The Lost Glade News

Whats wrong with cheesy lists is that your opponents never stick around for long when they are up against one. You play someone with a seemingly unbeatable list and its 9/10 they will not play you next time you ask them. Sure people play to win, but i find it more fun when you won against the odds or won knowing it was down to *YOU* and not just the book.

They are only entertaining to the person using it spoony. I played a all 500pts game thingy where it was like 8 armies of 500pts each played against each other (in store). I was like "nah people wont take magic and if so not alot". Wrong! Every bloody person took magic at least one lv2 mage. They all targetted me first as i had nothing and yeah not fun.

Increase entrants? for that i will not enter. How about it? decrease now.

Why should i respect someone who openly rips the rules apart and uses his army to the max? Why should i respect someone who plays the game in such a way it degrades it and makes others annoyed and in cases angry. No cheesy lists and stuff should not be banned but just Booed everytime they enter the store, make them feel down make them feel how we feel when they rip apart our armies that we have spent days...hay weeks...making! That they have spent hours? Different fish? so what! get another pond your not welcome...

I will say no more on the matter we have gone off topic enough. Good luck Aadne.

SDETT

This post has been edited by Silly Dragon Elf the Third on Jun 18 2007, 12:19 PM

You know, I'd be fine with that. Of course, that is, if I actually got some games in. Taking it all nicely is a good way to having fun yourself, even if you are losing; especially if you put a lot of effort into the other areas: painting, fluff and composition. So what if you have 20PD worth of magic raining down on you. In the end, you can say, "I lost on my own terms; I focused much more on other areas, you won in this area, well done",

EDIT in Response to the Edit:

Because it's a different style of play. You still clearly do not understand that everyone has their own approach to Warhammer, especially with 'get another pond your not welcome'. I feel that this is going too far, and it rings very closely with discrimination issues in the real world. So if you are going to respond, perhaps you should at least moderate what you say. This is supposed to be a rational debate; keep emotions out of it, please.

Myself, I'm a fluff-a-holic. I've only ever played one game of Warhammer and that was in January last year. I've made an army list before; you only have to find it amidst the Army List section on TLG. I've created several fluff articles on my army. And yet my actual army is barely painted; money-wise I probably actually have more Warhammer fluff books than I have an army. I'm a different fish in a pond. And so are they. And so are paint-a-holics and whoever else. They rip your army apart; why are you battling them? Don't then. Personally, I'd just battle them anyway if they asked, even if I know I'm going to lose. It's their attitude that counts; just as long as they don't rub it in your face and they're all genial about it, I know that I'm going to have a good time.

I think, perhaps, that before you start limiting this Army List Competition with your own prejudices, you should stop and think about everyone that will be participating in it; the power gamers, the army composers, the themers, the fluff-a-holics, the painters for those that might want to submit pictures--all this is Warhammer. Warhammer isn't just about creating army lists that seem to be well themed; its abouts trying to weight all the aspects to your tastes. If it came to a vote, I would not restrict WAACy army lists from entering this competition, not because I am a power gamer, but because I respect their way of approaching Warhammer.

This post has been edited by Schmeag on Jun 18 2007, 12:44 PM

OK it seems its kinda hard to get to an agreement on this...
SDETT got a point.. TLG aint the most active forum around so we prolly wont have around 5-8 entries.... Awww I just sneezed and banged my chin against my headset... F*** that hurted...
Never sneeze with your headset on!

Well... at least the best way to do it all is in my opinion the 20-40-40 method
Since many want all races then I guess it should be this way..
I see no problem in deciding your own point cost.. So I think one can decide this for himself.
It should be judged with members votes just like the painting comp I guess.. So if one enters with a cheesy list I guess those we like this cheesy list will vote for it.

So I would say the entry is free for all.. Come up with whatever army list you want

This post has been edited by aadne on Jun 18 2007, 12:56 PM

Yes, this seems to be a... varied way of going about things. Except for one thing: Will members then each be a judge with the 20-40-40 method? If so, in a sense, everyone will be giving their own marks out?

Well In my oppinion its most fair if all members can vote for their personal favourite army.. And when thinking about it I know its hard to get everyone to follow the 20-40-40 method.. in fact its impossible. But when we vote one should try to remember the 20-40-40 and vote with this in your mind... kind off

Can I just input something in? All armies, no matter how cheesy, how beardy or how rigged, are defeatable. Can I also point out that there is a kind of "Advantage Triangle" in Fantasy. It goes:

Close Combat beats Shooting
Shooting beats Magic
Magic beats Close Combat

Havn't you guys kinda seen that? I know that there are a lot more other aspects (movement, placement, baiting, etc) but that's the big picture. It's nearly impossible to make an impossible to defeat army. Maybe very hard to defeat army but not impossible. 40k is a whole new ball game when we talk about beardy and cheesy army compositions (infact, I've actually made an unstoppable Tyranid Force) but this is Fantasy. No army is rigged, no rules can be bent and everything has their strengths and weaknesses.

Just remember, so long as the dice ain't rigged, there's a chance you'll come out on top with any army. (Btw, if the other person wants to rematch with you, fight fire with fire and no, I'm not talking about magic lores)

Away from the cheesy discussion. I think the 20-40-40 suggestion is great but I actually think we should have a randomly generated panel of people (say 3-6 people). They could discuss the entries in a topic and decide upon which is the best list. Of coarse they won't be able to send in their own army list (just to make it less Bias) but hey, they won't always have to judge. If you ask me, having everyone vote is a bit weird since there's always gonna be people who will vote only for their army list (you gotta admit since you're not going to agree easily when it comes to competition) and there are others who down people down just because they think the list is crappy (eh, just maybe) so, a neutral panel would help.

BTW, these lists are made for fun. Sure you could make them but hey, we arn't gonna road test them. On that note, we could make the "most cheesy" category because not many people are gonna try make these lists, arn't I right?

True, but haven't you also noticed that the armies dubbed as 'cheesy' tend to win a lot more? All armies can be rigged; it's where strengths are maximsed that the 'cheesy' factor comes in. But with such a dynamic game that is Warhammer, it's very difficult to classify the border between 'cheesy' and 'non-cheesy'. Those army lists that are classified as 'cheesy', however, have been classified as such for a very good reason--they appear to be unrealistic, unsportsmanlike and probably most importantly, win a lot.

There's always a chance. Even against your Tyranid force. This is a game of chance, and definitely, if the opponent achieves ones on all his or her dice rolls, then you certainly do have the upper hand. But we have to face the fact that the likelihood of winning against a 'cheesy' army with an army that has not been maximised to one strength is much reduced when compared to two similarly composed armies facing off. And the point about 'fighting fire with fire', I think, is mute, especially if you are SDETT and dislike that kind of army in the first place. Really, it's not about getting revenge against someone that enjoys powergaming; it's more so about playing it your way and as I said, 'losing on your own terms' (if it comes to that). EDIT: Unless, of course, one is a power gamer him or herself, in which the method of 'fighting with fire' would only be natural.

This too is a valid idea. I just suppose it would have to depend on the trust and confidence of the members in the judges, lest they dispute their neutrality. I'm not feeling quite confident in army list composition for the reason that I haven't looked at any army lists or tried making any for a long while now (probably more than half a year), so I wouldn't mind judging. I know the basics of army list composition, but not the more advanced parts, though. I'll definitely be fine with the fluff section, and probably the themed criteria too.

This post has been edited by Schmeag on Jun 18 2007, 02:20 PM

Off-topicness aside; how great is the interest in organizing such a competition anyway? I'm not sure I'd be up for it but I'd be happy to co-judge (polls as judgement is just stupid) it since I won the latest and would consider entering a contest that you have won bad form...

Wow- good speech Schmeag.
I think that sums it up well.

I don't think having the fluffy and beardy competitions would be too bad- few people would fall in both camps, so numbers shouldn't be too much of an issue (If you don't play fluffy lists you'd probably not enter the 'fluff' list competition anyway, and vice versa)

Disappear for a few days and a whole debate springs up!

Just so you know Aadne, I organised the last competition, and would be more than happy to do so again if people would like me to.

Last time I decided on this points system, with 3 judges each scoring the army lists using this:


Originality & Creativity - 10pts

Playability - 10pts
(including both how fun it is to play with and how well it will do)

Small story/Fluff piece (i.e. theme) - 5pts
(very little is required, unlike the fluff competition; 100-150 words. This does not have to be a single piece, it can be split between units/characters, though if it is then uniformity will be expected [no missing out the 'basic' units])

Miscellaneous - 5pts
(variable, & can include things like presentation of the army list etc since it's an overall impression - up to the judge's discretion)


This seemed to work quite nicely, though we can modify it if people want to (or use a new system). I didn't include strategy tips etc as a main category (though the one person who included some got high scores on miscellaneous from me), because I think tactics should in general depend entirely on the situation. They should change and be modified depending on the army you are facing, the terrain and later on by how things have gone so far (very few battle plans stay the same through the whole of a game). Because of this I think it's better to be tied into miscellaneous - it allows you to include strategy if you have a plan that is applicable to most situations, but allows you to focus on other things if you don't. That's just my opinion of course, it's not set in stone or anything.


I think having judges is the way to go. Having 3 seperate ones works well, as it doesn't restrict the entrants too much (only 3 people can't enter) and 3 is enough to stop personal bias being a prominant factor if it is present.


On the note of judging, SORRY SDETT! I was really organised with judging, sorting all the entries out, printing them off and marking comments etc on them, but I let it fall by the wayside as far as finishing it off goes when my exams started. I know how fristrating it is having non-responsive judges - I really am sorry! I'll get my decisions to you tommorrow, I promise!


I'm not really bothered by 'beardy' armies, but I wouldn't advise restricting a competition to them. We had a reasonable turnout last time (8 entries), but if the same number of people enter split between two competitions (4 in each) it's not that great. If someone else wants to do a seperate competition for beardy armies that's fine, but they really can't be judged on the same criteria as for the normal competition.

As far as non-Asrai armies goes, I think allowing other armies would be a good idea this time. We restricted it last time, and it'd be nice to do something a bit different. As far as judging is concerned I'm quite familiar with most of the armies out there, and it may get us a few extra entries if we're lucky.


As far as your 'Advantage Triangle' goes Onimasha, I dissagree with that particular set up, but agree with the concept. There is clearly a 'rock paper scissors' kind of effect, but close combat/magic/shooting isn't really it in my opinion, though they are the main 3 damage causing phases. Magic and shooting overlap for one (and can complement each other brilliantly), whereas combat cas be slit between infantry and cavalry or light vs heavy. Shooting and magic are both good against light troups, but weak against heavy cavalry etc...

Servant of Isha.

You did a good job last time so I nominate you then

And as I pointed out earlier I'd be happy to judge if you want.

No problems servant. If you got exams then get them done with first priority to this judging, your exams are more important than a comp on a website. Don't worry yourself. Oh and good luck!

Peoples vote all the way don't try to mix judges with voting as it all comes a tad confusing maybe and remember no need to complicate things when there are so little numbers involved.

Well i would've nominated myself to be a judge except recent er...discussions has made it impossible not to be biased (also i want to enter).

SDETT

No prob tbh I dont really want to do it
So servant its all yours...
If we should have an limit to entries then I just have to say.... IM IN!
So then I hopefully got myself a spot.

OK one thing.. So its all races yup.. should it also be all point cost?
I have allready made my list and im pretty statisfied with it... so I would like all point cost.

My last exam is this wednesday SDETT. As said I'll try and get it finished tommorrow; I should be able to do it then and I plan to. If all else fails It'll be sent to you on thursday. Thanks for being so considering! (and sorry once again)


In the last competition I allowed 1000, 1500 and 2000pts lists, which worked quite well. I'm not worried if you go imbetween though, however I am going to put a max value. I'm not at all happy about judging a 3000pts battle - I wouldn't consider myself confidant enough at it, and it gets harder to distinguish lists at that value. So perhaps any points value, with a max of 2000?

I agree that mixing votes and judging won't work that well, and in my opinion judging is the way forward for an army list competition.

I'll be more than happy to have you as a Judge, Nelyafinwë. We just need one more judge then.


What do people think of the points system that was used last time? Does it need modifying? Assuming we've decided on things, I'll put the competition up on thursday. The main challenge will probably be finding a 3rd judge; Geep was great last time, but I expect he'll probably want to enter this time. So if anyone is interested speak up!

Servant of Isha.

The point system seems fine.. And max 2000 is Great.
OK im going away this weekend so Ill get my list ready on thursday