Composition rules

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Composition rules

Post  RickyDMMontoya on Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:42 am

Well, if anyone knows me, and has ever discussed army composition with me, they will know that I am the last person to endorse army composition rules.

That said, the latest results from the UK GT are in, and Daemons have taken 7 out of the top 10 spots:
1st Adam Hall - Daemons
2nd Shane Baxter - Daemons
3rd Will Goodwin - Empire
4th Phil Manwaring - Daemons
5th Fabio Panicucci - Daemons
6th Ben Curry - Dark Elves
7th Michael Biggs - Daemons
8th Lee Khater - Daemons
9th Elia Bonucci - Daemons
10th Joe Sturge - Dark Elves

Also reports from Daemon players at the Chicago GT are that games are over in 30-40 minutes, and the top positions will nearly all go to Daemons. Sure they're overrepresented, but they're way out of the statistical distribution for fair games.

Having played for/against Daemons I think it's obvious to me that the army is at least 50% better than its nearest current competition. As such, I would like to see a return of composition rules to the league (WHO THE HELL THOUGHT THEY WOULD EVER HEAR THAT FROM ME!?) and tournaments.

That said, I don't think a simple "core=good, rare=bad" composition ruleset would be preferable or even advantageous.

I'd like to keep using my Daemons, for at least another league, but I don't want to feel like I'm beating up on retarded kids every game, and when I'm done using my Daemons, I don't want to get tabled in turn 3 by some kid either. I'd like to use this thread to discuss potential/possible composition rules and if there's agreement, institute them for the next league. I'd like to see something perhaps even army specific. Maybe not even composition rules, but maybe even balance changes... The door's wide open in this thread, though I don't know how open Scott and Carson are to instituting something.

What does everyone else think?

EDIT: Chicago GT results:
Forsythe, Alex Daemons of Chaos
Schiltgen, Jeffrey Empire
Moyer, Brian Dark Elves
Bowman, David Daemons of Chaos
Butcher, Michael Daemons of Chaos
Braun, Jordan Empire
Snyder, Frank Deamons of Chaos
Verlinsky, Oleg Vampire Counts
Horstman, Jerrod Wood Elves
Faught, David Vampire Counts

8 Daemon players out of 44 (18%), 4 in of the top 10 (40%).

RickyDMMontoya

Posts : 1124
Join date : 2008-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Composition rules

Post  nathanr on Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:37 pm

I agree with you that there could be some changes made, but it is really tough to determine what is needed. I agree that core does not always equal good and rare does not always equal bad. Take wood elves for example. I could take an entire army of glade guard that would be crappy to play with and against that would be within most composition rules.

I think for the league we need more self-restraint rather than overall rules. For example, if I think that my 2-treeman wood elf army is a bit overpowered, then it probably is and I should consider dropping a treeman from the list in the name of sportsmanship. After all, being champion of the Saskatoon Warhammer League is a pretty crappy title if it costs you the respect of other players.

If that doesn't work we could have opponents judge each other's armies after each game, but that doesn't always work either.

Overall I think that right now we have a good group of people who aren't interested in "power-gaming". All my league games so far have been fun and I've had my share of wins and losses. I don't think anyone would accuse me of playing a "stacked" army list but I would probably fail pretty much any composition rules that I have seen. Its the same with most of the armies that I've faced so far.

One last point I should mention is that my 2000 point wood elf army is made up of pretty much all the wood elf models that I own. I don't have a lot of money to spend on Warhammer and composition rules would probably mean that I wouldn't be able to play my wood elf army because I'd need to buy a bunch of new models just to meet someone else's definition of a "fair army".

This turned into a pretty long post and I'm sure that others have equally strong opinions on this matter. It isn't an easy subject but I do think we need to work out a solution that everybody likes (or can at least accept).

nathanr

Posts : 4382
Join date : 2008-06-10
Age : 34
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Composition rules

Post  ScottRadom on Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:49 pm

Well Eric I can't agree more with you about demons. There are items in that book I refuse to take because while I LOVE the feeling of beating up retards I don't think I would like it in warhammer.

So... Where does that leave us? I have tempered my old adage of mandatory comp, and have come to have faith in the current members of the league. However I do agree that we should consider something.

-Maybe a bonus system picked by your opponent? I don't love this idea as it's hunman nature to grade the "fairness" of the army based on the results of the game.

-Scenario's? I love the new HoH scenarios and find a lot of them to balance out the army selection. Having said that those scenarios were also used to run the GT that Eric posted the results from so they may not do the trick.

-The only other thing I can pick might be a return to the old style of %core, rare etc which I think defeats the flavor of some of the armies like.... Demons and High Elves.

Hmm, what to do, what to do.

ScottRadom

Posts : 2156
Join date : 2008-04-18
Age : 40
Location : Saskatoon, SK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Composition rules

Post  RickyDMMontoya on Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:58 pm

Actually the scenarios for the UKGT are a little different, and way bitchin.

I was going to bring them up in another thread, because I want to play them.

You can find the UKGT scenarios here:
http://warhammerworld.typepad.com/warhammer_world_news/files/GW409_ToS_Warhammer.pdf

Maybe I am overreacting, and maybe it's just because I have problems with self restraint, and like to make good armies. I love coming up with awesome armies. It's half the fun to me. Hell my first list wasn't even intended to be hard (having been whipped up before the book came out), but ended up being THE most hated "net-list" for Daemons. I like to run the numbers and take scary shit. That said, I've already dropped the less savoury special characters from my list (goodbye Masque!), but I don't know how far is enough. I certainly have been having great games all league though... So maybe the problems "over there" aren't affecting us "over here."

RickyDMMontoya

Posts : 1124
Join date : 2008-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Composition rules

Post  nathanr on Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:12 pm

Maybe not a %core/special/rare system but rather a game balance thing. Such as "Does your 2000 point army have more than 10 power dice? 15? 17? (I'm looking at you Tzeentch)" or "Do you have more magic items than units?" or "Do you have more shooting units than non-shooting units?" etc.

I think that this type of a composition system might help eliminate certain types of unbalanced armies which focus on one phase only. Honestly I don't think the league needs to implement a composition system as I think we are doing quite well right now, but tournaments may need some sort of rules to help prevent the win at all costs mentality.

I don't think the daemon army as a whole is unbalanced, it just has a few oversights and inclusions which make it easy to turn into an overpowered army. I think it probably has to do with the fact that they put the army together simultaneously with the 40K Daemons and didn't spend as much time as they should have in the playtesting of certain items/combos/etc.

nathanr

Posts : 4382
Join date : 2008-06-10
Age : 34
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Composition rules

Post  Carson on Mon Oct 06, 2008 9:21 pm

Its a tough one. I really like right now that we have basically no rules. Its been working great sofar....that being said I can see some problems in future tournaments. The biggest "dislike" I have with Warhammer is being beaten purely by a "list" and not by game play/ luck etc.

I'll probably have some different thoughts on the matter when were driving home from the Calgary tournament!

I think we should all gear up our magical defences for our armies that were taking.

Carson
Admin

Posts : 2782
Join date : 2008-04-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

comp

Post  Ironwoulf on Tue Oct 07, 2008 2:11 pm

Comp is a hard thing to keep fair for each army as each has its own character. Limiting magic dice would hurt armies where magic makes up for lack of hand to hand capability. Why stop at magic, limit shooting, limit heavy cavalry, limit fear and terror causing units, list can go on and on. Make 50% core manditory, great for the old chaos mortal list as thier core would kick ass out of anyone. I would not be in favor of house rules on comp. If someone is a habitual uber army builder I won't play him.

In the league I have worked at keeping my armies fun for me and my opponet, made up themed armies some which worked , some didn't. I believe if you keep it fun others will want to play you. Remember it is a game, if you want it real we can step into the back lot and have some "fun" until it hurts.

Tournaments are another breed of cat. At the local tournaments I have done the uber army, crushed the enemy and scored zero on comp and rightly so. I didn't do it the next year because "winner in all things at any cost" didn't sit well with me. But one must remeber that it is an event that must have a winner.

Ironwoulf

Posts : 348
Join date : 2008-06-19
Age : 55
Location : Dalmeny SK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Composition rules

Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:20 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum