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

Marc Wilson    315
18 minutes ago, Awesomeone03 said:

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.

Heh, big congrats dude on coming first. Regardless of anything else in this questionable thread that's a big achievement.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Requizen    265
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.

Congrats on the win! It didn't seem like you went against a lot of MW spamming opponents like multi Thundertusk lists or Clan Skryre, which are traditionally the weakness of Stormcast. How do you think you would have dealt with those armies? More body spamming and using the Realmgate to spread out? Or gone all in on Vexillor bombing them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesomeone03    32
9 hours 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!

My 5th round opponent and my 2nd round opponent had mortal wound output. To look at the lists round two was Tyler Amoy who took 10th and Ben Mohlie who took 3rd in the ITC rankings. Bens list was spam spam spam mortal wounds with 60 blood letters, Saul the faithless and 3 secrators 8Dhaha who shall be victorious? "Only the Faithful!!!" Played my Hallowed Knights. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chord    418
2 hours ago, Awesomeone03 said:

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.

Congrats!  Can you explain how you leveraged the realmgate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GRex    44

Congrats @Awesomeone03  for taking first!

Shout out to Austin Morgan.  He was 5th on the rankings but his painting soft score pushed him to second place. He also received 5 favorite player votes (out of 6) and was awarded the sportsmanship award. 

#Chupacabras

IMG_0130.JPG

Edited by GRex
Name correction
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris Tomlin    3,049

Yeh Austin is a great guy, I'm a big fan of his. Was a shame not to catch up with him on my recent visit to the US.

Paint nomination, Best Sports and 2nd overall. Hobby hero!!

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awesomeone03    32

1st overall Grand Champion of the LVO AoS Championship Tournament. 

Andrew Standiferd of the Rolling Bad crew from Albuquerque, New Mexico.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sleboda    1,093
21 hours ago, PJetski said:

I'll be honest... those are some pretty terrible lists. Really seems like a beginners tournament 

Or one where people didn't feel the need to attach self esteem to crushing the foe. You know, pleasant over powerful?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gauche    186

Really glad to see with the GHB 2 sneak peek that Games Workshop is paying attention to the competitive scene. Hopefully the US doesn't pursue soft scores and we can get involved in shaping the future of the competitive game as I discussed earlier in the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GRex    44
5 minutes ago, Gauche said:

Really glad to see with the GHB 2 sneak peek that Games Workshop is paying attention to the competitive scene. Hopefully the US doesn't pursue soft scores and we can get involved in shaping the future of the competitive game as I discussed earlier in the thread.

This was GW's tournament pack.  They were the TO's. The type of event they ran at LVO will probably be similar to tournaments they run in the future at Warhammer World. 

However, soft scores will definitely be used at Adepticon. 

What part of the world are you playing at @Gauche ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PJetski    171
1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

Or one where people didn't feel the need to attach self esteem to crushing the foe. You know, pleasant over powerful?

Why play in a competitive tournament if you're not going to try to win?

There are lots of opportunities to play AOS (or any game, really) in non-competitive settings; the reason tournaments exist is to give people that want a competitive setting a different way to have fun than your typical friendly game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
amysrevenge    385

LOL do you really think all 200 players going to the SCGT really think they're in it to win it?  Maaaaybe 50 of them are really thinking it, maybe another 50 are thinking "if I just get the right matchups...", the other 100 are thinking "let's have a wicked time hanging out and smashing our little men together".

The chumps at the bottom having a good time are funding the champs at the top (having a different sort of good time, neither better nor worse), and giving them their bragging rights - the winner gets to claim winning a larger event than he would if the chumps stayed home.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
scrubyandwells    364
2 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

LOL do you really think all 200 players going to the SCGT really think they're in it to win it?  Maaaaybe 50 of them are really thinking it, maybe another 50 are thinking "if I just get the right matchups...", the other 100 are thinking "let's have a wicked time hanging out and smashing our little men together".

The chumps at the bottom having a good time are funding the champs at the top (having a different sort of good time, neither better nor worse), and giving them their bragging rights - the winner gets to claim winning a larger event than he would if the chumps stayed home.

Dan and Wayne recently spoke about this on Heelanhammer. SCGT is large enough that it can self-sort. It's a competitive event, but folks who aren't fussed about playing on the top tables, who might e.g. have a non-optimal army they love or that they've themed, they will quickly find their way to the right tables and opponents and (hopefully) have a blast. And the same goes for the other end of the spectrum.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
amysrevenge    385
8 minutes ago, scrubyandwells said:

Dan and Wayne recently spoke about this on Heelanhammer. SCGT is large enough that it can self-sort. It's a competitive event, but folks who aren't fussed about playing on the top tables, who might e.g. have a non-optimal army they love or that they've themed, they will quickly find their way to the right tables and opponents and (hopefully) have a blast. And the same goes for the other end of the spectrum.

Exactly.  It's foolish to assert that either type is the only type - both types are there in full force, sort themselves out (with a bit of overlap in the middle) and everyone has the kind of time they want, within reason.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ollie Grimwood    725

I've certainly attended tournaments just to participate and get some games in. There's also many different levels to compete at not everything is professional style take no prisoners.  It all depends on who they want attending their event as well. If the LVO's punters are the sort of folks who like soft scores and side boards and it sounds like they are why would they organise their tournament any other way? 

There's plenty of room for all sorts of tournaments and event just because one isn't to an individuals liking doesn't mean it's any less valid.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sleboda    1,093
40 minutes ago, PJetski said:

Why play in a competitive tournament if you're not going to try to win?

Oh, believe me, I'm sooooo about the win.  It may not be clear here, but over the years my view has been pretty much exactly what you said - It IS a tournament.  Play to win.  Bam.

I'm just saying that you can win and be not a dbag doing it.   

More later.  Phone posting sux.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wulfen    0

Quite honestly, if AoS events devolve (yes, I used that word) into WM-similar events, I'm out. There's a reason I left that community well behind.

Congrats to the winners, and to those that had a great time regardless. I watched some of the coverage on WH TV, and it looked like a lot of fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swarmofseals    339

Hi everyone, 

As @scrubyandwells mentioned, I've spent quite a few hours jamming all of the data that I could find from the lists of this event into a google docs spreadsheet. I hope some of you find it useful! You fan view the spreadsheet here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wKH4-s7Z2t-dHU_gfQHPGbEvT20_h4pdc9NenaLNX-I/edit?usp=sharing

Some info that you might want to help interpret the sheet:

  • There are four pages, one for each Grand Alliance. Within each alliance I broke it down into categories based on theme. I was not completely strict about allegiance here -- for example if you took an all Khorne army plus Sayl, you still get to go in the Khorne category. Armies that were clearly mixed were put in the mixed category for that GA. In the Death GA, I differentiated between mixed lists that included Tomb Kings units and those that did not. A couple of lists used a bunch of TK stuff while one used only a single Necrotect, but I still put that latter list in the Mixed Death w/ TK category. 
  • I listed all traits and artefacts mentioned on the army lists. They are listed both as their own entry in the roster and also I've added notes to indicate what traits/artefacts are held by characters (note is listed on the character's entry). I've also used notes to indicate unit equipment loadouts when they were explicitly listed. 
  • Battalions got their own entry. In some cases I clarified that an entry is a battalion, trait or artefact if I was concerned there might be a unit with a same or similar name and cause confusion.
  • Unit entries are given the form XxY where X is the number of units of a given size and Y is the number of default choices in the unit size. So "1x1" means a single unit of the minimum size, "2x2" is two units of double minimum size each, and so on. For example, if someone took a unit of 40 skeletons, two units of 20 skeletons and a unit of 10 skeletons it would be listed as: 1x4, 2x2, 1x1. 
  • Five players' (Ryan Taylor, Chris Morris, Pamela Castello, Josue Castillo, and Phillip Stinnett) lists were cut off and so part of the list is missing. I marked these with INCOMPLETE or INC next to the player name. There was one player (John Fueuerhelm) that had an incomplete list but the points costs, keywords and battlefield roles were visible so I was able to make some very strong guesses as to what was taken. I went ahead and entered my guesses but put in the possible ambiguities as notes. I also indicated that this list was speculative (SPEC).
  • Six further players (Norman Castillo, Rob Pro, Tony Pacheco, Benjamin Harrison, Mark Cathro, and Martin Orlando) had no lists available through the app

If you have any questions about interpreting the data, corrections, or if you'd like to send me some of the information that I'm missing please send me a PM! That way I will get an email notification and can be sure to respond quickly.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

EDITORIAL SECTION

 

My initial impression in entering these lists is that the metagame for this tournament very much feels like a typical "Friday Night Magic" level of competition to me. There are clearly some players who have brought relatively tuned, established, competitive lists. Some of these lists are optimized (or close to it) while others are not. There are also a lot of players whose lists either reflect homebrew strategies that are clearly designed to be competitive, lists that are clearly focused on theme over competitiveness, and a lot of lists that are "strictly suboptimal" (IE: no artefacts or command traits were listed, free unit upgrades were explicitly not taken). I'm guessing there was also a wide range of skill and experience present, with some competitors being very experienced and others being quite new to the game.

Personally, I think that's great. FNM is the pinnacle of fun for a lot of Magic players, particularly at stores that attract a large crowd. It's still competitive enough for people to feel tested but not so cutthroat that you can't bring what you want and still hope to have mostly enjoyable games.

I also think we shouldn't necessarily infer what people's motivations are for bringing the lists that they brought. Some players seemed to be focusing on theme, other players may have intentionally been toning it down in terms of "hardness" and still others may have brought lists that were constructed more based on what models they had. Simply stating that players made "bad" choices is unfair as we don't know exactly why the players made the choices that they did.

I strongly believe that the results of this tournament shouldn't be taken to indicate what is or isn't overpowered. No single tournament can indicate that, even large ones. The metagame being relatively soft is also a big caveat that reduces the usefulness of the results in terms of balance discussion. I do think we can learn some things about the game from this tournament (hence why I took the time to compile the lists), but we should not over-generalize. Also, please remember that the standings may reflect soft scores as well, so raw placing doesn't necessarily indicate how an army played on the tabletop. 

Edited by swarmofseals
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AustinTheMan    13

LVO was honestly the most fun I've ever had at a GT.

I have always been a big fan of soft scores, but that doesn't mean it's the only way to play. Personally, when I put my models on the table, I want my opponent and I to have a great time rolling dice even if they are newer to the game. My gaming club is always pushing to make creative lists which is what keeps most of us motivated for the hobby. LVO seemed to have that overall mentality as well which was nice.

There is obviously nothing wrong with "filth" lists and that style of play. I love watching the WHTV games of people taking the most finely tuned lists they can and going all out. It's just not the way a lot of us out here want to play on the tabletop.

In my opinion, there is no right or wrong way to play the game in the tournament scene. This is toy soldiers after all.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swarmofseals    339
1 hour ago, AustinTheMan said:

Stuff

I think this is really on point. Personally, I think that filth lists can be great within reason. I think where it crosses a line is when the game enables strategies that basically keep your opponent from participating in a meaningful way. This is in part why I'm really against alpha strike lists, but actually fine with hard-as-nails lists that still allow a game to occur. Even then perhaps it's great to have really disgusting, abusive lists on display as a spectator sport (eg. WHTV), but only so long as they are confined to a format where this stuff is explicitly encouraged. I'm sure people are sick of my Magic analogies, but it's like Vintage and (to a lesser extent) Legacy in that game. If you play Vintage or Legacy you know that your opponents can bring some really abusive stuff to the table and could in theory (legacy) or realistically (vintage) win before you even get to take a turn. If you don't want that kind of game, you play Standard, Modern, or Limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bradifer    144

I like to think of the Alpha Strike lists as aggro, except they lack a distinct set of counters through gameplay and list design.

Specifically it's more like MTG's infect/Storm decks. Sometimes they just kill you on turn 2/3 and there's not always a lot of interaction to be had.

^Fine when the games are fast, but I too would prefer a fully interactive game, whether the lists are tuned or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gauche    186
5 hours ago, GRex said:

This was GW's tournament pack.  They were the TO's. The type of event they ran at LVO will probably be similar to tournaments they run in the future at Warhammer World. 

However, soft scores will definitely be used at Adepticon. 

What part of the world are you playing at @Gauche ?

United States. I'm aware GW ran the rules pack, my hope is as they balance the game more they will feel less need to add things like this in OR they go back to a Best General Award in addition to other awards. They used to do this back in the day, I never had a problem with Best Overall being Sportsmanship + Painting + Games Played. However I have a big problem with being shouted down and told my play style is invalid and would not attend events that are run in that manner. However that's my personal feeling only.

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


×