I just came back a few hours ago from a local tournament that happens about twice a month. We were 12. I think i won, or tied for first place, or at least ended second. But that doesn't really matter. What matter is that people, especially those who used to expect an easy win from the old Ogres, seems to consider everything in our book broken.
You know what? i played through the 7th Ed with our old book. My record was something like 10 wins in 50 games, it was annoying, but i think it really helped me learn the game (with what once was a relatively simple army), and learn that you cannot win every time... I even ended up starting Dark Elves, because i wanted to feel what a win was like once or twice.
Then 8th edition came, and my record switched completely. With the new book, its even better, where i'm currently standing at 20 wins, for 4 Draws and 2 loss. I'm proud of that record, and pulled win from some pretty devastating army (like Warrior of Chaos, double aboms Skaven, and Cheese Daemon of Chaos). I almost never complain that something is too strong (well, ok, maybe except the Slann that cannot miscast, remove 6s, and is ethereal).
But its seriously getting out of hand with the complains. People complain about my 170 pts cannons, but for some reason, find it normal to be able to kill me 4 Ironguts in one turn (lucky shot.... REALLY?).
Then people complain about my 65 pts Gnoblar units that cause difficult terrain test, but dies in drove the first chance they get.
Then my Thundertusk, that never misfire. Do you know he only has a 5+ Armor Saves? That he cost 250 pts, and that despite the fact he has 3 ranged weapon, about 3/4 the times one will be out of range, or just completely unable to do anything with its BS 3 ?
But lets not forget about Troll Gut, that i actually manage to cast about once every 2 games, on very serious situation, where its a win-or-lose situation, and where i risk loosing my 385 pts caster WITHOUT A FREAKING WARDSAVE!
Then there's the Mournfangs, with their 2+ Armor Saves and 6+ Parry save... Yes, they are hard to kill if you bring crappy S3 against them, but what did you expect? they are a 70 pts model with T4 and 3 wounds.
I bunker my character in the same unit? Obviously, considering i only have bulls, ironguts and Maneaters that can take character (thanks to no mount available). Maneaters are too expensive, and Ironguts are too easy to die to Warmachines to even consider dropping their numbers. Two games against dwarf, in both game, out of the 9, only 4 was left when i got in Close Combat, and thank to god i managed to do some long charge, otherwise i'd probably lost one of my wardless characters, thanks to no look out sir!.
My list was even called "''Ard Boyz" by a Daemon player, that play a daemon prince....
The problem is that your list is the perfect example of Cookie Cutting.
ReplyDeleteIt takes everything from the Ogre Armybook that performs best and then you optimized it while playing it in a way that will of course annoy people.
Anything with a Deathstar is considered bad form ESPECIALLY at a local tournament!
For large tournaments, go all out! For 'Ard Boyz, you're on the right track.
But use opportunities like local tournaments to try different things - you know your list already works great with 20 Wins and few draws/losses.
I also play to win but I always alter - even slightly - my lists. I've started using Trolls (35 pts a pop?! A STEAL!) in 2 blocks and they have caused problem for people unprepared but hey, they get automatically slain when faced with the flaming banner.
And remember, people will always complain but sometimes those complaints are not without merit.
It's actually funny you mention this... it was the first time i was using this list at a tournament ; using Greedy Fist, and 3 medium sized unit of Gnoblar. It's all about tweaking, seeing what work, and what doesnt.
DeleteSince the new book came out ;
I tried 2 unit of Bulls and Ironguts, ending up loosing my 9 Naked Bulls everytime, simply because they had no punch compared to whatever else i could use.
I tried a Tyrant too, for many games, under many different version.
Even went as far as to try Yhetees.
It's not like i played 26 games with the same list... But i'm on the loosing end of that argument, why bother?
I think I'm in the same camp as you...I play to win. I would almost call myself a hardcore player. Not that I get bent when I lose, or try to be as hard as I can be in every situation, but I'm not playing patty-cake here, I'm playing a wargame.
ReplyDeleteI've fought a list similar to yours several times. I have no good answers for a lot of the tricks it brings, but I really can't think of anything in the OK book that I would call broken. I grumble about the Hellheart, but as a vampire player, I'm stuck with a ton of wizards, even some I probably may not even really need! Anyway, I digress and ramble...which I tend to do.
What I'm trying to say is I don't think you've done anything wrong. If your list is the one I think it is (How about reposting it here?) I think I'd laugh outloud at the people telling you it's 'ardBoyz.
There are a lot of "hard" things in the OK book, and every one of them has a counter. It's when "unknownw" things show up in a local meta that the cries of "broken" are heard the loudest. If these people fought against similar things frequently, they'd know what to expect and be prepared. Me, I relish the opportunities to fight new things (hell, every time I play WM/H I'm stung by something I've never even heard of!) so love it when new people play at our store or when I get to go to other "small" events!
In summary, yeah...fuck em. They should go back to Little League and re-learn about sore-losers.
For the record, whoever comment anonymous, you'll keep getting deleted. Not because of the content of your comment, but because, well, you post anonymous.
ReplyDeleteIt's seems all clear now, you deleted the last post because it did not really pleased you. I wont take time to rewrite it back and I will only resume it:
DeleteWhen you write that you came back with 1st position and crushing victories but got the "worst opponent" title like you call it two times in a row, maybe they are not that wrong.
If you need to delete this like you deleted the other post, it's probably that they are right and nothing else need to be said.
no more anonymous, and not a good reason to delete post
let's look at it differently. "worst opponent" is a pretty big statement.
DeleteYou need to give 3, 2 or 1 to your 3 opponent of the day (no opponent can have the same score). Say, you had 3 games, but only one you got crushed, what are the chance the one that crushed you get the 3 pts?
Sportmanship is very meaningless in tournaments, and is usually about how your opponent won/loss, or friendship. It's too personal of a score to be given that much value, but that's for another discussion.
Your probably right, if "sportmanship" is meaningless for you, you are plating the right way.
ReplyDeleteI've defeated many opponent by crushing them, and I've never heard complaints. The same way as I've been crushed a lot of times too, and some of them are the best games of my life.
I play to win too, but when I play against someone who play only for fun, I play it the same way. When I'm playing against a good player that play hard, I play hard.
It looks like that you would enjoy crushing a 10 years old kid who play its first game and be proud of it.
Maybe if you would start acting like a growed up person you would enjoy the game more, because treating you opponent of sore loser is not a good way to go. I've always try to stay polite with any opponent and those I would treat of sore loser are someone who's acting like you.
not saying its meaningless, just saying there's too many factor outside just the fun factor, that makes it pointless.
DeleteFor some, its a reason to punish a strong list.
For others, its a way to punish rules argument.
Or, just to punish someone you do not like.
I think Nova has a good example of what sportmanship is about;
Sportsmanship
Circle ONE of the following. Your selection has NO impact on your opponent’s final competitive standing, and should not reflect the results of the game.
1. EXCELLENT GAME
This should only be used for a game of 40k so enjoyable you will remember it as one of your favorite games ever.
2. AVERAGE GAME
This should apply to the vast majority of your games, unless they are almost uniquely excellent or unpleasant.
3. UNPLEASANT GAME
This should only be used for one of the worst games of 40k you’ve ever been involved in. Score only if you are able to explain why to the head judge (if asked to).
**quote** You need to give 3, 2 or 1 to your 3 opponent of the day (no opponent can have the same score). Say, you had 3 games, but only one you got crushed, what are the chance the one that crushed you get the 3 pts? **/quote**
ReplyDelete**quote**
1. EXCELLENT GAME
This should only be used for a game of 40k so enjoyable you will remember it as one of your favorite games ever.
2. AVERAGE GAME
This should apply to the vast majority of your games, unless they are almost uniquely excellent or unpleasant.
3. UNPLEASANT GAME
This should only be used for one of the worst games of 40k you’ve ever been involved in. Score only if you are able to explain why to the head judge (if asked to).
**/quote**
Looks like the same to me, just change your excellent game by "excellent game of the day ... average game by average game of the day and so on and it will gives you the same result. The only difference is probably because the second one allow you to vote multiple times for the same score and suggest to gives a 2 to everyone. That's probably why you love it.
Anyway, no need to keep arguing about this.
In a post you tell that you've been voted worst opponent and it was annoying, In the other, that you don't care, the voting was not good and should have no impact.
You tell it should not be voted in a 1-2-3 way .. and you give me a 1-2-3 exemple for "good voting"
I see nothing here but someone who need to be right.
Someone who need others to say that you're right.
Someone who thinks others are losers because they don't play your way.
We have few players that play like you around here and they have hard time finding friendly games as noone want to play against them.
All I can say is I'm sorry for you, you will end up playing alone.
Last post, coz anyway you'll say that I'm wrong and you're right ;)
DirtySanta, as a neutral viewer, I don't even get what is your point. Are you the Daemon player that can not stand to be beaten by an Ogre ?
ReplyDeleteThat said Enkiel, there is some truth in some complains in the Ogre book. There are indeed some things that are over the top and shouldn't have happened imo.
Like the Ironblaster. Cannons are already too good in this game. But at least they had some issues : static, easy to kill with chaff, and at least sometimes the rebound will fail. Guess what ? Ours can move & shoot 360°, can't be killed easily and can roll the rebound twice and pick the best.
Or the Mournfangs. Nobody would have complained if those things were limited to 3+ AS, like TK Necro Knights. 2+ AS is hard to deal with for many armies, and the parry thing was completely unnecessary.
Now people calling cheese on the Thundertusk is ... interesting :D
There's nothing really gamebreaking. Even with all that we are not a top tier army. But they are indeed some things that make people roll eyes and I think we, as Ogre generals, should be prepared for it.
Far2Casual: and said list has 2 ironblasters and 2 units of Mournfangs.
ReplyDeleteNot that I've played against him yet, only been reading up on it and 'DirtySanta' isn't one of Enkiel's opponents at that tournament.
Also can it really shoot 360? Its a Chariot unit type, correct? Thus limited to its front arc? Need to read up on the armybook and FAQ but unless something specifically allows it to shoot 360 it CANNOT due to being a Chariot!