You might have seen this thread over on Warseer about the composition system used in tournaments in Sweden. It makes pretty interesting reading and while I don't agree with some of the choices it was interesting to look at how my lists line up. Personally, I don't think 40K really needs a comp system as its scenario based nature means it does lean towards self balancing anyway.
The premise is that you start with 100 points (for a 1500 point list) and you gain or lose points based on what you have in the list, with a lower score indicating an tougher list. This post puts your result in a better perspective than the original post:
100pts - put the Care Bears away. This is a wargame.
75-99 - This isn't an episode of the A-Team - you are allowed to kill something.
50-74 - now you're getting there. Bit light yet though.
25-49 - You're there, balanced and competetive.
0-24 - Competetive
(-25)-(-1) - whoa, calm down a bit
(-50)-(-26) - This isn't Rambo 5 you know
(-51) or lower - Wowsers, kill count of Hotshots, Part Deux!
Working out my scores, my current Nurgle CSM list comes in at 29 points which is in the right area looking at this. My Witch Hunters list faired worse at 14 points which puts it in the competative area. WH get stung for having Exorcists, but given they're the best Heavy Support choice, I can't see you're going with anything else.
Just for fun, I ran a couple of my fluffy lists past it. My planetary strike force list from Warpstone Flux's May contest came in nice and fluffy at 75 points, whilst my all Inquisitorial force came in at 52 points and that's a 1750 point list.
Once you have the score, in the tournament it would be compared with your opponents score and you'd or they would gain additional tournament points.
3 comments:
Interesting,
My DH army with it's allied guard comes in at 41, without using a single Grey Knight.
Thanks for this post, I'd always written my guys off as pure fluffyness, rather than cometetive :)
I do not really like this system but I scored 45 points with my 1750 of space marines.
...the hell?
I can't say I think much of this 'comp' system. Want your tacticals to be mobile? Eat penalties.
My last marine army was about a '0' for Vulkan Marines w/ double-raider TH/SS joy. Is it a nasty list? Yes. I guess they got that right.
On the other hand? I think they got some armies just plain out of whack. I mean, Necrons, penalized for each unit of WARRIORS? Come on. If you want to max out on heavy destroyers and have a chance in hell of killing armor, -42 if I'm doing the math right? They're more dangerous than Land Raiders?
Same goes for the IMperial Guard list. -10 for Yarrick? I mean, seriously, Yarrick? Who has to run solo to not die in sweeping advances, and has a might powerfist to his name? A single maxed-out Psyker Battle Squad is worth -45? Which beats out multiple Land Raiders? I didn't know powerfists in vets were that cool, either. I also didn't know that Rough Riders were actually competitive, period.
My last Eldar mech-heavy list (with no Seer Council, mind you) clocked in at about -65, or '35' on their scale.
I could go on, but this comp system is just laughable, period. I understand that you might want to control stuff, but they have a bizarre opinion of what's actually competitive, and the weights seem almost arbitrary. I mean, seriously, a vet guardsman's powerfist is AS DEADLY as the two meltaguns his unit can carry? Come ON.
Post a Comment