Saturday, March 12, 2011

CVinton's post tournament round up.

(everyone kept saying my army looked like german panzer tanks)

First and foremost, thank you mi40k for putting this primer on. It was great fun, and I knew things would go well when I got there are found an out of order meter to park at (i.e. free parking)


Since we've got a trend here I'll keep it going and give an over view of my 3 games.

Here's what I brought:

1850 Pts - 5th Edition Roster

Company Command Squad Meltagun x1; Plasmagun x3; Officer of the Fleet
Chimera Heavy Flamer

9 Psyker Battle Squad
Chimera Heavy Flamer

Veteran Squad Plasmagun x3
1 Chimera Heavy Flamer

Veteran Squad Plasmagun x3
1 Chimera Heavy Flamer

Veteran Squad Plasmagun x3
1 Chimera Heavy Flamer

Veteran Squad Meltagun x3 Demo doctrine
1 Chimera Heavy Flamer

Veteran Squad Meltagun x3
1 Chimera Heavy Flamer

Hydra Flak

Manticore

Manticore

Vendetta

Vendetta

Game 1; primer mission 2

I had first turn but was seized.

I played an IG player who's list was a mix between gunline and mech. He had 3 leman battle tanks, one with pask, a handful of heavy weapons teams, primaris with a company command squad in a chimera, a platoon with grenade launchers and a platoon command squad with a medic, standard, plasmagun, 2 heavy weapons teams, an armored sentinel with plasma cannon, 1 vet squad with melta and demo, 5 ogryns.

He was there just for fun. This guy said he hadn't played in something like 3 months and was told by some friends about the tournament. Really great player and I feel bad for backing him in a corner and just putting the Mech IG pressure rush on him. After the game he jokingly said he felt like a high school girl who was tricked into a dark alley. I managed to get all three objectives; HQ in the center, more quarters claimed and more KP.

Overall I learned not to put my manticore shots so close to the board edge. I think I ended up losing 2 or 3 missiles off the edge, but I had to take the risk because he had his tanks so close to the edge.

I also learned that vendettas are always juicy targets for people. It freaks them out and they want to shoot them down, bad, and when your melta squads are in them, they want to shoot them down even more. I think this will be the last game I ever put guys in my vendetta that have a job to do that is more than a special-weapon-squad-with-3-flamers-just-because-its-fun job. Both my vendettas were immobilized early and then I had to play chimera taxi cab to get the meltaguns over to some armor.

Game 2; primer mission 3

Had first turn

sigh....allow me to stand on my soap box for a moment.

First, the guy I played was a good sport, he really was. I'd play him again, no problem at all. (Though, I don't know if he'd play me)

Now, to the soap box; WYSIWYG. It means your stuff has to be modeled. It means flamers don't count as melta, it means a sergeant model isn't your grenade launcher, it means that heavy bolter on your chimera is a heavy bolter.

I lost this match bad, I scored no points. (Que voice-over reflection statement) I recognize that this rant might seem like I'm just being a sore loser and have thought of that. Upon reflection I'm not and here is why.

Wysiwyg is not in a tournament so that people who have nice looking, correctly modeled armies, like me, can look down their nose at people that can't paint, or are gaming on a budget, or whatever the reason your stuff might not be modeled as-is. Its not meant to put one group of people above another. Its there to prevent confusion and to save time.

Because of the extent to which this army was not wysiwyg we managed to only get in 3 turns. A lot of time was spent in the start of the game explaining what was what.

I know that it doesn't seem like a big deal but I find it easier to focus on the mission objectives when I can look down at a model and say ok, that has a multi laser and heavy bolter and not have to think to myself "Is that the one with the flamer and stubber or is that hellhound without the turrent the one with the stubber?" I allowed myself to get frustrated and loose track of the objectives and even turns because I had to spend my energy and ADHA brain powers on keeping track of the list.

The final nail in the coffin for me, which was outlined as a tournament no-no over on mi40k's blog was the army list. I wish I took a picture of it but it was basically like this:
ccs 50
m 30
pcs 35
f 20
is pw com pw
is
200
((total))
130 hellhound (Sratched out)
pcs fx1 -15
100 vets 3m
220
((Total)) stratched out
95 straken
ect.
LRBT
LRD

I had a slight idea what was going on with this list but imagine if you didn't play guard. I totaled it up and I could only get it to somewhere around 1650. And who knows, maybe he played his first game with the list without the scratch outs maybe not.

And the bolters for flamers on his chimeras is what killed me. As a word of advice for you non-IG players out there; Don't let this go. If its a bolter on the model, its a bolter; if it's a flamer, its a flamer. He told me mid game when I called him that he said his chimeras all have flamers (all modeled with bolters) The reason its cheese is that its a free swap on a chimera. You say their flamers one game if you're playing a horde army and then next game, play bolters as modeled if thats on your chimeras and its to your advantage. And if its not marked on the list that their chimeras have upgrades to flamers, and their modeled with bolters then they come with bolters, sorry.

I could go on for days, but I'm over it, I vented and what I learned from this is don't stretch wysiwyg and don't let your opponent. I'm not letting it go anymore; whats modeled is whats there and you better have it written on your list (unless its standard equipment) and you better have paid for it.

/soap box.

Game 3; primer mission 4

Had first turn, was seized

Another awesome player. He had a fully painted salamanders army and it looked good. His list was mech and I wish that he had freed up points to put his dread in pods. Sadly, he was walking them across the board. I think it would have been a much different game if he podded in his dreads.

His list was vulkan, cato, command squad with apoth, standard, champion, 2x melta in rhino, 2x 10 man tac squad with flamer in rhinos, 3x multi melta dread with heavy flamer 3x TL las, spons las predators.

He did make a bad mistake right in the start and tried to spot light me with two of his preds instead of trying to spot me with his empty rhino and then shoot me with his preadators. He missed with both lights but it still allowed me to freely shoot his preds. I was able to fire my two vendettas at the two preds and still shoot my manticores at this 3rd pred (only with an extra d6 to scatter but of course they hit because they were on fire at this tournament). Despite him having first turn this gave me the alpha strike on his very important, very costly units and lost him board control of having first turn.

He lined up sort of lop sided and I was able to press a flank. On top of that, I had a tall building running perpendicular to my long board edge on the same side as his strong side that gave my vendettas cover from most of his army. Because of this I was able to shoot at his predators while only be fully exposed to those predators and in cover or out of sight for the rest of his army. Being able to isolate his predators and take care of his major long range anti-tank made the rest of the game a systematic break down of target priority. Firstly taking out the dreads and then killing his scoring units and their rhinos.

I had a spot of bad luck and was unable to bring down (stun, immobilize or wreck) a multi-meltaless dread with 3 twin linked melta guns and he charged into me to prevent me from claiming 2 of his objectives and get all three mission objectives. I ended up with 2 points, killing over half his army and holding my 3 objectives.


Conclusion:


It was a great time, and a fun tournament. Even my round two, though it was frustrating, shouldn't have stopped me from doing well and did not stop me from having fun. I felt bad being a little bitch about it but it frustrated me and I was within my rights to stomp me feet. I didn't push to have him thrown out, I just pointed it out to a judge after the game and never mentioned it again. In normal games I can keep track of proxy stuff just fine. I think what happen was I wasn't in the mind set to have to deal with proxies and just wanted to focus more on the missions because they were more complicated than the book missions. I gained a new respect for WYSIWYG and will stand behind it even more in tourneys.


Get Your Game On has some great players. I'll definitely be looking forward to some more tournaments in the area! Everyone is really excited about what the new location will bring and so am I. I definitely see potential in the store to do good things, especially with the new location being even more in the downtown area.

Thanks again for putting it on and maybe one day mi40k can finish above DFG.....

27 comments:

  1. Nice tourney rep. It's good to hear you did so well. DFG really represented! I can see where you are coming from with the wysiwyg. In tourneys, things need to be wysiwyg, even in a counts as army. The this is that routine is for pick-up games and new guys, that's it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's the thing isnt it, counts as is fine from the standpoint of, say Lustwing..

    But the models better have the right weapons. and look like termies,

    fluff counts as, doesnt affect strategy at all. having a bolter on a model, that cen be a flamer at will, well that's just cheating.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Glad you had fun. Sorry about the WYSIWYG issues with your Game 2. We went over all the armies that people turned in, and he must have turned in a full list to us as we would not have allowed him to turn in an abbreviated list.

    We were trying to allow a little freedom in WYSIWYG because the area has a lot of new players. Next time we will put a limit on what can be used. You shouldn't have to have an encyclopedic mind to know what you're facing.

    Anyway, glad you guys made it out. We'll be doing our best to represent at your guys next tournament.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey wait a minute can you ding us like that in your last line when we didn't even play?

    ReplyDelete
  5. bwhahahahaaha. You guys had some writers in the tournament. Also, I left some of the store credit on your account at GYGO, it wasn't much but was a "thanks for putting it on and judging it" gesture.

    ReplyDelete
  6. They used soft scores to help determine things. I am not opposed to the idea, but perhaps working on the balance of soft scores and painting vs the actual results. Maybe give it 20% weight instead of 50% would be better. It should play -some- role, as not having some form/way of keeping people being nice makes it real hard, of course you have to watch for those players who are just sore losers as well as legitimate problems. I have seen it in the past where a team gives an opponent a low score simply because they lost.

    ReplyDelete
  7. That is the downfall of sportsmanship being factored into the score. I think if the sportsmanship was simply "would you play them again willingly?" And if all three rounds result in a NO, they forfeit their battle points. I think that would work, especially considering how rare it is in our circles that sportsmanship is even a real issue.

    I am not saying this as a reflection of the GYGO tourney, just my own thoughts on it. Once again, wish I could have been there.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes but at the same time making them forfit it all is a bit harsh too. There should be something said for treating people nice, but also for winning.

    The key is how to balance it, your idea has merit OST and perhaps we can work on it a bit to try and smooth the edges.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The only soft score was painting. I think you got 10 points per battle point and then that added to your painting score. The sportsmanship was just a told to recognize problem players I think. Otherwise I don't understand how the scoring was done:

    I got 5 objectives for 50 points and 41 points painting for a total of 91.

    Adepticon does weight soft scores pretty heavy allowing a total of 45 points from painting and max of 120 from game, but in this case it could have been scaled considering there was only 3 of the 4 missions used. shaving off 25% of the max points would have been appropriate.

    I'm in no way criticizing the tournament, and just to restate things, it was AWESOME and I am 100% respectful of people that put these on and can't say shit about how they're run since I've never ran one.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So someone who paints amazingly even though lost a game or 2 should be placed higher than someone who say......goes 3-0 and maxes battle points? Sounds like some BS to me really. Painting should hold little to no weight.

    So with that scoring system your telling me that just because people can paint well they should win a or place higher in a tournament based on how well you PLAY the game, over someone who cant paint because of a Disability or some other thing that prevents them from painting well?

    Makes no sense what so ever to me.

    If you ask me painting should be a whole seperate catagory with no points that carry over into the battle points system. This way players who dont play so well arent carried by their amazing ability to paint. And those who dont paint well arent brought down by their inability to pant well, but play the game amazing.

    Just my 2 cents.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sportsmanship definitely was added into the score too - you got 50 points for your 3 rounds (2-1 record), I got 40 points for mine (3-0). I'm not sure exactly how things got scored, but something felt off there.

    ReplyDelete
  12. @LSS, it is a null point anyway, as DFG will not have a soft score tourney while I am at the helm.

    ReplyDelete
  13. We just used the adepticon scoring system not our first choice but since it was a adepticon primer we figured we should go with it. After running this system I can say we will never institute a soft score in our own tournaments.

    http://www.adepticon.org/?page_id=1727

    Go figure CViton Carried the 45 points for the painting and the extra for sportsmanship. I was the one who judged his painting and the only points he lost was "highlighting/blending" on his display board.

    In future tournaments we'll probably use the "ok great, horrible" voting system but not for anything other than giving us a heads up for trouble makers. We've kept all the paperwork for every tournament we've ever had so trends would be easy to spot if we start such a system.

    @Cpt
    Our normal tournaments have two prizes one for overall battle points winner, and one for best painted, that way the "best" player and best painter get rewarded.

    ReplyDelete
  14. @Vogrin

    Im sure its because you pissed someone off with your vase knowlesge of basically every rule.....you called them on something and they felt cheated when in fact they were the ones cheating.

    Thats why i love playing against you Vogrin, i usually learn something new every game that expands me as a player. Whether its tricks or adding to my already pretty strong knowledge of the rules.

    IMO if u went 3-0 u should have been a contender for 1st or 2nd right next to the ork player. Cause after all when u get to the nitty gritty of it its a game of skill and tactical knowldege not a game of glue and brush strokes.

    ReplyDelete
  15. OK, having seen CVinton's scores (20-10-20, lost rd 2), and mine (10-10-20, won all 3, know my opponent rd 1 rated me "average" sportsmanship), I'm guessing it was 10 points for a win, 10 points for "superior" sportsmanship. So 30 points battle results, 30 points sportsmanship, and 45 points painting max.

    The MAJOR problem with rating sportsmanship that high is one that anyone who has written a military performance evaluation is familiar with - "average" should be the normal result, with only exceptional games going higher, but instead it's like getting a 3 instead of a 5 on your OPR/EPR - the kiss of death to your chances of higher rank. It is far too objective a standard, and too unevenly applied, to matter that much.

    Oh well, I had a good time anyways, even if I really got my hopes up for placing when I went 3-0. And it was great to get the chance to run my list against other people rather than just the store regulars.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks for chiming in R3con, I figured it wasn't all doom and gloom and that you guys really put in the extra effort just to give people a chance to prep for adepticon.

    SO .... when are we going to do the Green/Blue battle?

    ReplyDelete
  17. @ Christopher i figured this was the case about running it with Adepticon rules. Only draw back to that is adepticon is like 7 games over the course of 2 days. That way you have a chance to balance out with battle points/painting points. If someone seriosulys went 7/0 at adepticon, which im sure will happen, it will be hard for someone who paints amazingly to keep up if they arent winning all their games and pulling full points every match.

    By no means as i bashing your tournament, wasnt there, dont know 100%. IM sure it was a fun time for all, just perhaps some got a little frustrated due to the scoring system not scaling properly to so few games with such a high % of paining included.

    ReplyDelete
  18. ... DFG will be holding a spelling bee soon though and I am sure Captain Obvious will sit that one out as well, lol!

    ReplyDelete
  19. As long as i get a sheet with all 25 words i have to spell ill Ace it.

    Actually better yet ill just come into your office and u can transcribe it for me.....like my personal Secretary....i have some other duties for you to do as well.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I don't know about Dave... but the ork player destroyed me... i mean.... deadly deadly destroyed.

    I dont have a problem with painting scores to a point, i think it should be based on, is it three colors and based then you get full credit for the points if only to encourage painting,

    OR more tournaments need to be 3 color + base or you dont play.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I have no idea how the scoring goes. I guess I thought you got 10xobjects + painting. period. sportsmenship x10 is huge. That should go unless of course a national tournament or a primer for a national tournament. I didn't realize that was the math.

    I'm glad that, like GW, adepticon even burried its points system somewhere retarded like in the prize section instead of in the "Scoring" section. Nice.

    ReplyDelete
  22. @Cpt Actually if you read closely the second day has no soft scores, so only the first 4 games are judged that way.

    There will be no painting/soft scoring in the blog war, although I'm not opposed to a point per shot being worked in.

    OST: email me I've got a couple ideas rolling around including one that has a bar open or cash 3 feet from the tables.

    ReplyDelete
  23. @ R3con and the rest of the guys that put it on

    Because the internet sucks at voice inflection and body language I just want a broad statement: No one is upset, we're just talking, just like we would be at the game shop. No one is butt hurt or upset about the format or anything like that. We all had a great time up there and I'm sure I'm not alone in saying I'll be up again (maybe not next time, but for sure in the future).



    And with that said, I'm going to close off this thread. I posted about soft scores with some talking points and we can all work out our love/hate for them over there.

    ReplyDelete