Why SCE is doing even worse in tournaments compared with previous version?

[AaronWilson]

So is the real issue the SCE battletome isn't bad, the lack of options inside it? 

[Bradipo322]

28 minutes ago, AaronWIlson said:

So is the real issue the SCE battletome isn't bad, the lack of options inside it? 

It's the lack of real options.

There are some things that are just too strong and others that are plainly bad.

[Nos]

1 hour ago, Bradipo322 said:

It's the lack of real options.

There are some things that are just too strong and others that are plainly bad.

You mean like 90% of factions then? 

[Kramer]

35 minutes ago, Nos said:

You mean like 90% of factions then? 

And name me the other 10% while you at it  

[Mikosan]

I think some perspective is needed on all sides of this.  Everyone knows that there are a lot of factions worse off.  If you are playing a game vs. a non-battletome army, sure everything in the book is competitive.  But is that the baseline for comparison?  I think the rub is that no army has had as many revisits as the Stormcast and to still have so many easily fixed issues with points and overlapping roles is kinda frustrating.  

[Nos]

2 hours ago, Mikosan said:

I think some perspective is needed on all sides of this.  Everyone knows that there are a lot of factions worse off.  If you are playing a game vs. a non-battletome army, sure everything in the book is competitive.  But is that the baseline for comparison?  I think the rub is that no army has had as many revisits as the Stormcast and to still have so many easily fixed issues with points and overlapping roles is kinda frustrating.  

Yes that is the baseline for comparison. That's just how the game works at present. The majority of factions are not competitive. If Stormcast were not where they are now they'd be overpowered, I fail to see how thats a balance improvement.  The point is it's impossible to balance a faction in a meta that's grossly unbalanced. If they're balanced against the overpowered factions they're still imbalanced against the lesser factions. If they're balanced against the lesser factions they're imbalanced against the OP ones. Beastmen will fit in that definition and so will every future release until AOS becomes invested in balance as a priority, which it isn't remotely at present. 

Another example, take Liberators vs Sequitors. If Sequitors were more expensive no-one would take them. If Liberators were 20 points cheaper no-one would take Sequitors either. If every SC unit had a purpose they would be ridiculously overpowered because the majority of other armies are comprised of a handful of decent options competitively speaking. If you had an army where eeverything is useful it would be so much more powerful than any other army because you could bring something for any occasion, any match up which is something no other army can do at present.  

What discussions like this illustrate is that competitive AOS is not about you bring your army at equal points, I bring mine and we test our generalship on the field. It's a puzzle you try and pose the opponent before the game even starts. I mean with a game involving such a ludicrous quantity of dice it *cant* be anything else really, especially when there is a handful of factions who have strong mechanics if rolling dice in their favour for free without even doing anything on the table. 

But the other main reason for that is because the development of the game is not designed around battlefield skill and the rules, it's designed around making cool thematic armies you can play with. They are far more interested in pushing the envelope with cool systems to simulate than they are making sure things are fair, one way or the other. 

For a sample, Prosecutors are not designed with balance in mind, they exist solely because they nicely visually augment the heavenly theme of Stormhosts, that's why they're there. They *might* get an errata buff, but they probably won't unless GW decide flyers in general need to be a bigger part of the game. But if they do decide that you can bet it's got very little to do with the competitive scene.

[Aezeal]

SC has tons of options.. that can't really be balanced easily especially since people can easily see which unit is probably even a point more expensive and then ignore other choices. I wish my book had more than 11 options...

And I think GW puts more value on mobility for objective grabbing etc than most players which means a lot of fast units are considered to expensive.

[Pavnik]

On 9/18/2018 at 5:39 PM, Nos said:

Yes that is the baseline for comparison. That's just how the game works at present. The majority of factions are not competitive. If Stormcast were not where they are now they'd be overpowered, I fail to see how thats a balance improvement.  The point is it's impossible to balance a faction in a meta that's grossly unbalanced. If they're balanced against the overpowered factions they're still imbalanced against the lesser factions. If they're balanced against the lesser factions they're imbalanced against the OP ones. Beastmen will fit in that definition and so will every future release until AOS becomes invested in balance as a priority, which it isn't remotely at present. 

Another example, take Liberators vs Sequitors. If Sequitors were more expensive no-one would take them. If Liberators were 20 points cheaper no-one would take Sequitors either. If every SC unit had a purpose they would be ridiculously overpowered because the majority of other armies are comprised of a handful of decent options competitively speaking. If you had an army where eeverything is useful it would be so much more powerful than any other army because you could bring something for any occasion, any match up which is something no other army can do at present.  

What discussions like this illustrate is that competitive AOS is not about you bring your army at equal points, I bring mine and we test our generalship on the field. It's a puzzle you try and pose the opponent before the game even starts. I mean with a game involving such a ludicrous quantity of dice it *cant* be anything else really, especially when there is a handful of factions who have strong mechanics if rolling dice in their favour for free without even doing anything on the table. 

But the other main reason for that is because the development of the game is not designed around battlefield skill and the rules, it's designed around making cool thematic armies you can play with. They are far more interested in pushing the envelope with cool systems to simulate than they are making sure things are fair, one way or the other. 

For a sample, Prosecutors are not designed with balance in mind, they exist solely because they nicely visually augment the heavenly theme of Stormhosts, that's why they're there. They *might* get an errata buff, but they probably won't unless GW decide flyers in general need to be a bigger part of the game. But if they do decide that you can bet it's got very little to do with the competitive scene.

Sorry, but thats pure idiocracy. U might be new to the game in general or never left ur kitchen table games. Or u were one of those kids that said "ya, i was bad at this exam, but there was a kid even worse". There will be always a best and a worst army and u try to compede against the best, not the worst.

Normaly u try to balance  the new books against the older books. With BoC they did this rly well.  I expect them to be in a top spot for upcoming tournaments.

The problem all SCE players on a competetive level are facing is the following: u have 53 Warscrolls and 22 Battalions.  9% out of those (5 Warscrolls and 2 Battalions) are worth to be taken to a tournament. The rest might see niche play against sub par enemys u might never face in a tournament, or in lists espacily designed to beat list xyz.

That creats a feeling of  "this book is ******",  since 91% of this book isn't worth to be looked at.

On the other hand u have DoK. They have 15 Warscrolls and 7 Battalions. 3 Warscrolls and 4 Battalions are considered bad for tournaments, the rest showed up at any GT and is placing in the higher ranks. That makes 32% junk and 68% good choices.  When u build an DoK army, u never feel like "dmn, look at all these bad units", becouse there aren't as meny bad units.

We SCE players are compareble to Nurgleplayers. Both can win a GT and both have a ton of crappy units wich they can choose from (and a few good ones). But with nurgle it isn't that noticeable, since they don't have all their units in the Magotkin book (missing all the StD and EC units).

 

To Sum it up: SCE is in a good place, but it feels lacking cuz off all the sub par units.

Fluff wise... AoS is ****** in general and not even close to the level the old world had. It begins with Sigmar trading a gem against the knowledge to create entire worlds and ends with nonexisting or varying maps. The world and background is by far to open minded to generate a good amount of fluff wich is coherent in itself.

On 9/18/2018 at 11:38 PM, Aezeal said:

SC has tons of options.. that can't really be balanced easily especially since people can easily see which unit is probably even a point more expensive and then ignore other choices. I wish my book had more than 11 options...

And I think GW puts more value on mobility for objective grabbing etc than most players which means a lot of fast units are considered to expensive.

"Tons of options" isn't equal to "tons of options that makes scence".

And how are we ment to grab objectives? Maybe playing more Skinks, so we can overwhelm by numbers?

Playing an army of SCE actualy feels like playing an army of Custodes in 40k, but with less punch and way less survivalbility. If we play a massed list, we strugle with killing things, but may whin the objectives game. When we play the killing game, we lose nearly all capebility to controll objectives. So we build a mixed army and hope for the best.

And by the by, there are tons of ways to diferenciate the units of SCE. Maybe make the Liberators a bit more tanky by giving them a 3+ save when not moving, so they rly can hold an objective and are a viable choise against Sequitors (Liberators = Tank, Sequitors = Spank). Evocators could be more of a buffing unit, by removing theire MW but make them cast Empower on all SCE units, not just Redeemer and Sacrosanct. Give Vanguard Hunters  the ability to allways run 6", so they will be able to grab objectives in a hury and be the quick flanking unit they are supposed to be.

There are so much possibilities...

[Seraphage]

SCE are one of the strongest at the moment this is pretty clear.  * this is a comment of a competitive player, don't know how it feels at casual *

However as someone above noted, the problem is that the good units for competitive lists are just too good to not be picked so the choices end up being bettween the same 5-6 units.

 

Then again, exactly like @Nos said, this happens all the time at the competitive scene ?

 

Let's just hope this will get "fixed" at some point !

[Yoshiya]

3 hours ago, Pavnik said:

Sorry, but thats pure idiocracy. U might be new to the game in general or never left ur kitchen table games. Or u were one of those kids that said "ya, i was bad at this exam, but there was a kid even worse". There will be always a best and a worst army and u try to compede against the best, not the worst.

Normaly u try to balance  the new books against the older books. With BoC they did this rly well.  I expect them to be in a top spot for upcoming tournaments.

I agree with most of the rest of what you say (though feel some points are a bit exaggerated) but this sums up perfectly what a lot of people mean by 'balanced' and why a lot of non-Stormcast players are lashing out at calls for it.

In a game as unbalanced as AoS an army consistently at the top is not balanced, they are simply more powerful than the average power level in the game. Sure a perfectly balanced force may find it easier to reach the top as they can take on everything but with over 50 warscrolls Stormcast is always going to be a difficult faction to balance as if all of them are worth taking in most armies then Stormcast will have an insane amount of flexibility compared to other factions. This will allow them to dominate simply by being too prepared for every army (ultimately all armies should get to this point but it simply isn't the nature of the game at this point with such focused factions).

By saying BoC is "balanced" by being able to reach top positions what you're really saying is that they are balanced against the most powerful factions in the game, not against the state of the game as a whole. It's fine to want that but don't pretend it's balance as it's the antithesis of it if a faction is heads and shoulders better than others.

Also, am sure that the BoC will ultimately be refined to only a select few warscrolls bring taken that focus around a very powerful strategy people work out. It's only just come out though so people are still processing all the pros and cons of units.

[Aeonotakist]

On 9/18/2018 at 5:39 PM, Nos said:

Yes that is the baseline for comparison. That's just how the game works at present. The majority of factions are not competitive. If Stormcast were not where they are now they'd be overpowered, I fail to see how thats a balance improvement.  The point is it's impossible to balance a faction in a meta that's grossly unbalanced. If they're balanced against the overpowered factions they're still imbalanced against the lesser factions. If they're balanced against the lesser factions they're imbalanced against the OP ones. Beastmen will fit in that definition and so will every future release until AOS becomes invested in balance as a priority, which it isn't remotely at present. 

Another example, take Liberators vs Sequitors. If Sequitors were more expensive no-one would take them. If Liberators were 20 points cheaper no-one would take Sequitors either. If every SC unit had a purpose they would be ridiculously overpowered because the majority of other armies are comprised of a handful of decent options competitively speaking. If you had an army where eeverything is useful it would be so much more powerful than any other army because you could bring something for any occasion, any match up which is something no other army can do at present.  

What discussions like this illustrate is that competitive AOS is not about you bring your army at equal points, I bring mine and we test our generalship on the field. It's a puzzle you try and pose the opponent before the game even starts. I mean with a game involving such a ludicrous quantity of dice it *cant* be anything else really, especially when there is a handful of factions who have strong mechanics if rolling dice in their favour for free without even doing anything on the table. 

But the other main reason for that is because the development of the game is not designed around battlefield skill and the rules, it's designed around making cool thematic armies you can play with. They are far more interested in pushing the envelope with cool systems to simulate than they are making sure things are fair, one way or the other. 

For a sample, Prosecutors are not designed with balance in mind, they exist solely because they nicely visually augment the heavenly theme of Stormhosts, that's why they're there. They *might* get an errata buff, but they probably won't unless GW decide flyers in general need to be a bigger part of the game. But if they do decide that you can bet it's got very little to do with the competitive scene.

But I do think the situation is worse on competitive environment. Perhaps due to meta reason. Today SCE is completely not competitive against Seraphon and LoN that is well played, performing bad against DoK, MK and even Tz for today. Those frictions normally take 40% of a tournament. 

I notice some tournament SCE is doing good, but they are all house ruled to nerf summoning. 

In last version SCE also have serious problem against Tz, FS and , but was not as desperate as today. Actually in the past SCE still got huge benefit and win the impossible when having a double turn. In AoS 2.0, with LoS and realms artifact against MW/shooting , it is more difficult to headshot key HQs. Meanwhile, double turn itself is less likely to happen. The bad match up for SCE now become more desperate.

 

In one word, I just don't believe somebody's comment SCE can get a good chance in beating LoN and Seraphon. I know some tournament champion might support that, but we also  champions that prove this is not ture.

In my opinion if we both use popular list (LoN Reapers + Nec with heavy protection, Seraphon Skywatch and SCE Gav bomb) the chance for SCE to win is below 25%.  That was the root cause why I think it is 'bad in tournament', I am not saying it is 'in general too weak'.

[Skreech Verminking]

6 hours ago, Pavnik said:

Sorry, but thats pure idiocracy. U might be new to the game in general or never left ur kitchen table games. Or u were one of those kids that said "ya, i was bad at this exam, but there was a kid even worse". There will be always a best and a worst army and u try to compede against the best, not the worst.

Normaly u try to balance  the new books against the older books. With BoC they did this rly well.  I expect them to be in a top spot for upcoming tournaments.

The problem all SCE players on a competetive level are facing is the following: u have 53 Warscrolls and 22 Battalions.  9% out of those (5 Warscrolls and 2 Battalions) are worth to be taken to a tournament. The rest might see niche play against sub par enemys u might never face in a tournament, or in lists espacily designed to beat list xyz.

That creats a feeling of  "this book is ******",  since 91% of this book isn't worth to be looked at.

On the other hand u have DoK. They have 15 Warscrolls and 7 Battalions. 3 Warscrolls and 4 Battalions are considered bad for tournaments, the rest showed up at any GT and is placing in the higher ranks. That makes 32% junk and 68% good choices.  When u build an DoK army, u never feel like "dmn, look at all these bad units", becouse there aren't as meny bad units.

We SCE players are compareble to Nurgleplayers. Both can win a GT and both have a ton of crappy units wich they can choose from (and a few good ones). But with nurgle it isn't that noticeable, since they don't have all their units in the Magotkin book (missing all the StD and EC units).

 

To Sum it up: SCE is in a good place, but it feels lacking cuz off all the sub par units.

Fluff wise... AoS is ****** in general and not even close to the level the old world had. It begins with Sigmar trading a gem against the knowledge to create entire worlds and ends with nonexisting or varying maps. The world and background is by far to open minded to generate a good amount of fluff wich is coherent in itself.

"Tons of options" isn't equal to "tons of options that makes scence".

And how are we ment to grab objectives? Maybe playing more Skinks, so we can overwhelm by numbers?

Playing an army of SCE actualy feels like playing an army of Custodes in 40k, but with less punch and way less survivalbility. If we play a massed list, we strugle with killing things, but may whin the objectives game. When we play the killing game, we lose nearly all capebility to controll objectives. So we build a mixed army and hope for the best.

And by the by, there are tons of ways to diferenciate the units of SCE. Maybe make the Liberators a bit more tanky by giving them a 3+ save when not moving, so they rly can hold an objective and are a viable choise against Sequitors (Liberators = Tank, Sequitors = Spank). Evocators could be more of a buffing unit, by removing theire MW but make them cast Empower on all SCE units, not just Redeemer and Sacrosanct. Give Vanguard Hunters  the ability to allways run 6", so they will be able to grab objectives in a hury and be the quick flanking unit they are supposed to be.

There are so much possibilities...

You heard him, 

Throw away your non competitive  stormcast Modells and start a Skaven army today.

?

[Nos]

7 hours ago, Pavnik said:

Sorry, but thats pure idiocracy. U might be new to the game in general or never left ur kitchen table games. Or u were one of those kids that said "ya, i was bad at this exam, but there was a kid even worse". There will be always a best and a worst army and u try to compede against the best, not the worst.

Normaly u try to balance  the new books against the older books. With BoC they did this rly well.  I expect them to be in a top spot for upcoming tournaments.

The problem all SCE players on a competetive level are facing is the following: u have 53 Warscrolls and 22 Battalions.  9% out of those (5 Warscrolls and 2 Battalions) are worth to be taken to a tournament. The rest might see niche play against sub par enemys u might never face in a tournament, or in lists espacily designed to beat list xyz.

That creats a feeling of  "this book is ******",  since 91% of this book isn't worth to be looked at.

On the other hand u have DoK. They have 15 Warscrolls and 7 Battalions. 3 Warscrolls and 4 Battalions are considered bad for tournaments, the rest showed up at any GT and is placing in the higher ranks. That makes 32% junk and 68% good choices.  When u build an DoK army, u never feel like "dmn, look at all these bad units", becouse there aren't as meny bad units.

We SCE players are compareble to Nurgleplayers. Both can win a GT and both have a ton of crappy units wich they can choose from (and a few good ones). But with nurgle it isn't that noticeable, since they don't have all their units in the Magotkin book (missing all the StD and EC units).

 

To Sum it up: SCE is in a good place, but it feels lacking cuz off all the sub par units.

Fluff wise... AoS is ****** in general and not even close to the level the old world had. It begins with Sigmar trading a gem against the knowledge to create entire worlds and ends with nonexisting or varying maps. The world and background is by far to open minded to generate a good amount of fluff wich is coherent in itself.

"Tons of options" isn't equal to "tons of options that makes scence".

And how are we ment to grab objectives? Maybe playing more Skinks, so we can overwhelm by numbers?

Playing an army of SCE actualy feels like playing an army of Custodes in 40k, but with less punch and way less survivalbility. If we play a massed list, we strugle with killing things, but may whin the objectives game. When we play the killing game, we lose nearly all capebility to controll objectives. So we build a mixed army and hope for the best.

And by the by, there are tons of ways to diferenciate the units of SCE. Maybe make the Liberators a bit more tanky by giving them a 3+ save when not moving, so they rly can hold an objective and are a viable choise against Sequitors (Liberators = Tank, Sequitors = Spank). Evocators could be more of a buffing unit, by removing theire MW but make them cast Empower on all SCE units, not just Redeemer and Sacrosanct. Give Vanguard Hunters  the ability to allways run 6", so they will be able to grab objectives in a hury and be the quick flanking unit they are supposed to be.

There are so much possibilities...

 

I'm not sure what an "Idiocracy" is but I imagine people who live in them are probably the sort of people who expect a Games company who are making unprecedented masses of profits off toy soldiers and simple rules to play with them to suddenly change their Buisness model to suit a minority of people who are overly serious about it

 

 

[Bradipo322]

1 hour ago, Skreech Verminking said:

You heard him, 

Throw away your non competitive  stormcast Modells and start a Skaven army today.

?

Just stop, please. You bring nothing to this thread, all yours "Play skaven" posts sounds like a mix between a bad joke and an insult.

This is a serious conversation and you keep being the jester of the situation.

I'm talking for me and myself only, but this is bad etiquette "in real life" let alone on the internet, where people get triggered very easily.

Why do you keep mocking us (Stormcast players)? Why are you being such a ****** (bad person)?

[Nos]

2 hours ago, Aeonotakist said:

But I do think the situation is worse on competitive environment. Perhaps due to meta reason. Today SCE is completely not competitive against Seraphon and LoN that is well played, performing bad against DoK, MK and even Tz for today. Those frictions normally take 40% of a tournament. 

I notice some tournament SCE is doing good, but they are all house ruled to nerf summoning. 

In last version SCE also have serious problem against Tz, FS and , but was not as desperate as today. Actually in the past SCE still got huge benefit and win the impossible when having a double turn. In AoS 2.0, with LoS and realms artifact against MW/shooting , it is more difficult to headshot key HQs. Meanwhile, double turn itself is less likely to happen. The bad match up for SCE now become more desperate.

 

In one word, I just don't believe somebody's comment SCE can get a good chance in beating LoN and Seraphon. I know some tournament champion might support that, but we also  champions that prove this is not ture.

In my opinion if we both use popular list (LoN Reapers + Nec with heavy protection, Seraphon Skywatch and SCE Gav bomb) the chance for SCE to win is below 25%.  That was the root cause why I think it is 'bad in tournament', I am not saying it is 'in general too weak'.

Yeah I agree. Hence my repeatedly stating that AOS is massively and inherently imbalanced, openly so, so why  people are bringing up balance I have no idea. I get that people want it at the top level, but the evidence is that GW don't care about that as much as they do other aspects of the hobby, namely that armies look and feel and play to their character. If they had the resources to deliver that and make it competitively balanced as well then they would. But they evidentky don't.

If SC were the *only* imbalanced faction then folk on here would have a point. However pretty much *all* are imbalanced, either as underpowered or overpowered, which brings up the fact that it's not an army which needs balance, it's the whole system, which, again, begs the question as to why anyone bothered about balance plays an inherently imbalanced game. 

[Skreech Verminking]

1 hour ago, Bradipo322 said:

Just stop, please. You bring nothing to this thread, all yours "Play skaven" posts sounds like a mix between a bad joke and an insult.

This is a serious conversation and you keep being the jester of the situation.

I'm talking for me and myself only, but this is bad etiquette "in real life" let alone on the internet, where people get triggered very easily.

Why do you keep mocking us (Stormcast players)? Why are you being such a ****** (bad person)?

Oh i didn’t mean it as an insult.

it was mostly just a joke.

but than again thanks for telling me.

my jokes can sometimes go a little bit too far.??

 

So yeah, I’m very sorry

[Requizen]

Stormcast came in 8th at Facehammer, going 4-1 with above-average kill points, and taking an Anvils list that doesn't use Longstrikes - so not Gavriel, not meta gimmick lists, just good gameplay. So, I think SCE are fine competitively for the time being.

That said, it was all entirely Sacrosanct other than some Heroes, so internal balance is notably not good, as expected. That's... a problem for another day, and probably not addressed until GHB2019, sadly.

[Aeonotakist]

13 minutes ago, Requizen said:

Stormcast came in 8th at Facehammer, going 4-1 with above-average kill points, and taking an Anvils list that doesn't use Longstrikes - so not Gavriel, not meta gimmick lists, just good gameplay. So, I think SCE are fine competitively for the time being.

That said, it was all entirely Sacrosanct other than some Heroes, so internal balance is notably not good, as expected. That's... a problem for another day, and probably not addressed until GHB2019, sadly.

what is the list and what are the enemies friction?

[Requizen]

9 minutes ago, Aeonotakist said:

what is the list and what are the enemies friction?

I asked in a chat for the list. Didn't get the opponents but:

Anvils

Arcanum on Gryph - General, Deathly Aura, Wind Runner, Azyrite Halo
Incantor - Stormcaller
Celestant - Soulthief
Relictor - Translocation

Sequitors x5
Sequitors x5
Sequitors x5

Castigators x9
Evocators x10
Dracoline Evocators x3

Ballista

Quicksilver Swords

Pretty atypical, more of a MSU approach which I've been theorizing but haven't tried. I like this sort of list, though I'd make some changes to some selections.

[Aeonotakist]

5 minutes ago, Requizen said:

I asked in a chat for the list. Didn't get the opponents but:

Anvils

Arcanum on Gryph - General, Deathly Aura, Wind Runner, Azyrite Halo
Incantor - Stormcaller
Celestant - Soulthief
Relictor - Translocation

Sequitors x5
Sequitors x5
Sequitors x5

Castigators x9
Evocators x10
Dracoline Evocators x3

Ballista

Quicksilver Swords

Pretty atypical, more of a MSU approach which I've been theorizing but haven't tried. I like this sort of list, though I'd make some changes to some selections.

Really hard to believe how this can win such games... Imagine my opponents Seraphon Skywatch just sit there and summon 20/20/10 Skinks in first turn.  I tried my best but just cannot figure out how this list can compete with the other one.

[Requizen]

4 minutes ago, Aeonotakist said:

Really hard to believe how this can win such games... Imagine my opponents Seraphon Skywatch just sit there and summon 20/20/10 Skinks in first turn.  I tried my best but just cannot figure out how this list can compete with the other one.

Really? Seems pretty obvious to me. Evos hit hard, Ballista is a reliable plink damage, Castigators have good damage on the turn they come in (and double turn if you get it), 5 man Sequitors and Dracovators are not super killy but hold their own quite well. There's also solid mobility with Translocation, Dracolines, Scions, and Arcanum getting the extra d6 Ride the Winds. It's a list without one centralized gimmick but with a lot of ways to hit and respond.

[Mark Williams]

I agree that list kinda seems like a sitting duck to me. 10 evocators could do very well if they are guarded and played well. I am just not sure it can win a tournament. It finished 8th? That might be about as well as it could do.

[Requizen]

Well chatted with the guy, apparently almost tabled Daughters list but lost due to time (ending in T3), beat Gavriel bomb and mixed Destro with 2x Thundertusks + Stonehorn. Also beat Strike Chamber SCE and Ogors, which sounded a bit more fluffy than not. 

Sounds like a pretty standard tourney run to me to be honest. "As well as it could do" is imo a bit insulting to someone who came in 8th out of almost 90.

[schwabbele]

4-1 and only 8th? Paintscore again? 

 

[Requizen]

3 minutes ago, schwabbele said:

4-1 and only 8th? Paintscore again? 

 

You can see the results here. Seems pretty correct?