|
|
Post by redshirt2375 on May 31, 2010 20:46:34 GMT -5
Well I can say from personal experience that if you have a list that tables pretty much everyone you face, you tend to get condemned anyways since you will usually get 0's for the soft scores no matter how friendly/helpful you are or how good your army looks/balanced it is. Best you can hope for is Killiest (also known as Best General  And I never laugh at Tau since I know that they are capable of taking on most armies. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on May 31, 2010 20:51:42 GMT -5
Yeah I'd agree Tau can be very tough to face.... can combine brutal shooting with great mobility...
|
|
|
|
Post by Mythweaver on May 31, 2010 22:58:07 GMT -5
Perhaps Shas 'O D'Narb should post his most recent Tau list. I don't think it will be laughter that breaks the silence....only tears. I'm caught in the middle of things here, in that I really enljoy building well balanced lists. Pitting me as a General against "you" as ageneral. But the two real tournaments I've taken part in have proven that someone will always bring the Min/Max because he or she wants to win models.... .....therefore, the only option I have is to play balanced Monday to Friday, making friends along the way. Saturday and Sunday Tournaments aren't there to make friends though, winning models is the goal. Mind you, I am a long way from having the experience or the models to really be Uber competative. I also think that those of us who are interested in one day being Ultra Competative should work toward that goal as a group, sharing ideas and skills along the way. Shas 'O D'Narb and I have often talked about having a Kingston team who's goal is to travel around earning a name for our gaming community. It definately isn't the sort of thing that everyone will be interested in, it is unlikely to ever go beyond the realm of talk but some of you reading this are nodding your heads in a positive fashion. Anyway I am ranting away with little or no cohesion (alot like my playing style). My point is that we are all going to run into those big bad lists, some will choose to run only those kind of lists but we have to make the best of it and enjoy what we are doing in spite of ourselves.  |
|
|
|
Post by shasodnarb on Jun 1, 2010 0:03:07 GMT -5
Aye, we've talked about that phenomenon before. It's really rather unfortunate and it's also a major reason why I'm against including soft scores in tournaments. You've mentioned numerous times how you felt your scores basically got screwed over by your opponent just because you had a great game.
I know we can't have a judge looking over every table but I think sportsmanship should simply be a prerequisite to playing in the tournament. If a player falls short of this, they get a warning and if they don't smarten up, then they don't get to continue in that tournament. Easy as that. It would be one solution to avoiding the bizarre situation of your opponent - who you may have just comprehensively defeated - being able to assign some highly subjective scores to the great game you just had. Plus, any behaviour (or other) issues would be quickly dealt with.
As far as composition scores go, I'm not in favour of them either (imho, that's why units have points values) but I definitely see the good intent behind including them.
Another way to get around this problem is to include sportsmanship and composition scores for most of the tournaments throughout the year but have a couple that are strictly competitive-minded, i.e., geared towards capturing that "Best General" title.
Heh heh, nah... the list isn't maxed out at all, really. I just built it around 3 core concepts, that's all. I like it, though. Should be fun to play.
|
|
|
|
Post by redshirt2375 on Jun 1, 2010 6:25:29 GMT -5
 That would be what 'Ard Boyz is for |
|
|
|
Post by nekekami on Jun 1, 2010 8:19:33 GMT -5
Speaking of, there better be an 'Ard Boyz again soon, since Tom and I were in Montreal for the last one.
Otherwise, all that's being said here is more of what happens to games when people hear the word "competitive." They do all the research they can, look for the hardest, most annoying way to win a game, and use it because winning is fun. Justification of action is used over and over, generally quoting "it's a competitive game, you're supposed to win." or somesuch along those lines, because it's an entirely justifiable standpoint on how to view a game. To judge someone and tell them yes or no is then seen as being negative, which gets the ball rolling on that slippery slope.
The fact is that people will do this no matter what. Even if the game isn't in a tournament, people will have words to say over everything - hell, I know I'm guilty of it too, especially when it comes to poor performance or just bad luck. I see it in a lot lists that don't change at all, people getting an idea for some rock-solid list and then refusing to step outside the box. There's a lot of middle ground left open, people going to one side of the argument or the other, and being right either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jun 1, 2010 9:51:25 GMT -5
While I certainly don't "enjoy" being tabled (  ) I feel far worse getting a massacre against someone else, even in tournies where it is a "competitive" setting.... just doesn't feel so great, and your opponent doesn't have very much fun having that happen to them.... ...granted in 40k I'm generally the one being massacred more than dishing it out ;D There have been moments though in tournies where I got all caught up in wanting to win... and found the experience very frustrating... and actually very humbling afterwards when I reflected back on it and realized I prevented my own fun (and likely my opponents as well) Actually the less I cared about winning, the better I did....  Now don't get me wrong, I don't enter tournies or play this game wanting to lose every game (that would be a rather strange way to spend a day) and I really like the thrill of a close battle, and when it goes back and forth, and pulling victory out of the jaws of defeat and all that.... but anytime winning became the only goal, I always felt worse afterwards.... I really like a list with "personality" or theme... it makes it fun... sure you can't cover all your bases, and there'll be stuff out there that just wrecks you... No net-list can give you that personal touch to the army, and make you feel like this is your list, your idea, and your army! In the end this is about having fun, hanging out with friends, rolling some dice and pushing around some toy soldiers... or as Bailey always says "who's dolls are winning today?" (despite my assertion they're "action figures" ;D ) |
|
|
|
Post by Mythweaver on Jun 2, 2010 12:43:47 GMT -5
Jon came up with this list after listening to me whine about playing against tooled lists. My first match, in my first Tournament over 500 points, was against a really tough Guard list.
That being said, when I manage to obtain 5 more Walkers and a few more Wave Serpents, either through models won or gifts from my wife (both unlikely); I will build this or a similiar list. Being a competator at a GT or Invite only tournament would be alot of fun.
|
|
That would be what 'Ard Boyz is for
) I feel far worse getting a massacre against someone else, even in tournies where it is a "competitive" setting.... just doesn't feel so great, and your opponent doesn't have very much fun having that happen to them.... 