tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post2134637778278651824..comments2024-03-17T01:39:05.808-07:00Comments on Whiskey & 40k: Player Variance & Its Impact on the Game and BalanceMike Brandt; mvbrandt@gmailhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00818846784767602047noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-15273796183728938682011-05-01T16:25:09.382-07:002011-05-01T16:25:09.382-07:00so can i use a IA book volume nine in the tourname...so can i use a IA book volume nine in the tournament with my team or by my selfRed Scorpions Schoolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10906499098412607329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-88669671339054458942010-03-03T04:50:00.561-08:002010-03-03T04:50:00.561-08:00I've actually seen a mostly-GK finish 4-0 in a...I've actually seen a mostly-GK finish 4-0 in a tournament and come .03 points shy of best general. He had almost all GK, with no thematic compromise when ensuring his force was competitive. There should be a compromise between "RUN THEMATIC ACCORDING TO FLUFF THE WAY I REALLY THINK IT SHOULD BE" and "thematic but still competitive." You can't make everyone happy, and you will cause harm trying too hard.<br /><br />It's good food for thought on the back and forth.Mike Brandt; mvbrandt@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00818846784767602047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-60724904977292372522010-03-03T04:15:26.690-08:002010-03-03T04:15:26.690-08:00Again, Natalie, Mike, I can't disagree but the...Again, Natalie, Mike, I can't disagree but there must be a middle ground. If I want to run an army of hobbits maybe I shouldn't win every GT but I don't think the same can be said of the Grey Knights player whom I've example-d to exhaustion. There are themes the *game* promotes that are not competitive but should be.Atrotoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11988037463590378225noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-69156682896820953122010-03-02T16:53:51.114-08:002010-03-02T16:53:51.114-08:00Good post. What's interesting is how interest...Good post. What's interesting is how interesting the comments are! I have nothing to contribute to the conversation though, so I'll leave you to it.Brenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07426628265866457542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-36558011219269190042010-03-02T09:21:35.575-08:002010-03-02T09:21:35.575-08:00I agree with Mike here. "Theme" is real...I agree with Mike here. "Theme" is really just a say of saying "The story I came up with for my army," and some stories that people come up with for their armies describe not very effective military formations.<br /><br />To give a personal example, I run a tribe of Snakebite orks called Da Circus Rukkus that is on the cusp of becoming a full-blown Waaagh! My friend runs a band of misfit sisters from a tiny order called the Order of the Kingly Raiment who are following a misguided inquisitor. His "theme" is intentionally describing a less effective force than mine. How are we supposed to make his theme as competitive as mine without breaking his theme?Nataliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12662787003156000207noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-68282976571190737252010-03-02T07:25:28.622-08:002010-03-02T07:25:28.622-08:00Well, now we get into an interesting place. Suppo...Well, now we get into an interesting place. Suppose what I really, really, really fuggin' want to do is have an army that's Grey Knights allied with Orks. The GK get stuck in the Octavius system, and an Ork weirdboy screws with their brains using the crazy psychic power of the waaagh, and they all get along and go on a rampaging waagh of their own after milk and cookies.<br /><br />If you make me take ANY units that don't equate to that theme, you're forcing me to take units I don't like just to even be legal.<br /><br />The game can't be happy for everyone ever ... and it's open ended and non-homogenized enough that there's always going to be "optimal" choices and suboptimal ones. While it's noble and I think pursuit-worthy to balance units against each other and make numerous builds playable within your own group - I've mentioned to you before that my own group completely rebalanced numerous codices mostly for shits ang giggles - it's not something that functions at a tournament level, if you will.<br /><br />Re: catering to anyone ... I think a themed army is a misnomer. It's simply the desire of someone's imagination to suit a theme, and the willingness to sacrifice competitiveness for that.<br /><br />I utilize a themed Catachan army that focuses on aggressive, in your face hard hitting play, which is basically Straken to a T. It's also competitive enough to win with. Cool as it is notionally to try and make "every" theme equal, I'm not sure it's a realistic goal ... b/c we each have a different opinion of what a theme is. There are people who think Catachans should never have flying vehicles in their theme. Says them.Mike Brandt; mvbrandt@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00818846784767602047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-39725612798046143642010-03-02T06:55:00.210-08:002010-03-02T06:55:00.210-08:00"Regardless, no matter what you do to DEEPEN ..."Regardless, no matter what you do to DEEPEN or BROADEN the game, or even to simply improve unit balance, it's going to help the sharper / more advantage-seeking players exponentially (not proportionally) in comparison to their antitheses."<br /><br />Ok this did it for me. More rules = more rules for good players to take advantage of and poor players to ignore. I understand what you're saying.<br /><br />I still hope though that we can agree that player should not be forced to take units they don't like just to be competitive. I don't disagree with the above comment but I feel it's eclipsed by the aforementioned Grey Knights players that are "forced" to take non-GKs to augment their force when attending tournaments.<br /><br />Everyone's army should be "realistically"(not perfectly) balanced even within it's own theme-imposed limitations. Shouldn't we cater to the needs of themed army players before we worry about Eldar players that don't use cover?Atrotoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11988037463590378225noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-84779529502767063072010-03-02T05:43:35.144-08:002010-03-02T05:43:35.144-08:00Natalie - I generally agree with you. When the pl...Natalie - I generally agree with you. When the players as a whole want the game to be a different way (such as meeting the fluff), it's usually a reflection of players' group, and hence a reflection of a roughly comparable set of skills across the participant players. This makes new rules totally "OK."<br /><br />Atrotos - Good commentary in general, and a good point to me about explaining the foundation that I'm defending before I go into my furious defense!<br /><br />I think to a couple of your points that it demands a little bit of a reiteration on my part ...<br /><br />Improving choices, making more competitive builds, etc., is not going to help the people who are incapable of building competitive builds. Contrary to popular belief, most people who go to a tournament believe their list can be competitive. Those guys that go with a pure fluff list and go "I KNO I'M GUNNA LEWZ" are not the norm, or even a significant minority.<br /><br />Regardless, no matter what you do to DEEPEN or BROADEN the game, or even to simply improve unit balance, it's going to help the sharper / more advantage-seeking players exponentially (not proportionally) in comparison to their antitheses.<br /><br />The point is, that the game will never be made MORE considerate to the "average" unless it becomes more homogenized. Most homebrew rules and certainly the IA expansion make the game more colorful, but not more homogeneous.<br /><br />This isn't a knock on them, just a rationale for not utilizing them in a tournament setting.Mike Brandt; mvbrandt@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00818846784767602047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-7924209837386422732010-03-01T17:44:26.637-08:002010-03-01T17:44:26.637-08:00Mike I'm being yelled at by my fiance to come ...Mike I'm being yelled at by my fiance to come to bed (it's about 3:30 am here) but instead I find myself reading and responding to your post. As before I find the quality and tone of your writing to be excellent but feel that you often skip the explanation of the point you support so well. <br /><br />In this case you've skipped why it is that rules desingers should concern themselves with how well their changes to the rules are implemented. Aren't some players *always* going to take advantage of rules where other don't? Why should this affect custom rules and expansions more than 'official' rules?<br /><br />"So, you're not going to improve competitiveness or balance, oddly enough. You're just going to add more variety of build."<br /><br />I found this comment deeply perplexing. Is not "adding variety of build" the same as "improving competitiveness"? Namely for us player that add self-imposed restrictions by adhering to a theme. You mentioned DHs being competitive due to ally rules but what about the player that only wants Grey Knights? Said player benefits from additional rules such as Forgeworlds GK version of the Redeemer. It expands the fluff while presenting the player with another viable choice within the Grey Knight list.Atrotoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11988037463590378225noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-13128997014711887942010-03-01T16:21:13.139-08:002010-03-01T16:21:13.139-08:00I'd like to offer another perspective on that,...I'd like to offer another perspective on that, Dave. I think we can distinguish between two kinds of homebrew and IA rules - those that are designed to fix something perceived to be broken, and those that are designed to enlarge the game. The IA2 update brings its vehicles into line with the current state of the art, for instance - that's a fix, and it's subject to the effect that Mike is talking about, where (to the extent it makes those units better than they were before) it benefits the "good" players more than the "bad" players.<br /><br />But other homebrew and IA rules aren't designed to fix anything. Slick Loader, the entire IA1 ammunition system, and lots of IA units such as Salamanders are added not to give one player or another a leg up, but to make the game more closely fit the fluff. Those should be included not whenever a player needs a handicap, but whenever the *players* are interested in making the game more closely fit the fluff. With this sort of thing, Mike's other point is right on - a good tactician is good tactician even if you change the rules of his army on him, or enlarge the sphere of action his opponent might take (by corollary, even a good player can be a bad tactician, and changing the rules on him is in my opinion the best way to figure that out).Nataliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12662787003156000207noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-62719318340858890602010-03-01T11:02:04.574-08:002010-03-01T11:02:04.574-08:00Honestly, the only reason for having home brewed o...Honestly, the only reason for having home brewed or IA lists is so that you can have a good players with a competitive army playing against a not so good player or a not so good army and give the not so good 'whatever' a leg up. <br /><br />"You are playing guard, but you aren't that good. We will let you shoot your battle cannon twice, i.e. slick loader".<br /><br />I agree EVERY army can be competitive. Some are just easier to make competitive than others.<br /><br />DaveUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15271532838678940318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-65349717784802187132010-03-01T07:13:53.534-08:002010-03-01T07:13:53.534-08:00Truth, in part.
The other truth of the issue ab...Truth, in part. <br /><br />The other truth of the issue above is that when you "improve" armies with homebrew rules changes, or the utilization of Imperial Armor, or what-have-you, you're going to benefit the good players more than the ... I don't like "bad," but "players who don't take full advantage of the rules."<br /><br />The premise is that while some codices have far more limited breadth of builds that are "competitive," none of them are purely noncompetitive (yup, not even DH, largely due to ally rules). Adding more variety to the codices via homebrew or IA will improve the spread of builds you can field, but it will not make players better. So, you're not going to improve competitiveness or balance, oddly enough. You're just going to add more variety of build.Mike Brandt; mvbrandt@gmailhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00818846784767602047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-388453741033869908.post-57601617144812854792010-03-01T07:03:30.367-08:002010-03-01T07:03:30.367-08:00Mike,
If I'm understanding you correctly it se...Mike,<br />If I'm understanding you correctly it seems as if you are saying that good players will be good players regardless of what army they are playing with. A good player can use a 5 point gaunt better than a bad player will use a 5 point gaunt and a good player will use a *cough* 35 point wraithguard better than a bad player will.<br /><br />I think what you are trying to get about is that good players are good players because they understand how the rules can be used to benefit their army and will put themselves into a position to take advantage of those rules. A bad player may take advantage of rules that benefit them, but they will not work to put themselves into an advantageous position, they may just end up in one through chance.<br /><br />In your example the eldar player didn't work to put himself into cover at all times, he just happened to be near cover so went into it. A good player would ensure that his units either moved from cover to cover, or had an intervening model that would provide it cover, say speeding jetbikes for instance.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15271532838678940318noreply@blogger.com