Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Welcome Guest!

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, and so, so much more. It's also quick and totally free, so what are you waiting for?

Chris Tomlin

Destruction showing at Facehammer GT - Debrief

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Sangfroid said:

the other thing I did more with the Mawkrusha and troggoth Hag combo (though really it's not her more just whatever allied shooting you take) was to both shoot a target first together to soften it up for destructive bulk. Didnt always come off by when it did helped get the Krusha into places the opponent wasn't expecting as well as combo charging 3 times over 2 times :-) 

 

Man that's good thinking, I love it!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, it's been great reading all your reports!

One thing did strike me about @Chris Tomlin and @Sangfroid lists - pre GH2017 there was lots of talk of Ironjawz struggling with battleshock. Now we've got Bestial Charisma, Golden Toof, and Boss Skewer.. but no one's using them!

Anyone think there might be situations / lists where they're the better option?

You both didn't take Ironfist, and didn't miss the movement, which is cool. Did you not miss the second artefact either?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soft scores were a contributing factor, which is fantastic IMO and maybe a reflection of why soft scores can be a net positive. They can be one way (among others) of giving a faction like Ironjawz, Nighthaunts, or Soulblight a better shot at a podium, whereas under hard scores only they'd have a tougher go of it on average vs SCE, Tzeentch, Murderhost, et al.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@scrubyandwells I completely disagree with you... soft scores played a minimal factor with 2 players in the top 10 receiving a painting nom. (worth 10 points more than the normal 30 almost every player received for meeting minimal standards) and 4 players in the top 10 receiving 2 sports votes worth 10 points.

In the top 30:

Myland score increased 6% from soft scores

Tomlin score increased 13% 

Baliey score increased 13% 

Mawdsley score increased 14%

Mills score increased 7%

Pano score increased 7%

Spink score increased 8%

That is 7 guys out of 30 that the soft scores had any effect on and the effect was minimal. We go over board in the USA with soft scores making up 20 to 50% of the final scores and I would argue that the same guys would have got the same sports vote whatever army they played.  I believe you are trying to push an adgenda with your post and I would ask you to look at the data.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, svnvaldez said:

@scrubyandwells I completely disagree with you... soft scores played a minimal factor with 2 players in the top 10 receiving a painting nom. (worth 10 points more than the normal 30 almost every player received for meeting minimal standards) and 4 players in the top 10 receiving 2 sports votes worth 10 points.

In the top 30:

Myland score increased 6% from soft scores

Tomlin score increased 13% 

Baliey score increased 13% 

Mawdsley score increased 14%

Mills score increased 7%

Pano score increased 7%

Spink score increased 8%

That is 7 guys out of 30 that the soft scores had any effect on and the effect was minimal. We go over board in the USA with soft scores making up 20 to 50% of the final scores and I would argue that the same guys would have got the same sports vote whatever army they played.  I believe you are trying to push an adgenda with your post and I would ask you to look at the data.

Happy to discuss this some time @svnvaldez.

I've admitted an emotional bias many times before on being interested in better understanding what tools can increase the number of factions and lists that can compete on top tables at tournaments -- in increasing the range of viable competitive variety at any given time.

Ironjawz, Nighthaunts, Soulblight, Wanderers, Flesh-Eater Courts, Beastclaw Raiders, and many, many others are, all else equal, behind the eight ball when it comes to the top tables. With that said, it's extremely early in GH17, so surprises could happen.

Ultimately, personally, I'm fine with whatever at any given time. There's no argument I can give you that it "should be a certain way."

Again, it's a personal bias. I'm emotionally more attached to the notion of a broader range of factions being competitively viable on the top tables, and interested in better understanding what tools can help increase viable variety in that regard.

Maybe that's a dumb thing to be interested in. Maybe it's a reasonable thing but I'm focusing on the "wrong" elements. Maybe I'm missing obvious things that you see. Maybe you have much better ideas. Maybe you have completely different interests. 

I'd love to better understand the perspective on hard-scores-only as well. Reece and I chatted a few weeks ago and I know he doesn't like soft scores. It'd be great to learn more about the perspective. 

Edited by scrubyandwells
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, svnvaldez said:

@scrubyandwells I completely disagree with you... soft scores played a minimal factor with 2 players in the top 10 receiving a painting nom. (worth 10 points more than the normal 30 almost every player received for meeting minimal standards) and 4 players in the top 10 receiving 2 sports votes worth 10 points.

In the top 30:

Myland score increased 6% from soft scores

Tomlin score increased 13% 

Baliey score increased 13% 

Mawdsley score increased 14%

Mills score increased 7%

Pano score increased 7%

Spink score increased 8%

That is 7 guys out of 30 that the soft scores had any effect on and the effect was minimal. We go over board in the USA with soft scores making up 20 to 50% of the final scores and I would argue that the same guys would have got the same sports vote whatever army they played.  I believe you are trying to push an adgenda with your post and I would ask you to look at the data.

And yeah I didn't look at this in detail, but more just looked at Chris's fantastic result with Ironjawz and noticed the extra +10 on painting and +10 on sports gave him a jump from 155 -- the range for 13th to 18th place -- to 175, tying for 3rd but losing the tie-breaker to Nicky. So the comment about "soft scores were a contributing factor" was a result of seeing the difference between him finishing tied for 3rd with Ironjawz and finishing 4th vs tied for 12th where he would've finished 15th (I believe...). So my brain saw that and immediately thought "Well that seems like a notable difference." I'll freely admit that kind of reaction to a single example doesn't/shouldn't have much bearing on the topic of soft scores at tournaments. Anyway, would love to discuss all of this in depth with you some time. 

Edited by scrubyandwells
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PlasticCraic said:

That's the thing though, they have changed massively.  As they used the GA Destruction allegiance, and that is significantly worse now.

The best things about it were Rampaging Destroyers (nerfed), Ravager (nerfed), Bellowing Tyrant (nerfed), Talisman of Protection (nerfed) and Battle Brew (nerfed).

They even nerfed the stuff nobody ever used (Nothing Left Standing), just to make sure!

It's great that IJ and BS have done well at this tournament, but I think you'll be waiting a long time to see any GA Destruction competing at the pointy end unfortunately.

I'm not convinced these nerfs are as bad as everyone suggests, you can adapt to them with the new allies and bigger units and other new goodies we got etc. 

Seems like people are over-reacting and jumping on new flavour of the month bandwagon lists. People will always under-estimate the mighty power of goblins! xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Chris Tomlin @Sangfroid

I'm still having a real wobble about whether or not to take Ironfist at the Finals this weekend...

I just can't see the Brutes moving quick enough without it? Do you think the reason neither of you missed it was  because you had either a) artillery or b) a 2nd big monster? that 4" stat movement makes me worry they won't survive long enough to get in otherwise...

 

 

*huge congrats to you both, and everyone else by the way - great work!

Edited by Fungrim
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TMI:

So the Retrospective Destruction Player for this tournament should have arguably chosen to play Bonesplitterz, as showing up with it gave you a 50% top tables chance, which is an amazing rate until you notice there were only two, but there it is. 

The army not to play for our time traveling destruction player was Ironjaws. Many people playing it plus a lone, very experienced player with a top result equals poor odds. If you wrote up an ironjawz list, you were at 14% for top 10 (and top 10 was 11% of the total players). 

Without rubbing it in, clearly bcr is in a dark place atm, and no amount of grot fodder seems able to save them (sorry @Soup Dragon and also @me) even giving him a phantom bump from impressively unlikely rolls it doesn't look good. Is this a puzzle to solve or a victim of a meta that doesn't take kindly to elite beasts plus too many nerfs?

Time will tell but one thing's for sure: fun was had! Don't forget it

*disclaimer: obviously army and list choice is but one facet of success. Players still need to play the game.

Edited by heywoah_twitch
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morning,

Wow, lots of great posts here.

18 hours ago, Sheriff said:

Both sound fun, albeit frustrating :D

I watched Tzeench for the first time on warhammer tv last week, and they seem crazy powerful even without this spell-stealing and dice-swapping shenanigans. 

The extra turn was frustrating as I do believe it cost me the game, the Changeling casting Foot of Gork was nothing but amazing. Set up a brilliant game with Will.

17 hours ago, Sangfroid said:

#BRUTES!

#BRUTES!

16 hours ago, bonzai said:

Holy ******!

Sounds like both your opponents had some truly epic moments. While unfortunate in a tournament setting, it still sounds really memorable and epic! Weird stuff like that is what makes this game awesome.

Good to hear that you are getting some good use out of Smashing & Bashing. It seemed like it would be tricky to pull off, but devastating when it goes through. I was hoping to see Ironjaws get a boost in the rankings once players adapted to the new rules and play style. Hopefully you are the first of many to start doing well with it.

Over all I am happy with the rankings. I feel like both armies are solid tier 2. Not as high up as Tzeentch or mixed order/chaos, but still able to place well. Which is a good place to be. The real surrise is the under representation of Beastclaw raiders. While it did take a hit with Stone horns, I would have thought allies would at least make the allegiance viable, and close to on par with the other destruction books. Hopefully this is just an over reaction to the changes made to it, and not an indication of it' long term health.

Now I am curious as to how many Flesh Eater cults were at the tourney and how they preformed. With the changes, it seems like they have enjoyed a massive surge in popularity in recent events.

Yup, agree with that. You can check out the full standings in the event forum. I think the Flesh-eaters were reasonably well represented. At BLACKOUT there was loads of them!

16 hours ago, Malakree said:

It's great to get feedback and to see IJ doing well, gives me hope for the future. Did either of you use Goregruntas and what was your opinions if you did, worth the cost or just outclassed by other units still?

We both used 2x3 Gore-gruntas. Without the Ironfist they are, IMO, vital as they do give you some speed and the ability to reach out for objectives early doors if required. Its so strange as my opinion on them has almost completely flipped! A crucial part of my list now. Still not the most reliable unit damage wise, but their overall utility is good. Deploying them sideways as a big fat pork screen is a personal fav, which I used to good effect over the weekend.

15 hours ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Could it be that the some of the  negative* vibes about the destruction changes may have unduly put off people from using them when maybe the criticism isn't entirely justified?

*not here though things have been as constructive as always. 

Edit: not an accusation genuine question 

 There's no doubt the changes have hit Destruction hard in some places and that in turn has put people off using them. But without people using them...we don't really know how bad it actually is, if that makes sense?

15 hours ago, heywoah_twitch said:

2 destruction in top 8, and then everyone else getting mostly crunched, what interesting results!

In MtG results like this meant either an underpowered list played by 10 normal people and one master of the deck who climbs into top8, or a deck that has some very polarizing matchups where one guy was lucky enough to dodge the bad matchups and smash the good ones. Could also be a list with a very unforgiving skill floor, where it's very difficult to play well and only the best tend to succeed. Besides simple variance, of course.

New Ironjawz have a lot of fiddly moving parts, but if you're lucky enough and/or tactically genius enough for the stars to align you can chain combo a devastating phase or two.

Seems to play like how the results ended up: On average disappointing, but 1 out of 7 times or so it's gigantically hype wwe power KOs!

Edit: that isn't exactly a criticism. Unreliable but overpowered is a legitimate alternative to safe and powerful, provided they're properly balanced.

I have to say it does not surprise me that myself and @Sangfroid were the top two placed Ironjawz players. We have both been using them for a long time now and know the army inside out. Obviously lots has changed, but our innate knowledge of the scrolls has allowed us to pick up the new stuff and just run with it I think.

I still do not think Ironjawz are a pick up and win with army.

I like the MtG comparisons. Interesting post, thanks :) 

14 hours ago, Berdysz said:

Wow...this gives hope :). Gratz to you Chris T! Just this past weekend I was at a local tournament when I scored 3 loses (1 minor, 2 majors) with my IJ. I was 'lucky' enough to play 3 games against Seraphons. I reviewed what I did, and it surely was some bad decision-making, but still I was not sure if my IJ can compete with such lists: like 40 saurus teleporting in front of you, or Fyreslayers 2x30 doing similar...

I will keep on trying now... :)

Thanks man. You've just gotta persevere and also, set your expectation at the right level. You will 100% lose games, anything over a 50% win rate with Ironjawz is solid IMO and will require some luck, both at the table and in the draw!

Don't expect it come easy and oddly, for me anyway, just pushing your Orruks forward is not the way to. It's very rewarding when it does click though, I can promise you that.

11 hours ago, Soup Dragon said:

However, I've slept on it now, so don't be surprised if you come across my Beastclaws running at you on a table near you soon!

Thanks for the thorough and honest report Paul, most appreciated. I have just quoted a snippet of this as I am very glad to hear it. As I mentioned before you are a cornerstone of Destruction on the UK scene so it would be sad to see you move away.

8 hours ago, Banglesprout said:

Hey guys, it's been great reading all your reports!

One thing did strike me about @Chris Tomlin and @Sangfroid lists - pre GH2017 there was lots of talk of Ironjawz struggling with battleshock. Now we've got Bestial Charisma, Golden Toof, and Boss Skewer.. but no one's using them!

Anyone think there might be situations / lists where they're the better option?

You both didn't take Ironfist, and didn't miss the movement, which is cool. Did you not miss the second artefact either?

Yeh this is interesting isn't it! I definitely think there builds with 2x10 (or 3x10 if you're Kieran!) Brutes and Bestial Charisma that could work well, but I think you're right. The Maw-krusha is such a tank now that for the most part it takes a bit of pressure off your Brutes. That said, I did still lose a fair few Brutes to Battleshock over the weekend so it is a concern. Boss Skewer over Dabbing might be a plan.

What's also interesting is that neither me nor Kieran went with any Ardboys.

8 hours ago, scrubyandwells said:

Soft scores were a contributing factor, which is fantastic IMO and maybe a reflection of why soft scores can be a net positive. They can be one way (among others) of giving a faction like Ironjawz, Nighthaunts, or Soulblight a better shot at a podium, whereas under hard scores only they'd have a tougher go of it on average vs SCE, Tzeentch, Murderhost, et al.

I'm honestly not really sure why you would need to analyse the soft score element and it's effect on placings? It's not like the Tournament was ever advertised as anything else. So with that in mind players have a decision to make around the army they bring and whether it is likely to score them additional points in those fields. In a straight up gaming event, maybe I opt to bring my 12 Skyfires and Lord of Change along instead. However knowing the soft scores, I stay up all night the evening before the event to ensure my army is at a level where it will score me the points I need. In my mind I am playing for these points in a different sort of way and is kind of metagaming the pack I suppose. Obviously sports votes are something else entirely that you cannot plan for.

5 hours ago, svnvaldez said:

@scrubyandwells I completely disagree with you... soft scores played a minimal factor with 2 players in the top 10 receiving a painting nom. (worth 10 points more than the normal 30 almost every player received for meeting minimal standards) and 4 players in the top 10 receiving 2 sports votes worth 10 points.

In the top 30:

Myland score increased 6% from soft scores

Tomlin score increased 13% 

Baliey score increased 13% 

Mawdsley score increased 14%

Mills score increased 7%

Pano score increased 7%

Spink score increased 8%

That is 7 guys out of 30 that the soft scores had any effect on and the effect was minimal. We go over board in the USA with soft scores making up 20 to 50% of the final scores and I would argue that the same guys would have got the same sports vote whatever army they played.  I believe you are trying to push an adgenda with your post and I would ask you to look at the data.

Interesting! Thanks for sharing.

3 hours ago, scrubyandwells said:

And yeah I didn't look at this in detail, but more just looked at Chris's fantastic result with Ironjawz and noticed the extra +10 on painting and +10 on sports gave him a jump from 155 -- the range for 13th to 18th place -- to 175, tying for 3rd but losing the tie-breaker to Nicky.

I fear this sounds somewhat borderline dismissive of my result :S. Placing aside I am more than happy with 4/5 wins in such a highly competitive field and suspect it may be the ceiling for Ironjawz without some incredible luck. We got a pretty tough meta over here!

2 hours ago, Junkyz said:

Great job Chris ! Top five with Ironjaws =) Do u use ur classic list?

Cheers man. I posted the list in my thread.

Chris

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there Lists available?

 

Talking pitty results: just 2 Death Army's in the Top50(!) and not a single one in the Top10?

I mean was Death on a 'no play list'?

Puts the initial destruction-post somehow in perspective....

Edited by Spiny Norman
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Spiny Norman said:

Are there Lists available?

 

Talking pitty results: just 2 Death Army's in the top 30 and not a single one in the top10?

Puts the initial destruction-post somehow in perspective.

50% of the grand alliances accounted for 17% of the top 30 placements. 

There is no reason for us to fight. 

 

Edit: math lol

Edited by heywoah_twitch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were pure BCR any good competitively speaking on the first place though? Didn’t the successful players play mixed Destruction lists with them and moonclan or Bonesplitterz. I’d be interested how a list like that faired currently (of course one of the list may have been one but I can’t tell till the lists  are published). Granted they aren’t as powerful as they were but that doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t viable. 

Thank Gorkamorka someone has mentioned how poor Death are we nearly had a thread where it wasn’t 😉

Edited by Ollie Grimwood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, heywoah_twitch said:

50% of the grand alliances account for 5% of the top 30 placements. 

True.

But I guess the lack of Death Armys and the far worse placing is quite mentionable, even in a thread that was supposed to rant over the Destruction performance (Which basically was good.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Spiny Norman said:

thread that was supposed to rant over the Destruction performance (Which basically was good.)

 

 

If by Destruction you mean orcs. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sheriff said:

If by Destruction you mean orcs. 

Good Performance: Ironjaws and Bonesplitters including allies.

 

Worst performance :  Death,  everything.

 

Sorry bros, wasn't ment to steal your salt. I'll open a new thread int he death board.

Edited by Spiny Norman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Spiny Norman said:

Good Performance: Ironjaws and Bonesplitters including allies.

 

Worst performance :  Death,  everything.

 

Sorry bros, wasn't ment to steal your salt. I'll open a new thread int he death board.

Yeah you guys have had some epic salt threads. We should team up for Season of War: Saltstorm, where we ally and murder Order and Chaos and their well-supported doomstacks. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sheriff said:

Yeah you guys have had some epic salt threads. We should team up for Season of War: Saltstorm, where we ally and murder Order and Chaos and their well-supported doomstacks. 

Did you look at the results?

How can you even dare(!!) to put us in the same boat?

 

You're like a bloke whining about College and how hard it is to find a good job these days.....right before an ethiopian girl takes the mic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Chris Tomlin said:

But without people using them...we don't really know how bad it actually is, if that makes sense?

A good point - for example we have no clue whether Nagash lists are viable again.

Edited by Nico
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Spiny Norman said:

Did you look at the results?

How can you even dare(!!) to put us in the same boat?

 

You're like a bloke whining about College and how hard it is to find a good job these days.....right before an ethiopian girl takes the mic.

Its not hard to find a good job though, recruitment is the challenge :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Nico said:

A good point - for example we have no clue whether Nagash lists are viable again.

@Drakira has been using him at the club to really good effect of late! Surprised we didn't see him at either BLACKOUT or Facehammer tbh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×