Jump to content
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?

scrubyandwells

Las Vegas Open 2017 Results + Lists

163 posts in this topic

Denneysman    60

Tell truth really disappointed  in this group now. I thought AoS community was friendly then this and all about love of the game. Instead we get told we'er a bunch of beginners and we make crappy lists. Don't care how you spin it thats just rude.

  • Like 20

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chord    367
7 minutes ago, Denneysman said:

Tell truth really disappointed  in this group now. I thought AoS community was friendly then this and all about love of the game. Instead we get told we'er a bunch of beginners and we make crappy lists. Don't care how you spin it thats just rude.

Agreed!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
shinros    575
9 minutes ago, Denneysman said:

Tell truth really disappointed  in this group now. I thought AoS community was friendly then this and all about love of the game. Instead we get told we'er a bunch of beginners and we make crappy lists. Don't care how you spin it thats just rude.

Don't let this topic be indicative of the community IMO largely this forum is quite friendly. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of agree that there are a lot of poor attitudes in this thread regarding these results. I think it takes much more skill to succeed with a "sub-optimal" list. Even if the environment may contain mostly other sub-par lists (not saying that's the case here). Congrats to the winners here, awesome variety of armies and it's really nice seeing some different army lists make it to the top. 

Encouraging the "I'm not your friend, I'm here to win" mentality can destroy a great community. You can absolutely win games with a nasty list and be competitive without being a try-hard ****** with a poor attitude. 

Edited by Lord Veshnakar
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gauche    186
1 minute ago, Lord Veshnakar said:

I kind of agree that there are a lot of poor attitudes in this thread regarding these results. I think it takes much more skill to succeed with a "sub-optimal" list. Even if the environment may contain mostly other sub-part lists (not saying that's the case here). Congrats to the winners here, awesome variety of armies and it's really nice seeing some different army lists make it to the top. 

Encouraging the "I'm not your friend, I'm here to win" mentality can destroy a great community. You can absolutely win games with a nasty list and be competitive without being a try-hard jerk with a poor attitude. 

Why is calling people a try hard nicer? I don't see anyone advocating poor attitudes or being rude to other players. Seems like judging people which is what you're advocating against.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just now, Gauche said:

Why is calling people a try hard nicer? I don't see anyone advocating poor attitudes or being rude to other players. Seems like judging people which is what you're advocating against.

I am using "you" as a generalization. I am not calling anyone a try-hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PJetski    170
1 hour ago, Denneysman said:

Wow someone need to do a little research. Then they would know "wardens of the gate" stormcast battalion comes with a realmgate and it's 80pts in the GHB so it's legal.

I could be mistaken but I'm fairly certain that a Realmgate doesn't have a point cost so it's not legal for Matched Play, which means that battalion is not legal either?

On another note, friendly and competitive are not mutually exclusive and I don't know why anyone would think otherwise.

You can say people have bad lists and if they take offense, well, that's on them. Some people have fun building the best army possible. It's very hypocritical to tell people how to have fun while telling others not to do the same!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thostos    36
19 minutes ago, PJetski said:

I could be mistaken but I'm fairly certain that a Realmgate doesn't have a point cost so it's not legal for Matched Play, which means that battalion is not legal either?

On another note, friendly and competitive are not mutually exclusive and I don't know why anyone would think otherwise.

You can say people have bad lists and if they take offense, well, that's on them. Some people have fun building the best army possible. It's very hypocritical to tell people how to have fun while telling others not to do the same!

  The Realmgate in this case does have a point costs..according to GW its calculated in with the cost of the Battalion(80 pts I believe).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GRex    44
23 minutes ago, PJetski said:

I could be mistaken but I'm fairly certain that a Realmgate doesn't have a point cost so it's not legal for Matched Play, which means that battalion is not legal either?

 

I feel like the gate is considered as part of the points for the Battallion. Having a single realmgate on the board really doesn't do anything, it won't connect you to another part of the board. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bradifer    144

Thanks to those explaining the "filth" term.

I don't recall ever hearing that term in the 10+ other competitive games I've played. I guess it's a nod to power level, in this community.

I'm all for being realistic (not being a douche, not brining 'filth' vs a new army etc,) I think that kind of stuff is common sense, but it's the internet, it's hard to tell when you're dealing with one of 'those' gamers that lacks common social interaction skills.

^For that reason above, perhaps that's why GW opted for the favorite opponent vote. Although It seems like such an odd way to go about that. I've never had a sportsmanship score in a game, but I would think then at least an average of X or better in order to qualify would make more sense in the long run.

I'm also for the ultra-strong lists in all games, to show how potentially overpowered something is, to award that person/team for their creativity/design skill, and then afterwards let the game developers balance their game around it.

GW has the GHB which, even if it's only an annual release, has the simple ability to re-evaluate things on a points basis. Hopefully they'll be more active than they have with 40K though, because of things like Stomp, Grav, D-Weapons, deathstars, eldar in general...that game, like MTG in paper, had limited options to adapt in a timely manner. MTG figured it out by heavy balance testing before release, and potential bans post-release. 

Again, as a newer player here, most of my games have been both fun and competitive, not some divide between them. I've encountered the occasional sweaty rhino in MTG that slowplayed and was a scumbag, but generally most games are fun, friendly, and show a strong desire to win on both parties. (Similarly, most games players choose to play with an army/deck/character that already own or are familiar with due to financial or time constraints. I would only play an army I actually want to win with, and hope that the developers have done a good enough job balancing the game so my chances of winning are realistic and don't require major cheese in order to be competitive. (See 40K: Tyranid lover forced to play 5 flyrants vs random Eldar list, or MTG: Blue player forced into Splinter Twin because the rest of the color is underpowered, etc...)

I did expect to see lists that were a bit scarier than those that were posted, sorry if that offends someone, but results should speak louder than forum posters right? If you had some nice results, don't let your feelings get hurt when a random internet stranger thinks your list looks softer than those from other publicly posted tournaments.

Hope the tournament was a lot of fun for those involved, I hope we can hear some written reports of the play experience and the overall feeling of the game's current state and its progression!

Edited by Bradifer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GRex    44
3 minutes ago, PJetski said:

Has there been any official wording on this, or are we merely speculating?

Point costs for a Baleful Realmgate in a Wardens of the Realmgate Battallion can probably get its own thread. 

Right now there are no points costs for Realmgates. Last I checked that doesn't make them illegal. The Warscroll Battalion is pointed in the GHB, which makes the list legal in matched play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Veterannoob    271

We were just discussing the games and commentators and it felt like a bit of culture shock at times with loose gaming. Then again, first time doing this on new medium in Vegas of all places with LOTS of gamers and jetlagged sickies and yeah, thought the coverage did great, all things considered. In the chat, obviously not everyone spoke but it seemed a lot more laid back. But we could only see what the screen allowed. I expected more beat-face. Even competitive gamers can roll bad unholy dice like me (well, almost as unholy). Was thrilled to see a bud play on day 2 but he must have picked up my luck from our recent game a few weeks back since he rolled for crap (40K game).

Guess if I do more tourneys I should expect to finally play vs. Sylvaneth. Certainly at least once at Adpeticon...:D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thostos    36
1 hour ago, PJetski said:

Has there been any official wording on this, or are we merely speculating?

 This was posted by Nico,here on the forums Nov 12th 2016,the second sentence is on the topic of the wardens of the realmgate battalion.

"Kudos to GW. Same say response on a Saturday.

Quote

Hello Nicholas, 

 
Thanks for emailing us back and asking to check your plans. I think that the proper Hurricanum model, combined with the human wizard you already have on the stegadon is a fine conversion to use at our events. It can't really be mistaken for a Engine of the Gods too easily I believe, and so should cause no confusion. 
 
As for the Battalion Question, as long as the Battalion has a Pitched Profile, then anything that comes in it for free can be assumed that cost is part of it, but even if it isn't, the Batt alion has the required Pitched Battle Profile so that kinda trumps it in that regard. 
 
Cheers, 
 
John Bracken

 

 
So Wardens of the Realmgate is good to go.
 
Now to do that Hurricanum."
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ollie Grimwood    624

Sounds like a  great event to me. I'm a big fan of the favourite game vote being needed to win it. I'd be interested to hear from participants how the addition of a side board affected things (I've never used one). 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the positive & progressive American attitude to things, our cousins across the pond rock, and nice to see GW getting involved too with the tv coverage and events team over there. More of the same please. Vegas baby!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris Tomlin    2,805
12 hours ago, ravman said:

Might have to have a cheeky holiday to vegas next year...!

Looking at the lists above, I'm not sure you'd be welcome!! ;)

12 hours ago, wayniac said:

I have to say, these seem to be the type of lists you want to see, not the typical "filth" you see dominating the European/UK meta.  None of them seem egregious, but all seem powerful.  They seem like the type of strong lists you bring to game night, not cutthroat WAAC style lists.  And honestly, I think that's a good thing.  We need more lists like this.

I personally am not really keen on this way of thinking, people read stuff like this and can be put off / scared to play certain players or lists without even giving it a chance. Perhaps saying that these are the type of lists you want to see might have been more appropriate? I appreciate different people have differing opinions on the matter.

I also think there are regions of the US with tournaments that are more in tune with the UK meta, however as others in this thread have stated, LVO probably isn't one of them. Which is fine, I'm not saying that's a good or a bad thing, it's just different :) 

It's fun to see people using different lists etc for sure.

Regardless, always good to see Ironjawz doing well (and my man Austin right up there as well) - congrats to everyone who took an award!!

Edited by Chris Tomlin
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Turragor    827
8 hours ago, Denneysman said:

Tell truth really disappointed  in this group now. I thought AoS community was friendly then this and all about love of the game. Instead we get told we'er a bunch of beginners and we make crappy lists. Don't care how you spin it thats just rude.

Most of this thread has been pretty dubious from my pov. Too much armchair speculation delivered in that classic, short, bordering-on-rude internet way.

"And if you don't like it tough! I thought this was a game where you are at war! With hammers! These are competitive events for crushing your opponents! Not events for FUN! FUN!? My FUN IS crushing..."

At the same time, as these members of the internet crushing-it wargamers society explained themselves more, they revealed that they had some good points.

Still, where they mock so in turn are they mocked. They don't like it when it rebounds though.

On lists: I personally don't think lists should or need to be X or Y. People should bring fluffy lists. People should bring hard winner take all lists. In deciding which to take, people should understand how they'll be perceived but also how well they are likely to do.

 

 

 

Edited by Turragor
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tokyo Nift    35
27 minutes ago, Turragor said:

On lists: I personally don't think lists should or need to be X or Y. People should bring fluffy lists. People should bring hard winner take all lists. In deciding which to take, people should understand how they'll be perceived but also how well they are likely to do.

 

Think this is the best answer here. Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rhellion    234

We're looking at a result list of factions (that happen to have names attached to it) and a few army lists. We're judging the lists and analyzing the playing field based on what we know to be powerful lists (which these are not). We don't know the skill of the players, we don't know the attitudes of the players. We're using the forum for all we can, which is looking at data and coming up with conclusions.

If you don't like being judged on this data, a forum thread discussing competitive warhammer / analyzing lists is probably not the best place to hang out. There are plenty of threads that don't specifically target lists and factions topping a tournament results sheet.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesomeone03    32
15 hours ago, PJetski said:

I'll be honest... those are some pretty terrible lists. Really seems like a beginners tournament and not a real competitive event.

Why was somebody allowed to bring a battalion that includes a Realmgate?

To answer your question about the Realmgate  I asked the TO directly from GW before hand to make sure if I could use it or not for it was not needed in my list and was just an added bonus if I could.  He said because it is listed in my Batallion/Formation and the Batallion has a points value itself I get it for free. Just quoting what I was told for I was absolutely prepared to play without it. 

To counter your view of my list it revolves highly around the sideboard of 500 points we were allowed in the tournament itself. For depending on the opponent I would either run 2 units of 10 Liberators and 3 units of prosecutors or 4 units of 5 liberators. Then working possible points against certain armies pending need of Heroes like a Venator or Azyros pending my opponent. I could give a breakdown of the finalized list against each opponent after sideboard was used to give you a better idea of how the list works. Do t knock it till you try it good buddy ;).

Finally someone commented on the 2 grandhammers in units of 5 it was a typo from Copy pasting from Scrollbuilder. The original units of 5 had 1 each that would go up to 2 if I added an additional 5 to the Liberators.

That pretty much wraps it up.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesomeone03    32
15 hours ago, mystycalchemy said:

Question about that first place Stormcast list. 

Under battlelines, he lists 2 Grandhammers for each Liberator squad. Did he actually run 2 in a squad of 5 or are they supposed to be squads of 10?

This was my list and it Was a typo carried over from Scrollbuilder. No worries I noticed after printing it out and showed each of my opponents letting them know beforehand. I got you bro . The list be fine.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesomeone03    32
14 hours ago, Requizen said:

I think we're very used to seeing the UK scene. The US (and I guess international since LVO is pretty large) is a different meta, perhaps a bit younger but not specifically worse than what we've been seeing at the Masters and the like. 

The event also had side boards, which potentially discouraged things like BCR, which thrive on smashing TAC armies and force a specific reaction. The lack of Tomb Kings with snakes is a bit odd, but it could come from many of the AoS players being new converts and not longstanding WHFB players with existing armies to draw from.

I think the Realmgate list is tight though. I love my Skyborne Slayers, but seeing something so out of left field is nice. It has a decent amount of utility, two hard hitting units, and then enough tools for mobility to play the board game. 

Thank You for taking the time to view the list as a whole for the list is extremely reliant on the sideboard factor of the tournament. This was my list and it took me some time to fine tune it to be a TAC list. For it's ability to adapt to opponent to opponent from game to game. Against certain armies I would play 2 units of 10 liberators or possibly 4 units of 5 pending opponents. I really appreciate the compliment and taking the tournament in as a whole.

i did play against a killer Warrior Brotherhood, 2 strong sylvaneth lists and 1 hard hitting Khorne demon/ bloodbound list.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesomeone03    32
11 hours ago, Gauche said:

Disappointed to hear that.

I was able to go 6-0 and received multiple favorite opponent votes allowing me to take 1st overall. It adds the concept of softscore to the game. Which made it an amazing experience overall.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wayniac    613
Thanks to those explaining the "filth" term.

I don't recall ever hearing that term in the 10+ other competitive games I've played. I guess it's a nod to power level, in this community.

I'm all for being realistic (not being a douche, not brining 'filth' vs a new army etc,) I think that kind of stuff is common sense, but it's the internet, it's hard to tell when you're dealing with one of 'those' gamers that lacks common social interaction skills.

^For that reason above, perhaps that's why GW opted for the favorite opponent vote. Although It seems like such an odd way to go about that. I've never had a sportsmanship score in a game, but I would think then at least an average of X or better in order to qualify would make more sense in the long run.

I'm also for the ultra-strong lists in all games, to show how potentially overpowered something is, to award that person/team for their creativity/design skill, and then afterwards let the game developers balance their game around it.

GW has the GHB which, even if it's only an annual release, has the simple ability to re-evaluate things on a points basis. Hopefully they'll be more active than they have with 40K though, because of things like Stomp, Grav, D-Weapons, deathstars, eldar in general...that game, like MTG in paper, had limited options to adapt in a timely manner. MTG figured it out by heavy balance testing before release, and potential bans post-release. 

Again, as a newer player here, most of my games have been both fun and competitive, not some divide between them. I've encountered the occasional sweaty rhino in MTG that slowplayed and was a scumbag, but generally most games are fun, friendly, and show a strong desire to win on both parties. (Similarly, most games players choose to play with an army/deck/character that already own or are familiar with due to financial or time constraints. I would only play an army I actually want to win with, and hope that the developers have done a good enough job balancing the game so my chances of winning are realistic and don't require major cheese in order to be competitive. (See 40K: Tyranid lover forced to play 5 flyrants vs random Eldar list, or MTG: Blue player forced into Splinter Twin because the rest of the color is underpowered, etc...)

I did expect to see lists that were a bit scarier than those that were posted, sorry if that offends someone, but results should speak louder than forum posters right? If you had some nice results, don't let your feelings get hurt when a random internet stranger thinks your list looks softer than those from other publicly posted tournaments.

Hope the tournament was a lot of fun for those involved, I hope we can hear some written reports of the play experience and the overall feeling of the game's current state and its progression!

 

I think the issue with that comes from few people expecting GW to change anything even if they are showing what is broken. For example Privateer Press made changes when Mad Dogs spam won Warmachine weekend because they saw it and were like hey this probably isn't what we want.

 

Many of us, myself included, feel GW would see a lot of the strong stuff dominating and instead of thinking this is something that should change say people want more of this and continue on that path to sell more.

 

However I really do like the idea of a soft score and sportsmanship because I feel they are needed in GW games due to the strong skew in balance you can get just because of the way they designed armies. I would argue against this in basically any other game except for GW games because I feel like GW games need the most help to reign in the most abusive lists.

 

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

 

 

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


×