should comp scores be taken out for A-con 2010?

The place to discuss all that was! Visit the AdeptiCon website (www.adepticon.org) for past coverage, event results and photos!

should comp scores be taken out for A-con 2010?

Yes, I feel that army composition should be taken out
23
39%
No, I feel that army composition should be scored
36
61%
 
Total votes : 59

Postby Matthias » Tue Apr 14, 2009 5:08 pm

Since there was no comp in the Gladiator and no comp in the Championships (OK - maybe 1 point of the Sportsmanship checklist might be clouded by comp perception) - I am assuming this thread is geared towards the 40K Team Tournament or Fantasy events.

Speaking from the 40K Team Tournament side...Comp has seen a reduced role over the years - which was a direct response to this very argument. Team composition is also 100% scored by your opponent - there are no event judges involved - so I am not sure why that is even being argued.

Generally I think this system has worked to a degree for a couple of reasons. First there is no hard set rules for comp. It is based solely off your opponent's perception of your army (which you will see below has a minimal impact at best). Secondly, it attempts to appease both types of players. It gives you an option to protest a list, but at the same time the penalty is not score breaking in the least.

At the end of the day comp accounts for a whopping 5% of your teams total score. Hardly anything punitive in the grand scheme of things.

That said - I looked at the comp scores for the 2009 40K TT and discovered the following:

  • There were 656 comp scores given out over the event (82 teams, 2 scores per team over 4 games).
  • Of those 656 comp scores there were only 25 zeros given (about 4%).
  • All the rest gave 3 points (remember in the 40K TT it is a choice between 3 or 0 - nothing else).

The round breakdown was:

Round 1: 1 zero
Round 2: 10 zeros
Round 3: 7 zeros
Round 4: 7 zeros

By this standard I feel comfortable saying that comp plays an extremely minimal role in the 40K TT. You are talking 75 points denied out of 1968 possibly given. The later rounds seem pretty accurate, but it is obvious that people are more high-spirited starting the event (or no one wants to rock the boat right out of the gate).

I think some of what is being said here is a bit off base or arguments stuck waaaay in the past without really paying attention to how those scoring systems have changed in 40K events over the years at AdeptiCon.

I want to run the sportsmanship numbers too (and I understand the next argument about socially engineering your way to top marks)...but this is a social gathering first and foremost.

At this point I feel comfortable saying I'd take removing comp from the 40K TT scoring system into heavy consideration given the above minimal impact it has on the event.
User avatar
Matthias
Techpriest
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby fyrblckdragon » Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:24 pm

Comp has no place in 40k. My teammates and I discussed it for quite a while during the event, and frankly, there is no army selection that would offend me in 40k. Unless there is a loophole, and you're the first to find it, all powerful builds have an achilles heel, and in a 300+ player pool, that achilles heel will probably be there. Balanced lists can usually do dominate in large 40k tournaments. They might not get first place, but the top spots are usually held by those that bring a balanced list, and can adapt.
User avatar
fyrblckdragon
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:08 pm
Location: Saint Charles

Postby n00bzilla99 » Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:53 pm

fyrblckdragon wrote:Comp has no place in 40k. My teammates and I discussed it for quite a while during the event, and frankly, there is no army selection that would offend me in 40k. Unless there is a loophole, and you're the first to find it, all powerful builds have an achilles heel, and in a 300+ player pool, that achilles heel will probably be there. Balanced lists can usually do dominate in large 40k tournaments. They might not get first place, but the top spots are usually held by those that bring a balanced list, and can adapt.


Read Nob Bikers.
Image
Check out my band Brotherhood Sidekicks on Soundcloud!

G.R.A.M.P.A. Member
User avatar
n00bzilla99
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Postby Redbeard » Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:56 pm

AdeptusBrewCityJoe wrote:Read Nob Bikers.


Fred, what happened when you guys played Nob bikers in the TT? Was it turn 1 or turn 2 when you had tabled them?
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Postby n00bzilla99 » Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:03 pm

Redbeard wrote:Fred, what happened when you guys played Nob bikers in the TT? Was it turn 1 or turn 2 when you had tabled them?


Ok, I admit that Nob Bikers can be defeated especially when the list consists of them and lootas, but if you have multiple mobs + bikers on the field, (90 boyz + 10 bikers) it becomes harder to table them.

We couldn't kill Meganobz in Super armor or whatever, that stopped us from tabling our enemy. These were also nobz that got the whole good wound allocation goodness to "share the love".
Image
Check out my band Brotherhood Sidekicks on Soundcloud!

G.R.A.M.P.A. Member
User avatar
n00bzilla99
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Postby Inquisitor_Malice » Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:23 pm

Allocate all the wounds you want. Abaddon has a answer. :)
- Greg
User avatar
Inquisitor_Malice
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:58 pm

Postby n00bzilla99 » Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:28 pm

Inquisitor_Malice wrote:Allocate all the wounds you want. Abaddon has a answer. :)


Imperials can't have Abaddon :(
Image
Check out my band Brotherhood Sidekicks on Soundcloud!

G.R.A.M.P.A. Member
User avatar
n00bzilla99
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Postby Generalissimo_Fred » Tue Apr 14, 2009 7:50 pm

Redbeard wrote:
AdeptusBrewCityJoe wrote:Read Nob Bikers.


Fred, what happened when you guys played Nob bikers in the TT? Was it turn 1 or turn 2 when you had tabled them?



Top of 2 and they were tabled. I will say our lists were specifically designed to beat Nob Bikers and we had good rolls. Our lists were also maxed out Oblits and Lash DP's. I will also say the mirror mjatch happened on the table next to us with our team partners and the reverse happened. The Nob Bikers tabled us.

To be honest there are some armies that can't really deal with Nob Bikers. That's not a reason to ban them either and I'm not in favor of that. I'm in favor of giving people incentive to take only one 700pt Nob Biker unit and spend the other units points on other stuff in the codex.
Generalissimo_Fred
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Elgin, IL

Postby Turtle » Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:22 pm

instead imperials, have vindicators, missile launchers, lascannons, multimeltas, dreadnaughts, chapter master ordinance, basilisks, medusa's, melta guns, battle cannons, demolisher cannons, plasma guns, plasma cannons

if any of these things are shot at a nob biker unit, the unit gets ONE save a 5+ invul if they bought cybork bodies, and if they turbo boosted the get a 3+ save, and for every save they fail a biker dies. and they can't turbo boost an entire game

expecting to kill them without loosing a single unit is a fantasy, sometimes it happens and when it does it's awesome, but what do you expect from a 600+point unit

but you're right nobody has an answer to them they are way too powerful :roll:
"Here have a beer, Marines play better with beer: Rhysk
Turtle
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: just outside of mil-town

Postby Blackmoor » Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:49 am

I say we have no comp at all.

That way we can play to see who brings the best lash list.
Last edited by Blackmoor on Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Blackmoor
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:15 pm

Postby Blackmoor » Wed Apr 15, 2009 2:50 am

Turtle wrote:instead imperials, have vindicators, missile launchers, lascannons, multimeltas, dreadnaughts, chapter master ordinance, basilisks, medusa's, melta guns, battle cannons, demolisher cannons, plasma guns, plasma cannons

if any of these things are shot at a nob biker unit, the unit gets ONE save a 5+ invul if they bought cybork bodies, and if they turbo boosted the get a 3+ save, and for every save they fail a biker dies. and they can't turbo boost an entire game

expecting to kill them without loosing a single unit is a fantasy, sometimes it happens and when it does it's awesome, but what do you expect from a 600+point unit

but you're right nobody has an answer to them they are way too powerful :roll:


Lash and Demons can beat Nob Bikers. Nothing you listed can.
Blackmoor
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:15 pm

Postby Matthias » Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:15 am

A quick idea I had last night in regards to comp in the TT/removing comp...

The numbers do not necessarily support composition judging in the TT. That said I know the issue is generally split and proponents just want a better system. Sadly, years of tweaking and tuning have proved that no system will ever approach perfection.

AdeptiCon has always been about fun first. When we started this con we were literally swimming in mediocre GT's and we wanted to do something different/fun. The competitive part of the convention has ALWAYS secondary (not to say we don't take it seriously). I know there are those out there value winning above all and would rather submit players to doping tests before actually having fun - and that point has never been lost on us. Both sides of the hobby often butt heads at an event like this and that can create some issues.

My current proposal for the 2010 TT scoring system would be thus:

  1. Generally remove composition from the overall score (it would not make up a direct % of your overall score).
  2. Each result sheet for each game (so 8 per team) would have a single check box stating something similar like this year: Our opponents' armies were abusive, totally over the top and no fun to play against.
  3. The checkbox itself it not a direct penalty, however it a majority of the games involving your team (that is 5 spread out over the 4 games) receive a check in this box then your team would receive a one time -15 or -20 penalty to your overall score.
The benefits would be:
  1. Comp penalties would only be applied if a majority of your opponents deemed it necessary. This cuts down on the grudge/hard feelings comp ding everyone sees as a problem.
  2. Still gives those that wish to see comp included a voice.
  3. Much less data entry on the TO side.
  4. Moves away from attempting to put a perfect subjective system in place in favor of a more simple checks and balances system.

Just an idea. Interested to hear some feedback.
Real battles are fought in 6mm!
User avatar
Matthias
Techpriest
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby incarna » Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:55 pm

Matthias wrote:A quick idea I had last night in regards to comp in the TT/removing comp...

The numbers do not necessarily support composition judging in the TT. That said I know the issue is generally split and proponents just want a better system. Sadly, years of tweaking and tuning have proved that no system will ever approach perfection.

AdeptiCon has always been about fun first. When we started this con we were literally swimming in mediocre GT's and we wanted to do something different/fun. The competitive part of the convention has ALWAYS secondary (not to say we don't take it seriously). I know there are those out there value winning above all and would rather submit players to doping tests before actually having fun - and that point has never been lost on us. Both sides of the hobby often butt heads at an event like this and that can create some issues.

My current proposal for the 2010 TT scoring system would be thus:

  1. Generally remove composition from the overall score (it would not make up a direct % of your overall score).
  2. Each result sheet for each game (so 8 per team) would have a single check box stating something similar like this year: Our opponents' armies were abusive, totally over the top and no fun to play against.
  3. The checkbox itself it not a direct penalty, however it a majority of the games involving your team (that is 5 spread out over the 4 games) receive a check in this box then your team would receive a one time -15 or -20 penalty to your overall score.
The benefits would be:
  1. Comp penalties would only be applied if a majority of your opponents deemed it necessary. This cuts down on the grudge/hard feelings comp ding everyone sees as a problem.
  2. Still gives those that wish to see comp included a voice.
  3. Much less data entry on the TO side.
  4. Moves away from attempting to put a perfect subjective system in place in favor of a more simple checks and balances system.
Just an idea. Interested to hear some feedback.


I'm not willing to change my position that composition scores are a bad idea just yet. However, I believe that this idea that you've proposed is an excelent compromise to bridge the gap between those who dislike comp scoring and thsoe who feel they are a good thing.
incarna
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:47 am

Postby EldarCorsair » Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:21 am

I voted yes, for all the reasons the OP listed.

Consider that comp scores have been completely removed from 99% of tournies in the the UK...
User avatar
EldarCorsair
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Woodstock

Postby doc » Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:24 pm

EldarCorsair wrote:Consider that comp scores have been completely removed from 99% of tourneys in the the UK...

I wouldn't jump on that bandwagon too fast - you might get hurt!
So you'd like a tourney were there are really only 5 lists (FB)?

Yhe UK events have become BORING with the sameness of lists - go on the UK forum (I'm sure you have) they all talk about the ultimate winner list. It then comes down to a dice off... Almost as bad a playing Magic construct decks...

I really don't care if Comp is dropped or not - the only people I see complaining about composition are powergamers - as they are the one that get dinged points for having uber-lists. I'll still play my fluffy-bunny lists, and have fun regardless. I could not image showing up with 5 Land Raiders for an Individual event...

*IF* you keep composition go with two options - a prepublised system, such as the one Astronomi-Con has been using for 7 years - where the player know what points he/she will be loosing based purely on where they put their points in the FOC.
Or, go with the old RTT style sheet, where background, story and fluff where rewarded, but make sure it is non-player judged.

Take away the chipmunking, sandbagging and emotion from the scoring.

I'd also suggest having Best General be a combination of Composition AND battle points.
Jason "Doc" Dyer
31x GT attendee; Best Painted, and 4x Best Sport
Doc's Projects
A-Club
doc
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 1:23 pm
Location: North Vancouver, BC, Canada

PreviousNext

Return to AdeptiCon 2009

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron