Nehekhare Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 adepticon lists: http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2013/04/22/tits-tournaments-adepticon-2013-top-16-lists-ton-pics/ there is no CSM primary in the top 16. there is no CSM without necrons as primary in the top 16. there is no CSM that features actual CSM in the top 16 (only 1 model in PA per army: HQ). there are no CSM troops other than cultists in the top 16 (plague zombies once). there are no heavy supportoptions from C:CSM in the top 16 there are no elite options from C:CSM in the top 16. there are 3 baledrakes out of 4 CSM allied detachments in the top 16. discuss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDevourer Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Drakes are really ideal for necron lists at 1850. Cultists and Sorc are just one of the cheaper ways of unlocking it. Quite sad to see the same necron list over and over again really, but hey thats nothing new. Was suprised to see spawn in one necron list instead of a drake, but I can see it working very well with the wraithes. The list with allied Typhus kind of suprised me, I personally don´t think paying the points for Typhus is worth it when you play 35 zombies. It´s a shame that our codex CSM is reduced to non PA units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornywingythingy Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Yeah, I don't think anyones surprised csm didn't shine at adepticon, though the thunderfire spam with double blob did surprise me.... Its a good army though, and nice to see not all crons in the top... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chillin Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 I dont think anyone is surprized Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron_Within Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 It's not really a comment on the weakness of CSM's Codex (though there are many) I think it's more a comment of how bent Necrons are; 9 out of 16 lists containing Necrons is tiny bit disproportionate. 4 CSM contributed and lets face it, it's just for the baledrake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nehekhare Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 I think it's mostly a comment about how game design works out. Codices: Necrons and GK. NONE of the 6th ed codices made it exept goatboy's daemons (which got hardcountered by GK) and those baledrakes. what does that mean? are 5th ed codices OP or 6th ed codices UP? if the goal of 6th was to forge a narrative, how did this impact on the efford to create good rules (hint: the goal was to sell miniatures)? Seen many ground vehicles? one of those lists had razorbacks, one was Orks and one was DEldar. Flyers. flyersflyersflyers. everything else in thise game is just there to die more slowly than the other guys, even the beasts. line up, roll, take off. who cares as long as you own the minis. there is no game left of 40k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenith Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 All this shows is that those that really want to win tournaments go with the armies that the internet percieves as the most powerful, and won't risk trying to win with another army considered sub par. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellios Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 All this shows is that those that really want to win tournaments go with the armies that the internet percieves as the most powerful, and won't risk trying to win with another army considered sub par. In the end a lot of it is down to luck, but saying that people just use net lists out of fear is like saying people just use FW for perceived advantage. A good general doesn't need to use net lists if he has a good army. In fact having an army people are not expecting him to have will help him. While some players might use net lists as crutches, good players don't need to. If good players are using those lists, they probably are better against the meta than most other lists. I would be interested in seeing how many armies of each faction entered the tournament and how well each faction did compared to its representation. If 75% of the competitors were running Necrons... then maybe Necrons aren't that good. If 10 out of 12 Necron players placed in the top 16... Then Necrons are probably pretty powerful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nehekhare Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 I would be interested in seeing how many armies of each faction entered the tournament and how well each faction did compared to its representation. If 75% of the competitors were running Necrons... then maybe Necrons aren't that good. If 10 out of 12 Necron players placed in the top 16... Then Necrons are probably pretty powerful. http://www.adepticon.org/?page_id=5838 31/233 Necrons, 18 top 25% (15 primary), only 8 not top 50%(!) 31/233 GK, 11 top 25% (9 primary), 5 bottom 25% 48/233 CSM, 18 top 25% (9 primary), 12 bottom 25% best CD: 6 best DA: 20 take a look at the BOA result if you want to know how CSM (and Necs) fare when there is AA for everyone. this is not about what the internet thinks, but how it performed on the tables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verythrax Draconis Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 I think that it proves that the 6th ed is meant to tone down the power level that was set up way to high in the 5th. But incredibly I'm getting very positive about the 6th codices, since this time they are coming fast, and despite the fluff disrespect and some plain design decisions, I believe the game will be more balanced this time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Father Ferrum Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 there is no game left of 40k. Come play Dystopian Wars with me. It's everything 40K used to be. . . you know, fun and action-packed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piousservant Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 This is why I've never bother with tournaments. 40k can be fun but it really isn't designed for that kind of play. On the other hand, introducing some limitations can make a big difference. THIS is a good, fun tournament. Haven't crunched the numbers but I think there is a little more variety at the top... ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nehekhare Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 I think that it proves that the 6th ed is meant to tone down the power level that was set up way to high in the 5th. [...] I believe the game will be more balanced this time around. they tried that at the beginning of 5th, too. didn't work and left us with the blandest CSM/DA codices ever. the game can be balanced on any power level, it's just that static balance contradicts miniature sales. Also, imho those neat little tricks and imbalances make the game interesting, otherwise it's just a roll-off (like now). Come play Dystopian Wars with me. It's everything 40K used to be. . . you know, fun and action-packed. the setting sure is interesting. gotta have a deep look at the rules, albeit florida may be a bit far for me ;) This is why I've never bother with tournaments. 40k can be fun but it really isn't designed for that kind of play. always that fun vs win argument :( it's not mutually exclusive! 40k is a game about competing/opposing armies. you play it by trying to win. that is what is fun about it. beer and pretzels don't need miniatures. tournament play is the extrapolation of game design. good design makes for good fun. bad design makes for ownage of plastic miniatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piousservant Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 always that fun vs win argument :( it's not mutually exclusive! 40k is a game about competing/opposing armies. you play it by trying to win. that is what is fun about it. beer and pretzels don't need miniatures. tournament play is the extrapolation of game design. good design makes for good fun. bad design makes for ownage of plastic miniatures. As I saw it put once, the objective of the game is to win. The point of the game is to have fun. And I'm not saying that there is only one way to have fun, or a "right" way to enjoy the game. But it's tournament players themselves complaining the game isn't fun, because of balance issues, etc - not people who are busy playing campaigns and fluffy armies. Massive generalisations abound, but hopefully you see my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nehekhare Posted April 24, 2013 Author Share Posted April 24, 2013 As I saw it put once, the objective of the game is to win. The point of the game is to have fun. exactly my point, absolutely agreed: 40k is about having fun by achieving objectives. it's also a game, which is played by rules - how you win and have fun. the better the rules, the more fun. balance issues are a consequence of bad game design, not tournament play. doesn't matter for fluff because you don't need rules for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDevourer Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Aye, as long as the design is flawed it will be abused, logically. Even by those who wouldn´t call themselves tournament players. My big hope is that at some point the game will reach a mutually beneficial point and that the balance issues are minimal. Probably too much, I know... Games Workshop just isn´t good at balancing. Maybe they should look at getting some new people to design codices. Or maybe a more serious group of test players. It just feels like they´re blind when looking at some of the rules they release. And Imo tournaments are really fun =). Especially with the right people. It has to be challenging, but also fun to interact with your opponent. It´s why I usually only play team tag tournies, more people to chat to during game, and much more taunting going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Goatboy got realy lucky that he run in to only one army with proper anti psyker defense[and from what I saw he lost the game too]. his army is very nice , but am too much of a chicken to play one like that when there are runes taffs and eldarr unes in the game . All in all a very fun event , tons of free stuff , awesome people , the tables were realy nice [loads of space and the chairs were ... lets just say there were made to accomodate a normal human , not the weedy small ones weak chairs can] . the necron are good , because they have it all , speed fire power flyers good melee , when someone adds some psychic defense they become great . After the new FW book becomes legal for UK tournaments I will want to read ton of reports about chaos and how it is doing . t7 multi wound str 9 ap 2 guass interceptors that work without crew ? yes please. right now the only "safe" chaos army to play with is zombi wave and zombi is not an army I would like to play against or with. Builds that let you play legal stalling lists are always bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 All this shows is that those that really want to win tournaments go with the armies that the internet percieves as the most powerful, and won't risk trying to win with another army considered sub par. There is more truth in this than most people are willing to admit. I don't even bother listening to people telling me what I 'should' bring... what wins, what they read on the internet. I win all the time with stuff I have no business winning with. Creativity and people who really know their stuff is easily the most dangerous thing to come up against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 Prot you just insulted everyone who plays tournament and posts on any forum about w40k. You realy think that people that actualy play this game just for the game take their knowladge from what they read on the net ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDevourer Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 To be honest... I´m sure a lot of people came up with those lists without looking into the interwebz. It´s not hard to see what is powerful in the chaos dex and finding synergy isn´t either. But the again this is coming from a player in a group of competetive players. Maybe it´s different for the "average" gamer. But I read the codex once or twice and think of exactly the same net lists I see in the next couple of days. Then I read it again and find another "net list" that is played a few months later. Saying that everyone is just playing net lists because of being lazy or because they can´t be creative by themselves is a bit harsh don´t you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornywingythingy Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 Yeah, for a start Josh Roberts list (cron with csm) has been developing for ages, he was one of the first playing cron wraithwing/air hybrid in the UK, is part of the uk etc team, and considered one of if not the best player in the uk atm. Seriously, this guy is sometimes on the 40kuk podcast, listen to him talking about his tournaments, his thinking and way of gaming, well its way beyond my abilities, I don't consider myself bad at 40k, but this guy is awesome. Tony kopatch is the same, considered brilliantly gifted at the game.... And tbf who would have put marines with guard to do so well at adepticon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Father Ferrum Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Yeah, I watched Kopach's games at Adepticon, and I was amazed at what he was bringing. I'm no pushover at this game, but the list building concept for that army must have come straight out of left field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 If someone wants a good lists he has to forget playing any faction . there is no factions or codex in an edition with ally , just armies which are good and bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornywingythingy Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Yeah, I watched Kopach's games at Adepticon, and I was amazed at what he was bringing. I'm no pushover at this game, but the list building concept for that army must have come straight out of left field. Yeah, one of the 11th company guys had played kopatchs earlier versions of that list, on the run up to adepticon, and said how good it was, still surprised me though . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nehekhare Posted April 28, 2013 Author Share Posted April 28, 2013 I'm just happy that wraithwing armies do so well because I really like the concept of it. Josh's list is the most elegant thing I have seen in a long time. It inspired me to convert up more mechanical horrors and add some cult of the void dragon hereteks - which is exeptional considering my abysmal attitude towards the game atm. perhaps I might even finally overcome my dislike for turkey and convert something suitingly necron-c'tan-cthuloid from it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.