Community Comp: A system used in Australia that has revived a tournament scene

[difsta]

Hi All,

First time poster, long time reader :P

this is partially in response to the post written by Denzark over at [url=http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?55087-A-Commentary-on-Contemporary-Balance-in-40K]A Commentary on Contemporary Balance in 40K[/url] I was thinking of simply responding there, but decided not to derail his thread, as it is a good read and there were some good discussions.

Re-balancing – Tournaments.

I respect the hell out of TOs, I really do. But in the same way I have demonstrated a level of subjectivity in 40K, TOs are naturally subjective. What you think is an improvement to the problems may not be. Why should we trust your house rules are better than the shambles the design team has come up with? Too much tinkering is counter-productive. What you can do is this: Firstly, place terrain symmetrically so it doesn’t matter which side gets which. Secondly, make sure each side has an equal number of objectives if the game is objective based (if you have an odd number and the players are placing, the gunline player who is lucky to have 3 objectives to place behind his ADL and tank park is already at an advantage. Next, ensure that whatever happens both sides get an equal number of turns (leave time between rounds in case of run over). Lastly, ensure you use a swiss progression system so that the naturally stronger players/armies face off against each other (you may think this point is obvious – but GW use random table selection through all rounds of their in-house GTs). Finally, consider not playing Maelstrom because it is just too random if you are trying to claim balance with your house rule nerfing of ranged D and invisibility.

Historically I would have completely agreed with him. At the tail end of 5th Edition I felt it was as balanced as 40k has ever been, and didn't really require any 'tweaking' to keep it balanced or 'fair'.

Then 6th, and then 7th came along, and with the constant releases of content, it has become harder and harder for the casual tournament goers to keep up. In the southern states of Australia we historically had tournaments that had a 'composition' score, a concept which most people are familiar with (if not, quick google will sort that out). Most tournament goers wanted it, but most tournament goers complained about it Later in 5th and pretty much all of 6th we dropped the comp score from a lot of our events. We left it up to GW to keep the table top balanced. Our attendances plumitted. We had events that were 80+ players drop to 20-30 players within 12 months, and then 12 months later not even run. We did a poll of the veteran gamers that had left the hobby, and the biggest gripe they had was lack of balance, and the removal of comp scores meant that if they wanted to be able to keep up with the 'arms race' that was becoming 40k, then they had to invest too much time, money and effort to constantly be changing armies. Now some armies had the benefits you could take different choices and suddenly your army was 'back up to scratch', other codeces were were not competetive, and you either changed codex, allied a codex, or were reserved to the fact you were likely to get your butt handed to you most rounds.

A bunch of gamers in Australia (about 10 of us initially) came up with a system we called Community Comp ([url=http://www.communitycomp.org/]www.communitycomp.org[/url]). This system has grown over the last 2 years, and has over 15 people now on the Community Comp panel. We had a large number of leagues run it to start with, so players could tweak their list every week and see how the system would grow/evolve. We then ran a bunch of free events where people could come along and test out the system (we are talking about 10-20 player events over about 3-4 rounds). The system took off. We now have a large number of events ranging from 15 players up to 100 players now using the system all over Australia (and even in a few other countries now also).

Now the system doesn't change the rules, we aren't nerfing powers like invisibility, we aren't changing how D weapons work. We are simply limitting the strength of the armies that can attend an event. Some events use the Community Comp System 'as it is'. So they allocate a number of comp points to the tournament, and players submit a list and are allocated the appropriate percentage of that based on their list strength. Others have decided that they don't want to have comp scores, all they want to do is stop the absolute BS lists from attending. So they put a credit limit, eg. 'You can't spend more than 14 Community Comp Credits on your list'.

The system is constantly evolving. We have a large number of TO's that have been kind enough to send us the army lists in attendance at their events. This isn't specifically used to change scores, but more to see what level the community are playing at as a whole. This helps us gauge where to set the bar. If a list is doing better than its comp score suggests it should, we don't simply go and now hit that list, but we do take a look at it to make sure we haven't missed some unit or combo. And if that unit or combo is something that deserves an alteration in credits, we then look at updating it.

We have a 3 monthly "full release". Whereby there will be any of the 'large' changes to the system, or previously release codeces. And then we have what we refer to as "minor releases" that we put out roughly 1-2 weeks after a new codex/campaign/data slate/etc. get released. We only update rules for units that are within that release, or have a direct affect on existing units.

I recommend having a read of the document. And before picking any one particular points cost as right or wrong, put your standard list that you love to play the most through the system. See how many points you get. People are expected to spend points, the average list in attendance usually spends between 8-12 credits.

If you have any questions about the system, you can post them here, or on our [url=https://www.facebook.com/CommunityComp]Facebook Page[/url]

- Josh

[Arkhan Land]

looks pretty cool ill share with other people I game with

[daboarder]

Some of you may have heard of the community comp I push occasionally in these discussions.

Difsta is one of the blokes who runs it

[Lord Manton]

Ive got Space Wolves, running the Wolves Unleashed detachment (not listed in the CommComp document). My usual TAC list is something like:

Wolf Lord SS/TH Wulfen Stone
Rune Priest Axe, Psychic Hood, PP
GHx10 WGPackLeader, 2xMG, Wolf Standard, Power Sword x2 8xCCW
GHx10 WGPL, CombiMelta, 2x MG
GHx9 WGPL, PG, CombiPlas
Drop Pod x2
Storm Wolf
Dreadnought AssaultCannon
Land Speeder MM
Long Fangs - 4x ML, Flakk x1.

So as far as I can see, I've got 1 comp point for drop pods, 3 points for StormWolf and that's it?

In total that army has 4 Comp points, at 1,500pts. I don't think this is in any way a broken or even particularly beardy list (and it shows with the comp score), it has a few things to deal with armour and vehicles, and it's a bit assaulty. The Lord with the combat unit of hunters is a bit beasty, but the rest is standard. The Priest usually rocks Tempestas Lore.

Then again, I don't think the system was built for lists like this...

[daboarder]

Not built for it? I dunno why you'd think that, I dont particularly see anything broken and in need of toning down in that list of yours

[Lord Manton]

Not built for it? I dunno why you'd think that, I dont particularly see anything broken and in need of toning down in that list of yours

Yeah, the system is designed to tone down broken lists to equalise tourneys. So my list, which isn't broken, isn't going to gain many points. I might need to add a few more iron priests on Thunderwolves.

[Morgrim]

Yeah, the system is designed to tone down broken lists to equalise tourneys. So my list, which isn't broken, isn't going to gain many points. I might need to add a few more iron priests on Thunderwolves.

I'm not sure what you're getting that. You're not meant to be 'gaining' points. It's saying the lower your comp points, the further from broken your army is. If it was costing for tournament scores, it'd be something like "If your CP are < 5 you get two extra score points, if you CP is between 6 and 14 you get one extra score point, armies with CP > 14 are barred".

[40kGamer]

I'm not sure what you're getting that. You're not meant to be 'gaining' points. It's saying the lower your comp points, the further from broken your army is. If it was costing for tournament scores, it'd be something like "If your CP are < 5 you get two extra score points, if you CP is between 6 and 14 you get one extra score point, armies with CP > 14 are barred".

So it works a bit like the Swedish comp for WFB?

[Lord Manton]

I'm not sure what you're getting that. You're not meant to be 'gaining' points. It's saying the lower your comp points, the further from broken your army is. If it was costing for tournament scores, it'd be something like "If your CP are < 5 you get two extra score points, if you CP is between 6 and 14 you get one extra score point, armies with CP > 14 are barred".

I don't think my sarcasm translates well online. I know my list isn't broken, hence fewer comp points. I think we need to put a net list in and see how it fares and get a comparison. But I cbf finding one.
I noticed a lot of the SoB units had points. I thought they were meant to be no good.

[difsta]

I don't think my sarcasm translates well online. I know my list isn't broken, hence fewer comp points. I think we need to put a net list in and see how it fares and get a comparison. But I cbf finding one.
I noticed a lot of the SoB units had points. I thought they were meant to be no good.

I am happy to put a couple of 'Net Lists' through for you today and show you what they get. As for SoB (Adepta Sororitas) they are basically untouched. There are 3 relic type things that are costed 1-2 points each. Exorcists are a credit, and units of Penitent Engines are C1, meaning the first unit costs 0 credits, the 2nd unit costs 1 credit and the 3rd unit costs 2. So if you 'Spam' Pentinent Engines you are hit only 3 credits. It isn't a stupidly broken list if you spam them, but it is still 'ok' hence a few credits. Saint Celestine is worth 2 credits. You will find that most hit and run characters are 1-2 credits purely for the ability of granting hit and run to units. And the Ministorium Priests are 1 credit each in addition to being cumulative. The more priests you have the stronger the affects. But if you were to write a 'standard' sisters lists you would pay way less than the 'average' tournament goer who only pays between 8-12.

As for your list, your list is slightly 'softer' than the average tournament list that we are seeing attend events. Spending only 4 credits would get you 46 out of the available 50 Credits at a standard tournament. So when you add your battle and comp score together at the end of the event, lets say you won 3 games and lost 2 and scored 66 out of 100 for battle your total score would be 66+46 = 112. So someone who spent say 10 credits on their list and they got 35 comp credits would need to score 11 more battle points than you (usually that would mean they would need to win 4 games) to simply equal your score.

Your list is definitely the lists we like to see at our events.

- - - Updated - - -

Here is the list that won Adepticon

‘Change We Can Believe in’
Fateweaver - 6 Credits plus 8 Credits for the use of Fatey and a Grimoire
Heralds of Tzeentch Level 3 Disc, and Exalted Reward. (1 Credit for ML3, 2 Credits for Grimoire)
Heralds of Tzeentch Level 3 Disc, and Exalted Reward. (1 Credit for ML3, 1 Credit for C1 of psykers)
Herald of Nurgle Level 2, (one locus of Fecundity) (2 Credits of C1 Psykers, 1 for Locus)
Herald of Nurgle Level 2 (3 Credits of C1 Psykers)
10 Pink Horrors
11 Pink Horrors
2x 8 Screamers
8 Plague Drones with Venom Sting, and Champion with a Greater Reward.
(3 Credits of "Fast Assault Units" under Daemons)

The list spends 28 Credits and would not be allowed at a Community Comp event as the cap is 20. This was not taking into fact that if Fatey wanted to pay the points for having the ability to roll Invis (he only gets 1 roll) he would have to pay 8 credits. Which of course he wouldn't...

- - - Updated - - -

This list will be out of date as of Saturday, however Brad Chester's Eldar List from the ETC

HQ 1 - Warlord: Autarch, Scorpion Chainsword, Fusion Gun
Troop 1: Dire Avengers, Transport 1
Troop 2: Dire Avengers, Transport 2
Troop 3: Dire Avengers, Transport 3
Troop 4: Dire Avengers, Transport 4
FA 1: Warp Spiders, 4 x Warp Siders - (1 Credit)
FA 2: Swooping Hawks, 1 x Swooping Hawk
HS 1: Wraithknight (3 Credits)
HS 2: Wraithknight (3 Credits, 2 Credits from C2 Wraithknights)
HS 3: Wraithknight (3 Credits, 4 Credits from C2 Wraithknights)
Transport 1: Wave Serpent, Twin-Linked Scatter Laser, Shuriken Cannon (1 Credit)
Transport 2: Wave Serpent, Twin-Linked Scatter Laser, Shuriken Cannon (1 Credit, 2 Credits from C2 Serpents)
Transport 3: Wave Serpent, Twin-Linked Scatter Laser, Shuriken Cannon (1 Credit, 4 Credits from C2 Serpents)
Transport 4: Wave Serpent, Twin-Linked Scatter Laser, Shuriken Cannon (1 Credit, 6 Credits from C2 Serpents)

Total of 32 Credits, also banned from Community Comp Events due to spending more than 20 credits.