[Archive] WPS Comp system and Chaos Dwarfs

Swissdictator:

WPS

It’s not a bad system overall. The intent being that modifying to the points at a tournament will balance out the fluffy/soft lists losing more and hard lists/winning a lot. Basically it makes it more about generalship (and dice) then simply listbuilding.

I find it is a little harsh on the Chaos Dwarfs, but I’m trying to work a build that will score decently on this and still be able to compete fairly well. Sad thing is I get knocked pretty badly for taking the Great Taurus.

I absolutely love the figure, and the options provided, but it takes a fair comp hit here.

So while this is partially list building, it’s also a discussion of how to have the balance between fluffy/fight. It’s also a discussion of the system itself.

Baggronor:

I don’t see why a Taurus should be frowned upon so much, its not exactly game-breaking. Although I don’t really agree with the whole re-balancing comp thing anyway, its never going to be anything like accurate. Only a -800 for a second war hydra for DEs, WEs actually get a bonus for having only tree spirits (we all know theres an abundance of tactics in those lists) and Vampire Lords get penalised just for showing up :hat

I don’t see why a Taurus should be so frowned upon either, its not exactly game-breaking. Just seems to me like they’re won’t be happy until everyone shows up with nothing but blocks of spearmen. And who would penalise the Armour of Gazrakh over the Black Hammer of Hashut? Killing flammable targets in 1 hit sounds a fair bit harsher than a 1+ save on 1 guy.

grunts:

I like the system and I do agree that its a bit harsh on the Chaos Dwarfs. I guess they frown on the Taurus as it doesn’t take up a hero choice (though in all the latest books, neither do any non-dragons). I’m confused about the armour of gazrakh as they call it the Armour of Gazrakh the Cruel. Perhaps they meant the Gauntlets of Bazrak the Cruel?

And I just want to say wow, that list is exceedingly harsh against daemons. If you want good comp, you have to take a daemon prince with no daemonic gifts, then nothing but the basic 4 types of demons with no banners.

Swissdictator:

If my army gets less then a 2600 (before the dividing by 200) I might consider a different one, though I still feel like I’m getting a bit… short changed.

snowblizz:

If my army gets less then a 2600 (before the dividing by 200) I might consider a different one, though I still feel like I'm getting a bit... short changed.

swissdictator
Haha! I tried to comp the DoC list I've been planning for tournament use and it wasn't pretty at all.

On the other hand I played a tournament with a BoC army that clocked in at 24 comp points. Despite having 2 Terror causers :)

WPS comp should be viewed more as an attempt to punish the no-brainer and easy choices and those which your opponent is going to gnash their teeth at than necessarily "nerfing" all power builds. That seems more a interesting side effect. And there are always those who take their army and damn the consequences, unless the penalties are severe enough.

grunts:

wow, I just added up what my comp score would have been if they’d used this at the last tournament I was at and its a BIG negative number…like -7000.  And I didn’t come close to winning a single battle!  This is much harsher than I thought.

The biggest minus was -5000 for my magic score. Then -2300 for warmachines. And -100 for the Armour of gazhrak. Then the teensie bonus for the first unit of blunderbusses and my warriors.

snowblizz:

wow, I just added up what my comp score would have been if they'd used this at the last tournament I was at and its a BIG negative number...like -7000.  And I didn't come close to winning a single battle!  This is much harsher than I thought.

The biggest minus was -5000 for my magic score. Then -2300 for warmachines. And -100 for the Armour of gazhrak. Then the teensie bonus for the first unit of blunderbusses and my warriors.

grunts
Wait... how many power and dispel dice did you have? Even my nastiest DoC 14PD 9DD list didn't get that high for magic.

Servius:

well i will say that the Taurus gets the same negative as most of the other ridden flying terror causers… this is the reason for the negative not its combat abilities… take it this way… i won against a gobbo fast cav army because of a sun dragon…

On the armor… its a 1+ save on foot. thats pretty brutal especially on a hero.

The negative as me an Swiss have discussed is well a little harsh… I think it should be something more like you pay penalty for every unit of BB you have more than normally or GW equipped warriors.

Earthshaker is pretty harsh… your basically paying the penalty for 2 stonethrowers when you only get one. if given the choice of 2 Stone throwers or 1 earthshaker… i would take the throwers. I like getting a bonus for HG… but i think it should be double points only as most of the time the units are super cheap.

In my opinion the VC and Daemon lists are the 2 most easily brutal lists… they are full of underpriced items that give awesome abilities and are definately a no brainer. I mean at the Vegas GT this year a Daemon player scored in the top half after missing the second day completely! :o:o And with the daemons whole list being designed specifically with brutal combos… Their lists are hit hard as they well should be as in a competitive tournament that and sportsmenship are probably the only negative most of them will even take.

I also think that magic in general is pretty harsh… if everyone went for just the comp score they would have to down their magic to 4 or 5 dice to keep the score high… and it one person comes in with a crazed magic list they would probably win the tournament as they would be blasting the heck out of people.

snowblizz:

In my opinion the VC and Daemon lists are the 2 most easily brutal lists... they are full of underpriced items that give awesome abilities and are definately a no brainer.  I mean at the Vegas GT this year a Daemon player scored in the top half after missing the second day completely! :o:o And with the daemons whole list being designed specifically with brutal combos.. Their lists are hit hard as they well should be as in a competitive tournament that and sportsmenship are probably the only negative most of them will even take.

Servius
Not if I'm playing them I suspect. Though I sorta got into DoC for the reason to try, for once, to play and not feel like I already lost because of the army I brought to the table.

Where the WPS system can bite is when you decide that armies of a certain compyness aren't allowed. I played in a tournament where anything under 14 meant you brought something else.

grunts:

wow, I just added up what my comp score would have been if they'd used this at the last tournament I was at and its a BIG negative number...like -7000.  And I didn't come close to winning a single battle!  This is much harsher than I thought.

The biggest minus was -5000 for my magic score. Then -2300 for warmachines. And -100 for the Armour of gazhrak. Then the teensie bonus for the first unit of blunderbusses and my warriors.

grunts
Wait... how many power and dispel dice did you have? Even my nastiest DoC 14PD 9DD list didn't get that high for magic.


snowblizz
The problem was dispel scrolls and power stones. I had a level 4 and two level 2's, 3 dispel scrolls, and 3 power stones. That gave me a score of 15 for power (so -800 for 10 and then -300 per extra dice over 10 is another -1500) and a score of 13 for dispel (-800 for 10 and -300 per extra dice over 10 is another -900), unless I'm adding it wrong but I think I'm reading it right.

Servius:

@ Grunts - you did it correctly... thats a little heavy on the magic even in a tournament sense.. and well deserving of the negative in my opinion.. I consider anything above 8 casting and 5 dispel to be abusive..
I just started today designing an Indy GT ruleset with some buddies on the tournament scene.. We devised a good comp system in our opinion.. You use the WPS. and apply the comp as normal.. The sportsmanship is 10 questions all relating to the player and not his list or anything relating to comp then Battle Points are a score depending on scenario and VP you can get a max of 60 BP. now after the BP for both players is calculated the judges take the sheet and do a special Handicapped final score for the match. this is only done on the first day. the Final 2 games are not Handicapped. Take the following example.

Daemons VS Chaos Dwarfs..
Daemons won the game with ALL Bonus BP getting a 60.
Chaos Dwarfs lost the game with no extra BP getting a 20.
Daemons scored an 11 on their WPS.
Chaos Dwarfs scored an 18 on their WPS.
So there is a difference of 7. In the favor of the Chaos Dwarf Player. So the Chaos Dwarf would gain a bonus 7 points to their score. Making the final for the round a 27. The Daemons would take a negative 7 to their score making it a 53. This is an extreme example. as the first round would be using the WPS score to match players with similar Comps.. but this could happen in round 2 or 3 per say. The only additional modifier to the Handicap score is that the bonus could not take a player who lost the match above 29 or below 20 and could not take a winning player above 60 below 31. In the even of a BP tie the Handicap score is not applied.

One of the problems we see is the fact that some players have found the balance point of power and comp even with this system to allow them to take a decent negative comp score and still have alot of power and win games though it. We feel the handicapping will quell this as even with the power you will not be able to pad your score so to speak to make up for your comp score.. effectively making comp a more crucial score in the competition.

cornixt:

It is confusing in general, confusingly written, and somewhat arbitrary. Penalising Dwarfs for taking more than one war machine?! I can understand that they want to level the playing field a bit more, especially with some of the new books, but this seems to be turning armies into cookie-cutter lists. Themed armies are usually ripped to shreds as it is, this kicks them in the nads and then sends you a bill.

The Taurus penalty is larger than it should be, the Lammasu penalty should be smaller or not exist (you’d already be taking a massive deduction with a Sorc Lord due to magic penaties, so sticking him on a large target…) No mention of the Ld10 Hero as a general, which I’d argue is one of the most abusive parts of the list with a Taurus (maybe that is why the Taurus penalty is so large). It might all balance out with the infantry units giving bonuses. Do WPS use 3K lists or the more common 2250? I worked out that my (almost) 2250 list comes out at around 3500, mostly due to the FC bonuses for my CD warriors that cancel out my Taurus and war machine penalties. I have a few spare points that I would use on a DR or extra sorcerer, either of which would drop me by 150 in penalties. If I wanted to boost it the army up to a 3k list then I can see a lot more additional penalties than bonuses (although mostly due to the models I have rather than what I’d want to include)

Can anyone provide some context for what this means in the tournament? What are typical battle scores (median value would be nicest). They are expecting most players to get around 15-20 extra from this system, no more than 30 and unlikely to be less than 7.

grunts:

@ Grunts - you did it correctly... thats a little heavy on the magic even in a tournament sense.. and well deserving of the negative in my opinion.. I consider anything above 8 casting and 5 dispel to be abusive..


Servius
Yes, I admit I went pretty magic heavy, but it was all for naught.  The end definately didn't justify the means here (0W-4L-1D isn't the best record...in fact, it was the worst :hat off). The WPS wasn't used at the tournament I was at though, and I scored 15/20 on comp which put me above average.  I think they based that more on "wow, he brought a Ravening Hordes list...thats brave" than on actual army composition.

*Edit*
Composition seems to be a pretty tricky point at tournaments from what I've been seeing, and I've seen it abused a bit too, especially when its in the players hands.  The tournament I was just at had two comp. scores.  The first was awarded by the judges after review of your army list. The second is at the beginning of each battle by each player giving a score of 1 to 5, after all 5 games are played out, the average score that players awarded you is added/deducted from your battle score (ranging from -25% to +25%).  Some players abused this by giving every opponent the lowest mark possible, and one player went so far as to say "I want to see your army list" (lists were not viewable before battles).  If you didn't show it to him, which was almost everyone, he said "fine, then I'm scoring you a one".  He wasn't even doing this for comp purposes, he was memorizing what characters had what items.  

But I digress, the point I was trying to make is that....umm shoot, I forgot... oh right, I was going to agree with cornixt that this is definately turning some armies into "cookie-cutter" lists.  I like that this is attempting to level things out with the new books (its certainly needed), but at the same time its taking some of the fun out of making an army.  Penalizing for excessive warmachines for example; are they hard to fight against? Heck yes. Are they fun to use against someone? Oh you better believe it.  But will they win you the battle by themselves? Generally not (or absolutely not, as my tournament record shows).  But a good opponent can plan for war machines; flyers, fast cavalry, BoC ambush, Dwarf miners.  Plus the more warmachines you have, the less troops you have to defend against the inevitablity of the enemy making it to you.  

Anyhoo, enough rambling. I hope I've stayed mostly on topic, the last thing I want to do is hijack this thread.

Baggronor:

they are full of underpriced items that give awesome abilities and are definately a no brainer.
Have you tried making a VC list? 'Underpriced' is not a word that can ever be associated with VC characters :) True, many of their items are very good, but when you consider a Vampire Lord clocks in at around 350-450 points with all his gear, the costs are about right. There is also very little in the VC book that is a no-brainer, the internal balance is very good and VC armies generally show decent variety even at GT level. There are drawbacks to all of their choices, the more powerful they are the more specialised they become. I'm not saying they aren't a top tier army, because they clearly are, but then they always have been.

Generally speaking, I have never seen comp scores perform adequately and I'm not a fan at all.

Swissdictator:

The VC list I took for a long time was basically as follows:

Lord: Walking Death, Red Fury, Inf Hatred. 1+ Armor, Blood Drinker, something else (Book?)
Thrall: Avatar of Death (Hw/Sh), Dark Acolyte and I think the Helm
Wight King BSB: Regen Banner
Wight King: Sword of Kings, something else

23 Hw/Sh Grave Guard Bnr/Mu Warbanner
23 GW GG…  Bnr/Mu
20 zomboids
20 zomboids
20 Ghouls w/ Ghast
5 wolves
5 wolves
Varghulf

I might be forgetting a little, but it did poorly in comp. I took that list to be very different and it did well in games.

My CD do comp much better. Then again I do take big beefy blocks of Melee warriors, and a block of Bigs uns while having medium magic/shooting.

snowblizz:

It is confusing in general, confusingly written, and somewhat arbitrary. Penalising Dwarfs for taking more than one war machine?! I can understand that they want to level the playing field a bit more, especially with some of the new books, but this seems to be turning armies into cookie-cutter lists. Themed armies are usually ripped to shreds as it is, this kicks them in the nads and then sends you a bill.

cornixt
What you say is true, but it holds for any comp system really. What you need to remember is that while say Dwarfs get a penalty for taking lots of warmachines at the same time you get bonus points back for taking certain units e.g. less shooting in other areas by investing in non-shooting infantry (which is not a bad idea anyway). I have a friend who is a hardcore Dwarf player who maintains there is no reason to take more than 3 warmahines in a dwarf army. Ever. Sure whacky theme armies get penalized but it after all is a system intended for tournaments to weed out the extremes. And or every genuine themed army there's at least 10 who claim to be thematic trying to hide the fact they are a blatant attempt to use everything good from an armybook. I still laugh at the story where my friend played against an Empire army where it was clear the Empire player had brought a gunline but he seriously tried to claim he was playing a no-wizard themed army.
So even when you get certain penalties you can make up for them in other ways, just not if you are cherry picking the army choices.
The Taurus penalty is larger than it should be, the Lammasu penalty should be smaller or not exist (you'd already be taking a massive deduction with a Sorc Lord due to magic penaties, so sticking him on a large target...) No mention of the Ld10 Hero as a general, which I'd argue is one of the most abusive parts of the list with a Taurus (maybe that is why the Taurus penalty is so large). It might all balance out with the infantry units giving bonuses. Do WPS use 3K lists or the more common 2250?  I worked out that my (almost) 2250 list comes out at around 3500, mostly due to the FC bonuses for my CD warriors that cancel out my Taurus and war machine penalties. I have a few spare points that I would use on a DR or extra sorcerer, either of which would drop me by 150 in penalties.  If I wanted to boost it the army up to a 3k list then I can see a lot more additional penalties than bonuses (although mostly due to the models I have rather than what I'd want to include)

cornixt
Well it is aimed at tournaments so I'm guessing around the 2k-3k mark is where it is at. Few tournaments play as high as even 2500 though, right? I know the WPS is constantly discussed and refined, or so I believe and I would say that it depends a bit on the armies involved. CDs aren't a very common army so I can only postulate that it would be more liable for a mistaken comp pointing. Of course I don't know who and on what basis the WPS is constructed. Other than suspecting the Warhammer Players Society (WPS) of being involved.
Can anyone provide some context for what this means in the tournament?  What are typical battle scores (median value would be nicest). They are expecting most players to get around 15-20 extra from this system, no more than 30 and unlikely to be less than 7.

cornixt
I think that is usually dependant on tournament. I don't know how the original WPS tournament(s) use it. The one I can recall just banned any army with a comp <14 and the higher comp got a bonus to decide on the specifics in scenarios (attacker, defender, that sort of thing), but it was also played at only 1750p.