Jump to content

Which army do you use at tournaments and why?


Chikout

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

I think everyone who steps into the competitive ring should be fully aware of what they are getting into yes.

maybe this is what war-games needs to make pushing tiny plastic models around a table more of a high impact, televisual spectator sport, top-table games held inside cages and rings.

sadly the entirely on-brand Octagon is already taken by MMA, but ENTER THE DODECAGON! has a certain ring to it, if sounding a little like you're about to perform an proctological examination on some many headed mythical beast...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DerZauberer said:

List building:

This is something which is not necessery true and I've seen/noticed to much examples to agree with that. Netlisting is a big thing and if you compare the podium lists you certainly see 3 KoS, Shootcast, 120 Gitz with 4+ Endless Spells, Big Waagh Ardfists... those are all stuff which were on a podium once and people copy them. There is ofcourse an aspect of "countering" those netlists, which is a great and skill-heavy thing to do and come up with gatekeepers, but those lists usually loose to anything else they are not designed to counter (thats why they're called gatekeeper lists). If you compare factions, it's easy to proove with math which unit is better as other units, same for allegiance, battalions and rules. Thats how netlists are created. Just look around TGA in the factions topics, which are all about getting the smallest edge out of certain units and rules, discussing 150+ pages with sheets and stats which is the best unit or combo to take. The small differences we see in lists are primarly personal preferences, but all resolve around certain cores, which are "auto includes", and having "auto includes" is no skill. 

 

I think maybe our definitions of netlisting are different.  For me netlisting is more the journey to the list rather than the final list.  If someone looks at a tournament winning list and then just copies it then that is netlisting.   If however they arrive at a similar list based on their own calculations of what units are strong versus not, trial and error of using different units and trial and error with different lists then that is not netlisting.   Comparing unit stats and seeing which are better, trying units out and figuring out which are better, figuring out synergistic combos and applying them is part of list building.   Of course, you apply that to Slaanesh you will end up with 3 Keepers.  You apply that to Deepkin you will end up with 18(+) eels.   Because those are the best.  I arrived at 18 eels in my own Deepkin list because I tried everything out (seriously, I have 6 Sharks and 2 Eidolons of the storm) and just found eels were the best, and the more I had, the better I did.    Trying to improve your list is part of the game and people shouldn't be denigrated from doing it.

That said no one should be put off from attending a tournament for fear that they haven't built a strong list.  Tournaments aren't that competitive outside the top %.  They aren't 80% 3 Keepers Slaanesh, 20% 120 plague monks.   Slaanesh are <10%. If you lose your first game you will probably never face them.   And none of your opponents in the bottom half of the tournament are going to be WAAC aggro-players.  They will have lists like yours and mindsets like yours and you will have fun games.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bring my daughters of khaine because it is the only army I own 2k of. I've owned 6 or 7 armies in the last 3 years, but always had an issue with the lore, models, or playstyle. Daughters is the only army that checks all those boxes for me and I'm tired of bouncing around the factions. Luckily for me, they have quite strong rules.

Tournament by definition has a competitive notion to it. That serves me just fine, because I make nearly everything I do a competition. That's just a fact about myself I have come to accept. However, the main reason I attend "tournaments" is because that's the only way I know I'll get to actually play games. My scene is incredibly small, about 6 of us total, and it's a long way before theres another store. Its quite regular for me to be the only person to show up for open play or "event" days (we dont use the word tournament because the competitive implications have turned off some newer/less experienced players). So if I want to play at all, travelling to a tournament is my only reliable option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2019 at 9:31 AM, Ointagru said:

It's easier to win a tournament and to pretend to be a serious player when you can just buy an army that has a competitive edge over the others. This kind of posturing is not possible in chess.

Not true I always proxy my rook as a second queen. You have to pay 1500 for it through chessworld but I did a pretty solid conversion so people let me use It.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...