments! They have what is called a "soft ban." This is a tacit understanding amongst all top players that Akuma is too good to be played, and that he destroys an otherwise beautiful game, so they unofficially agree not to play him. There are always a very small number of people who do play him in tournaments, but never the top players. Usually a few poor players try their hand at the god-character and lose, which is utterly humiliating and crowd-pleasing. This is an interesting alternate take on the "hard ban" we have in America.

Again, I apologize for parroting someone else's book but he's just so spot on. I couldn't say it better myself.

[spartan249]

Akuma is not an accurate parallel here IMO. Nu-13 from Blazblue CT would be a better parallel of tier level vs the rest of the cast/armies.

 

Akuma was completely broken in that game with basically no true counters. Flamer/screamer can definitely be handled given some layering and damage mitigation tactics, which was the case in BBCT vs Nu and Rachel. Akuma level broken is not a parallel to be used lightly, as it's basically the definition of a completely broken character/army.

[knife&fork]

You will never complain about Flamer-Screamer spam. You will instead buy them and play as them yourself. You will hop from flavor-of-the-month constantly, with no Codex Loyalty whatsoever.

 

No, sometimes you might get stuck with a codex that has gotten so screwed over by the codex creep that wining is very very unlikely, more often than not you just have to adjust your list. Sometimes those changes will be quite dramatic, but if you refuse to change you can't really blame the people who did.

 

People did not stop Nob bikers by playing Nob bikers themselves, they got more missile launchers.

 

We can protest and whine all we like about having to buy more stuff, but that's part of the game. Frankly the change and shifting power is also part of what makes this game fun.

Armies like GK and Daemons have been the whipping boys of 40k for so long and when they get a new dex they are too good and people shouldn't play them? It's like there's an imaginary point where one player thinks the meta was perfect according to them and everyone is supposed to agree....

 

It's a little boring when the best list is a monobuild like screamers/flamers or dual lash of editions past but are you going to say that only a certain amount of players can bring the good list and the rest have to take suboptimal choices? I sure wouldn't.

[CitadelArmyGuy]

It's like there's an imaginary point where one player thinks the meta was perfect according to them and everyone is supposed to agree....

Well, the point is not imaginary. It is very real.

 

And that point is when every major GT is won by a just one certain build.

 

Flamer/Screamers are not there yet, merely by dint of fact that there haven't been many GTs since their WD Update.

 

They do not merit either a soft nor hard ban, not yet. But they're on their way. Time will tell. Also, Time may resolve the issue in the form of a new Daemons Codex. Either way, we'll see.

[DominicJ]

No, sometimes you might get stuck with a codex that has gotten so screwed over by the codex creep that wining is very very unlikely, more often than not you just have to adjust your list. Sometimes those changes will be quite dramatic, but if you refuse to change you can't really blame the people who did.

 

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

I play blood angels, because they are blood angels.

 

I played them using the catch all codex that came with 2nd Ed, I played them when we shared our codex with the dark angels, I play them today, I will play them in the future when there is a "generic" space marine codex and we differentiate with "doctrines", I will play them if I have to write my own codex in Matt Wards blood.

 

If you swap army every six months, based on whats winning tournaments, whatever floats your boat.

 

Armies like GK and Daemons have been the whipping boys of 40k for so long and when they get a new dex they are too good and people shouldn't play them? It's like there's an imaginary point where one player thinks the meta was perfect according to them and everyone is supposed to agree....

 

Suddenly changing to grey knights, because they are winning, and then to deamons, because they are winning, seems, to me, odd.

The Meta has never been perfect, its rarely even good.

 

But, there are two ways to deal with that.

Ignore it, accept that life isnt perfect and that this isnt high stakes poker, its a game, played for fun.

 

Be dominated by it, spend your life chasing the meta, swapping from army to army chasing some fleeting quirk in the rules that will, for the next three weeks, allow you to beat those whos lives arent validated by proving their ability, to, well, chase the Meta.

[Morticon]

Armies like GK and Daemons have been the whipping boys of 40k for so long and when they get a new dex they are too good and people shouldn't play them?

 

Not sure people are suggesting either of those armies shouldnt be played. Theres just something about the literal brokenness that is the screamer/flamer spam combo. Personally I wont begrudge a player for playing it, but its not an enjoyable experience for me on any level - and more importantly it speaks volumes to how poorly designed the codex/units are if those codicies build themselves.

 

Also, Daemons have done exceptionally well in local meta from their release. They suffered towards the end a little with certain DE and GK builds, but otherwise dominated locally- winning national tournaments here, so I dont believe they have been the whipping boys of 40k.

GK- previously DHs - different story there.

[knife&fork]

Well, the point is not imaginary. It is very real.

 

And that point is when every major GT is won by a just one certain build.

 

They do not merit either a soft nor hard ban, not yet. But they're on their way. Time will tell. Also, Time may resolve the issue in the form of a new Daemons Codex. Either way, we'll see.

 

How often has a build like this become better as time passes? It's against the nature of the meta (people need time to adjust) and just as importantly against GWs monetary interests. They try to push models and sometimes they push a little too hard, but in the end they are going to promote sales by releasing new and improved stuff.

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

That there is a huge middle ground between WAAC, codex hopping list of the month and fluffy rainbow lists that suck.

 

I'm not the one arguing that people should switch codex at every opportunity. But you have to change whatever army you choose play along with the meta or you'll get left behind. Hey, I thought it sucked when I had to scrap my DoA list when 6th hit, but now I've found a new way to play that I enjoy and I'm sure that eventually most of the 'retired' units will be useful again someday. And I can still use them 'for fun'.

 

 

Actually I think the fighting game analogy is way off. Game characters doesn't have the modularity armies in this game has, particularly the marine codices. Swapping units and their equipment makes a huge difference in how they play. Not to mention the amount of tactics and different strategies you can chose to employ in an analog environment like the tabletop.