PDA

View Full Version : Points denial at a tournament is it wrong?



AM1640
13-02-2012, 19:03
Hi, I am wondering what people think about points denial at a tournament. You would create an army not to win but rather to deny anybody who plays you to win because your army would be desinged so that you would never give up points. You wouldn't win any games but neither would anybody else. Is this possible and how mean, cheesy, or unsportsmanlike would you think this would be?
For example if some one showed up with 3 units of 100 zombies each and a few necromancers so that it would be difficult to get rid of these units in order to get victory points. These units could also sit on and deny objectives even though they will never win a round of combat. Look forward to everybody's comments.

tmarichards
13-02-2012, 19:10
I think a better option would be to instead learn how to play the game properly than pull a dick move like that.

pointyteeth
13-02-2012, 19:33
I find any type of points denial centric army to be a real downer to play regardless of win or lose, especially in a tournament.

Korraz
13-02-2012, 19:36
Personally, I would probably pull every dirty trick in the book against such an army, just to be done as quickly as possible. The game is already ruined, might as well let the WAACler run free now.

Frankly, I don't see the point. Why would you want to wast everybodie's time?

SunTzu
13-02-2012, 19:43
So to use your example... you put a bunch of zombies on the table. Roll some dice, take some off. Roll some dice, put some back on. Repeat for two hours.

That sounds like the most boring way to waste time imaginable.

It's not even like it's playing to win... you might win a game like that (if you get off a spell that scores you 100 VPs and don't lose anything yourself) but never a whole tournament. So what's the point?

abdulaapocolyps
13-02-2012, 19:43
Yeah,there are some awful,boring lists out there but A- cheese is so prevalent at tourneys any way I would expect to see it and b- I'm not sure there IS an unbeatable list in the new books.
I wonder if GW will ever put points limits on units,scaled or not,so we can get rid of some of those no save spells...

thesheriff
13-02-2012, 19:54
I dont see the point.

I can understand armies that use aspects of points denial, such as lots of big units. I mean, my tournament daemon army is;
*Herald of tzeentch
*Herald of Khorne BSB
*Skulltaker
*48 Bloodletters w/ CMD, IoEW
*39 Horrors w/ CMD, Chageling
*2 x 4 Flamers

Now, with two units in that game, + charecters being worth 1720pts (+100 for BSB, 50 for banners, 100 for general, so its actually 1970vps), it is definatly playing along the lines that you have to shift one of those two units to win. This is Point denial in moderation (and only in competative enviroments i might add).

But, taking for example in an Undead army;
*2 x 5 Dire wolves = 90
*One Vampire Lord with a 4+ rerolalble, 4++ with +1 wound = 350
*301 Skellies w/ CMD, Screaming Banner

...is a dick move, and should not be tolerated. There is no point to doing that.

thesheriff

Doommasters
13-02-2012, 19:58
You are playing in a Tournament, you play to win do what you have to on the battle field but be a nice gamer not an angry nerd. Points denial is a solid tactic no problems with it what so ever.

At the same time you want to win, building a list that is only going to deny points and not get you any is pretty pointless.

Phazael
13-02-2012, 20:03
Deathstar units are the reason that mass kill spells like Dwellers and Gateway exist. I have no problem with point denial on a limited basis, like keeping a BSB or general safe, but the guy who shows up with two eagles with the Archmage and Friends hiding inside the Folding Fortress deserves to get tossed from the torunament before his models hit the table.

Lord Inquisitor
13-02-2012, 20:07
The classic example of points denial is the High Elf army with Teclis or if banned a BoH Archmage with a BSB toting the World Dragon banner, a bare-bones lord, a hundred or so archers all in a Folding Fortress. Pretty much impossible to kill all of them in 6 turns, immune to magic and throwing out as many shots and spells as possible. (Ideally the fortress is 15 stories high to allow all the archers to shoot :o although most TOs will cap this at 3 stories). Two eagles round out the list and don't give up enough points for a win. A few armies have tricks that will ruin this build altogether - ogres (sniper maneaters), daemons (siren song) and skaven (crack's call). [edit: Phazael got there before me!]

There are others, most Deathstar builds can also do points denial quite well.

Frankly, it's a tournament, so go for it. 3x100 zombies is cool and all, but it isn't going to work too well in practice. I played a practice game against something similar and you can kill them particularly if the vamp player gets a bad magic phase. Tarpits don't win games by themselves. Just be aware that it can cost you comp points and, judging by the responses to this thread, sportsmanship points too...

AM1640
13-02-2012, 20:14
Wow, so I guess anybody who did this would be tarred and feathered.
Don't worry I would never do this, I just enjoy reading people's reactions, and some of them are quite heated.
I am wondering if I should start a new thread or just ask this here,
What do you include in your army to deal with an opponent that plays points denial by bringing the Teclis Folding Fortress, or a giant hordestar, etc?

Lord Inquisitor
13-02-2012, 20:16
My two main armies are Daemons and Ogres.

Daemons - Siren Song and Ld bomb deals with everything.
Ogres - Sniper Maneaters + Hellheart.

Hawthorne
13-02-2012, 20:20
I agree with Phazael.

I do find it funny people complain a lot about death stars and point denial but then they also complain about mass murder spells.
(I'm not saying it's hypocrisy just find it funny)

tmarichards
13-02-2012, 20:23
Bring the exact same, but play better :)

thesheriff
13-02-2012, 20:23
...Two eagles round out the list and don't give up enough points for a win. A few armies have tricks that will ruin this build altogether...

Providing that the archers dont kill anything, 2 Eagles is just enough to win on VP's.


You are playing in a Tournament, you play to win do what you have to on the battle field but be a nice gamer not an angry nerd. Points denial is a solid tactic no problems with it what so ever.

At the same time you want to win, building a list that is only going to deny points and not get you any is pretty pointless.

Its not a viable tactic. Tactics involve complex thought. This is a gimmic. It saps the fun from the game.

Im all for competative play, but competative play is designed to find out who is the best general, not who can hide the most points in one unit.

If i saw that on the other end of the table, Id shake his hand and go and have a pint in Bugmans. I honestly have better things to do with my time (ie; getting pissed).

If i were to see that regularly, id stop going to that particular tournament.

Sexiest_hero
13-02-2012, 20:37
I play a form of points denial using beastmen. I aim razorgors, Lords, and monsters to kill Bsb, mages, and chaff while harpies and skin of men chariot, hunt war machines. after I kill enough to win on vp, the whole army turns tail and flees, if things get rally bad Ill send in the ghorgon to chomp a unit and stall it out for the rest of the game. It's the only way to beat things like Bloodletter hordes and Chosen stars without resorting to the uber spells, that people complain about anyways. No, I will not march my army into your meat grinder, when I can kill what I need to and out maneuver you the rest of the game.

Lord Inquisitor
13-02-2012, 20:57
I do find it funny people complain a lot about death stars and point denial but then they also complain about mass murder spells.
(I'm not saying it's hypocrisy just find it funny)
Eh, I find this is typically a false premise. Megadeath spells rarely bother deathstars that much, which either have excellent stats (chosenstar) or some way to protect them (rune maw, world dragon, etc). Character-heavy units aren't usually bothered because the characters have good stats or look out sir vs pit or psun. Those uber-spells are usually as effective or more so against a "balanced" army.


Providing that the archers dont kill anything, 2 Eagles is just enough to win on VP's.
True (funny, I thought you needed 101 points for a win in the rulebook). Depends on the tournament format as many increase the margin for draws but you are right.

Havock
13-02-2012, 20:59
The classic example of points denial is the High Elf army with Teclis or if banned a BoH Archmage with a BSB toting the World Dragon banner, a bare-bones lord, a hundred or so archers all in a Folding Fortress. Pretty much impossible to kill all of them in 6 turns, immune to magic and throwing out as many shots and spells as possible. (Ideally the fortress is 15 stories high to allow all the archers to shoot :o although most TOs will cap this at 3 stories). Two eagles round out the list and don't give up enough points for a win. A few armies have tricks that will ruin this build altogether - ogres (sniper maneaters), daemons (siren song) and skaven (crack's call). [edit: Phazael got there before me!]

There are others, most Deathstar builds can also do points denial quite well.

Frankly, it's a tournament, so go for it. 3x100 zombies is cool and all, but it isn't going to work too well in practice. I played a practice game against something similar and you can kill them particularly if the vamp player gets a bad magic phase. Tarpits don't win games by themselves. Just be aware that it can cost you comp points and, judging by the responses to this thread, sportsmanship points too...

On the High elves: A lot of of tourneys restrict the amount of models that can fit in, or just outright ban the folding fortress.

And I think he meant 301 skeletons in one unit, which should keep you safe against just about everything (very little can kill that unit against the raising -although you could limit how much he can raise back by 'blocking' his unit. The list is also vulnerable to golden BB hits on the vampire.

Steam_Giant
13-02-2012, 21:02
And yet Ironically, if you could master this "Ultimate points denial list" you would be heralded a list champion and welcomed into your national ETC team with open arms.

Since to perfect this list you need to be playing decent opponents, bringing it to a tournament is your best bet to improve.

I say go for it!

Think of it as a challenge, and if your opponent cant that's his problem. The Heelanhammer podcast recently remarked on the 50/50 base line tactic from players who felt they had a bad match up. Unfortunately its a tournament, you have to be ready to face the opponent in front of you. As Asger said in the twitter conversation afterwards, good generals will adapt.

If no-one can adapt to your Zombie spam, your well on your way to winning a tournament, Somehow?

ewar
13-02-2012, 21:13
If no-one can adapt to your Zombie spam, your well on your way to winning a tournament, Somehow?

Haha I think that's a pretty unlikely outcome. You may not lose a lot of games but you sure as hell aren't going to win much either.

Against a list like that I'd probably just sit in my own deployment and tick away 6 turns for the draw, 10 minute game, 10-10 each and then go for a pint. Job done, congrats on your warhammer genius.

The Low King
13-02-2012, 21:36
Hi, I am wondering what people think about points denial at a tournament. You would create an army not to win but rather to deny anybody who plays you to win because your army would be desinged so that you would never give up points. You wouldn't win any games but neither would anybody else. Is this possible and how mean, cheesy, or unsportsmanlike would you think this would be?
For example if some one showed up with 3 units of 100 zombies each and a few necromancers so that it would be difficult to get rid of these units in order to get victory points. These units could also sit on and deny objectives even though they will never win a round of combat. Look forward to everybody's comments.


It would be very boring for you to play but i think that any list (short of some broken things like Teclis in a tower) that forces someone to think a bit cant be all bad. With 300 zombies you will have something else with them. If i can kill that stuff and/or the necromancers youve lost.




But, taking for example in an Undead army;
*2 x 5 Dire wolves = 90
*One Vampire Lord with a 4+ rerolalble, 4++ with +1 wound = 350
*301 Skellies w/ CMD, Screaming Banner

...is a dick move, and should not be tolerated. There is no point to doing that.

thesheriff

Well....thats 2000 points right? if thats all you have then i would simply shut down the vampires magic (,kill the wolves) and bombard the unit with templates (300 models are hard to miss). Then get into combat with the list and kill the Vampire lord. At 2400 points (maybe adding some extra skeletons) a standard dwarf list could get a horde in each side and be removing 100 skeletons a turn.

w3rm
13-02-2012, 21:37
I'm all for playing points denial. But that list is terrible. You will literally win no games with that list. My daemons or even my skaven literally just laugh at that list. I throw all my dice at wither. I then do it again. (I forget if zombies are t3 now). If so I do it again. Look i killed your whole unit and characters. Then I just double abom a unit of zombies and they will just plow through it in the 4 turns I have left. Look I killed both your units and I win. With Daemons it even easier.

Points denial usually needs to be able to kill units to be able to win not just stay there and last the whole game.

dimetri1
14-02-2012, 00:30
I think a better option would be to instead learn how to play the game properly than pull a dick move like that.
Ditto............................................. ..

Harwammer
14-02-2012, 01:10
Hi, I am wondering what people think about points denial at a tournament. You would create an army not to win but rather to deny anybody who plays you to win because your army would be desinged so that you would never give up points. You wouldn't win any games but neither would anybody else. Is this possible and how mean, cheesy, or unsportsmanlike would you think this would be?
For example if some one showed up with 3 units of 100 zombies each and a few necromancers so that it would be difficult to get rid of these units in order to get victory points. These units could also sit on and deny objectives even though they will never win a round of combat. Look forward to everybody's comments.

As far as I can tell the two view points for tournaments are 1) have fun and make friends or 2) try to win. Obviously there is overlap between these two camps. Your suggestion doesn't fit into either camp (in terms of rankings a points denial army is not going to compete against an army that scores a big win in every game). I don't see the reason why you'd want to take something like this unless you were just aiming to ruin 5 other players' weekends?

calnen
14-02-2012, 08:37
Another vote here for considering point denial as *part of* your list mechanics, but not as the be-all-and-end-all of your battleplan. In a tournament when the size of the VP swing determines how many tournament points you get, you want to give away as few points as possible. Hence you get cheap, disposable units, and big solid ones that you intend to survive the game. Like the Daemon list someone posted earlier.

Memnos
14-02-2012, 08:54
Three necromancers and 300 zombies?

All they have to do is kill your necromancers. You can't outmaneuver them to prevent a well-made army from hitting your necromancers: If they're in the blocks, charge and don't challenge. Just hit 'em. If they're outside, use fliers.

Points denial is a viable tactic to win and not simply make your opponent not win. Were I facing that army, I would quickly kill the Necromancers, then shatter the rest of your army.

Steam_Giant
14-02-2012, 09:24
Perhaps a few Lvl1 forbidden lore "Beast" casters to spam the sig spell might make these guys more survivable? S5 T5 zombies? :')

Another option is to drop a zombie block for an ethereal block of something, now your opponent must consider his tactics/ deployment (slightly).

Also throw in a corpse cart for the buffs, it can hide behind your blocks and you might just kill 100pts of chaff. (I'd suggest the mortis engine but that will be too tempting a target for your opponents and doesn't fit your theme).

Havock
14-02-2012, 11:33
Does anyone actually play with the "100 points difference for a win", thing? I never do, nor do I know people who do, excepting perhaps newbies who do things by the book.

Generally speaking, at tournaments you won't and most players will not bring enough chaff to give you that margin.

Satan
14-02-2012, 12:01
Hi, I am wondering what people think about points denial at a tournament. You would create an army not to win but rather to deny anybody who plays you to win because your army would be desinged so that you would never give up points. You wouldn't win any games but neither would anybody else. Is this possible and how mean, cheesy, or unsportsmanlike would you think this would be?
For example if some one showed up with 3 units of 100 zombies each and a few necromancers so that it would be difficult to get rid of these units in order to get victory points. These units could also sit on and deny objectives even though they will never win a round of combat. Look forward to everybody's comments.

I would not consider it unsportsmanlike at a tournament though I doubt the general effectiveness of your particular example. It's a valid tactic like any other. Wouldn't be fun to face in a friendly game though.

Von Wibble
14-02-2012, 12:32
In a tournament surely such an army wouldn't win anyway. It won't lose games but it won't win by much either and so other players will wni just by getting 1 decnet victory and not losing any games... Seems like a bad idea.

In a one off game or team scenario where you only need a draw then obviously its more viable. Doesn't make for a fun game mind. I once faced an undead army with 2 corpse carts and 1 huge core unit. Still won because that unit was skeletons (before the update) but it wasn't a particularly fun game...

Satan
14-02-2012, 12:38
In a tournament surely such an army wouldn't win anyway. It won't lose games but it won't win by much either and so other players will wni just by getting 1 decnet victory and not losing any games... Seems like a bad idea.

In a one off game or team scenario where you only need a draw then obviously its more viable. Doesn't make for a fun game mind. I once faced an undead army with 2 corpse carts and 1 huge core unit. Still won because that unit was skeletons (before the update) but it wasn't a particularly fun game...

In Team Tournaments using the ETC format points denial lists can be quite essential.

T10
14-02-2012, 13:08
You wouldn't win any games but neither would anybody else.

If the tournament is N rounds, then if there are more than 4 x N players then you will likely never even meet the top players (assuming that the top players are pitted against each others. Your only contribution is to reduce the average scores of the good players you meet and raise the scores of the bad players.


Is this possible and how mean, cheesy, or unsportsmanlike would you think this would be?

1000. It's a ballpark estimate.

-T10

Mid'ean
14-02-2012, 13:23
I wouldn't have a problem playing that list. Friendly or tourney wise. I would look at as a challenge and try to find the best way to beat it. Generals thru out history never had a choice on what their enemies army looked like. You showed up at the battle and figured out how to deal with what was there. One of my pet peeves is at my LGS the terrain is always set up before hand by staff members. They do a good job and come up with some neat tables, always varied. But some players show up and we'll pick a tables and then sides and then the complaints start..." This terrain set doesn't work for me! My units won't fit/place how or where I want them to"...yadda...yadda. You know what. Deal with it. Make the terrain work for you. Change your tactics. Adapt. THAT'S the mark of a good general!!!

T10
14-02-2012, 13:29
The good general picks the battlefield, and the best general never needs to fight a battle. :)

However, this is a game where most of the appeal (for me, at least!) is to try to win the battle by playing the game and not before the game starts.

-T10

Petey
14-02-2012, 16:08
Its not a viable tactic. Tactics involve complex thought. This is a gimmic. It saps the fun from the game.

Im all for competative play, but competative play is designed to find out who is the best general, not who can hide the most points in one unit.

If i saw that on the other end of the table, Id shake his hand and go and have a pint in Bugmans. I honestly have better things to do with my time (ie; getting pissed).

If i were to see that regularly, id stop going to that particular tournament.

Actually, throwing lots of expendable crap troops at your enemies has been a viable tactic for thousands of years, just ask the ancient persian. :p

You are right though it does sap the fun from the game. But I feel the real point has been missed yet again. GW is absolutely incompetent in certain areas of their rules. They very easily could have assigned a population cap to buildings, or at the least to the folding fortress. Just like they could have had a 14 year old american powergamer look at their rules in any edition for an evening and found out all the broken parts in the rules. Yes I blame it on them being British.

While I'm not a fan of these armies, HE Fortress nonsense or unlimited zombie landia, I think they could have been easily avoidable if the game designers had better play testers ("we totally playtested the hell out of this list, we like played it 12 times... after drinks at the pub...") and more of them, a better mix coming from the tourney circuit.

Don't get me wrong, this is the best edition to date as far as I'm concerned, but really, there are just some parts of it that make me wonder if they think about their decisions before they print them. Their garbage terrain rules being first on the list needing review.

Spider-pope
14-02-2012, 17:06
Typically i would say when it comes to a tournament pretty much anything goes.

Although i have to say winning/not losing would have to be the only thing one cared about to field such an army. Because it certainly won't be fun to play with, fun to play against, your opponents will likely be bored stiff by the end of the game,if they don't concede and go elsewhere immediately, so socialising wont be great.

You'd basically sacrifice everything about the tournament except for those handful of points you'll get for forcing a draw.

Chickenbane
14-02-2012, 17:33
I don't see the reason why you'd want to take something like this unless you were just aiming to ruin 5 other players' weekends?

I suddenly feel the urge to go to a tournament. :evilgrin:

Ghremdal
14-02-2012, 18:36
I just don't know if you can build a list (at 2000+ points) that (without the folding fortress), that won't give up a 100 points that your opponent needs for a minor victory.

Lord Inquisitor
14-02-2012, 18:47
Oh it can be done.

Something along the lines of: Tyrant, Slaughtermaster, BSB with rune maw and 3 other heroes. Somebody has the Crown of Command. 3 sabretusks and 10 gnoblars with a banner to hide in the corner (value of chaff units = 98 points). Remainder of points: Ironguts - about 26, that's a horde 6 wide and 5 full ranks deep including characters. You have to deal with a giant horde of ironguts with the Rune Maw and the front rank entirely comprised of characters.

You can get victory points but you're going to have to get dirty. Now some armies can deal with this list well but even then you need to watch out. The characters can play the "make way" shell game. The chaff units are fast and able to prevent the enemy avoiding the deathstar.

Harwammer
14-02-2012, 19:20
I just don't know if you can build a list (at 2000+ points) that (without the folding fortress), that won't give up a 100 points that your opponent needs for a minor victory.

To repeat Lord Inquisitor in short: Make any characters very hard to assassinate, take a tough to kill/break megablock and fill upto 99 points with at least two chaff units.

Phazael
14-02-2012, 19:41
Purple Sun (or any vortex type spell) still drills it, but Death is not a terribly common lore in tournament play where I am at.

The more feasable list is the Zombie wall, where a zombie unit ten ranks deep and as wide as the deployment zone sits in front of a pair of smaller (say less than 100) zombie bunkers with enough VC casters to assure Comet hiding in it. Sit back, drop comet all game and wait for it to land to get 101 points while the enemy flails away against a giant zombie terrain piece he cannot get around in the 6 turns he has to try.

Another fun one is Chaos Deathstar with two 20 point hound units that cower in a corner and a couple characters in a giant slaanesh deathstar with the rapturous standard and a Tzeench marked BSB sporting the 3++ ward. The warriors statlines make them largely uncaring of the vast bulk of the kill spells in the game, other than Gateway, and they may as well be completely unbreakable in combat.

SugarShark
14-02-2012, 19:44
I don't see how people could penalize sportsmanship on building a legal army list. Ironically that act/intent (to penalize) seems like the sort of thing to lose sportsmanship on.
half of a tourney will play rock, paper, scissors the other half will be there to have a good time; you get points for painting! random scenarios! this game seems like a poor choice if you get steamed over intangibles.

Phazael
14-02-2012, 21:22
There is a difference in putting down a tough as nails army list that looks like an army on the table with multiple elements to it and putting down a mathematically designed equation where there is little to no tactical interaction between players.

bildo
14-02-2012, 21:41
zombie hordes when backed right can be game winning, 2 necro lords, 1 shadow and 1 vamp, youve got yourself one unit thats good because they get rerolls to hit and wound, and the enemy is weaker in the stats that help your multi-tude of attacks hit and wound. ive lost using a bloodletter horde to this tactic.

Askari
14-02-2012, 21:51
Just like they could have had a 14 year old american powergamer look at their rules in any edition for an evening and found out all the broken parts in the rules. Yes I blame it on them being British.

Yeah because no-one powergames in the UK :wtf:

It's a perfectly viable tactic, but ultimately fruitless - at least in places I've attended, to win you're going to need to not just edge out victory, but massacre the enemy. Mere minor victories isn't enough sometimes - which means the points-denial list just won't win first overall, which makes it a total waste of time unless you're one of those 'trolling' types I guess.

Points-denial aspects of a list is an entirely different concept. Try taking out a horde of Grave Guard with a Vampire Lord in it, if you take them on you're in one hell of a fight, if you don't then that's ~1000pts you're not getting from my army.

popisdead
14-02-2012, 23:08
No. The two reasons to go to a tournament are to win or play a bunch of fun games.

If you are doing points denial then you're gunning to win. People do worse.

Tupinamba
14-02-2012, 23:12
I keep seeing these theoretical examples of point denial armies, with 100 archers and Teclis or 100 Saurus and Slann in a folding fortress or now your 300 zombies and I ask myself: is someone really going to buy and paint 300 zombies just to "play" such a boring game? Even the other examples. Itīs 100 minis of the same kind we are talking here, hardly a very interesting collection... and the production line painting of this should be very fun indeed... Yes, the focus here is tournament play, yet you still have to actually buy, assemble and paint all this stuff to participate at the tournament.

Another question is as where to fit these units on a table, as there is terrain, there is the shorter edge of battle for the pass etc. Plus, itīs not only about battle line. Armies have to be able to cope with all 6 missions. Watchtower is pretty much autolose for those armies. So not only do I think this kind of army wouldnīt win, but it would loose in any battle where it has to actually do something other than absorving damage.

I wonder whatīs the point of such an army, other than deny the fun to everyone involved.:rolleyes:

swiftshadow14
14-02-2012, 23:19
Well I was playing lizardmen at a 90+ person tourny and got 3rd place. I made my list very sturdy and each unit was hard to get points from. I just kill the other guys little stuff and keep my big units up. If you can kill the supporting units you can do well. I dont care what people say aboit point denial. GW took away partial points and alot of skill went with that. So I play the game like gw wants by not giving up points. I take a slann with dragon bane gem and life and temple gaurd with a champ with dragon bane helm so he has a 2 up ward save against fire. Most armies put flame banner on their big nasty unit. I had my champ and slann only vs a huge block of stregth 7 chosen and they lived. this won the game. I also went 8 combat rounds with a huge ogre deathstar and my slann/champ lived due to life magic. since no partial points I won the game. Yes point denial is cheap but in 8th he who plays cheapest wins most. Its a sad sad day.

Phazael
14-02-2012, 23:21
A lot depends on how the tournaments score wins. My events are generally degree of difficulty to keep the point denial in check, plus lots of bonus points tied to secondary objectives to make people do something each game, beyond sitting there and trying not to die. In straight up win loss formats, point denial is extremely powerful.

Makaber
14-02-2012, 23:21
Last time I went to a big tournament, there was no comp and I played mostly top-ranked players. I didn't play against a single list I thought was cheap, and I don't recall seeing any that were that outrageous either. The worst was about 30 Horrors in a tower, but I still won the game.

What I'm saying is, I guess it's a fun excersise on paper, but I think the problem in the real world is highly exaggerated. At the end of the day, I belive the vast, vast majority of Warhammer players want to actually play Warhammer. But that's just me, and I don't go to that many tournaments, so I might be full of crap.

Phazael
14-02-2012, 23:24
The US Throne of Skulls finals had a guy doing the World Dragon blob in Fortress Shennanigans. Hard Boys has people taking the Slaan Shack and billion skinks all the time. Frankly, the Fortress is what makes a lot of this crap possible, so even low comp events out here tend to ban it outright.

GrandmasterWang
15-02-2012, 00:35
The fortress needs to actually have the levels though. What are these people using for these massive fortresses? I mean how the hell do you make a 15 story tower?

The rules are specific about you needing to have a suitable model

ewar
15-02-2012, 01:01
The fortress needs to actually have the levels though. What are these people using for these massive fortresses? I mean how the hell do you make a 15 story tower?

The rules are specific about you needing to have a suitable model

Only to shoot from - all those huge units fit in a single story garden shed, but if they had missile weapons only 5 could shoot. Which doesn't make a whole lot of difference, as its the magic user who does the damage.

woodster17
15-02-2012, 01:18
If someone wants to spend nearly Ģ400-500 on 300+ Skeleton Warriors or Zombies, and paint them all, them fair play to them :D I'm not sure why you would bother to play with so little variety in your army, it's a bit dull but if winning means that much I'm not going to complain. Would much rather lose to someone who can tactically out manouevre and out think me though, rather than sitting there with a small nation amount of Undead.

Lord Inquisitor
15-02-2012, 01:27
I keep seeing these theoretical examples of point denial armies, with 100 archers and Teclis or 100 Saurus and Slann in a folding fortress or now your 300 zombies and I ask myself: is someone really going to buy and paint 300 zombies just to "play" such a boring game? Even the other examples. Itīs 100 minis of the same kind we are talking here, hardly a very interesting collection... and the production line painting of this should be very fun indeed...
Yes. Sooner or later you'll come across a player who has enough money, drive and desire to win to put together such extreme armies, even if it is three colours. Sometimes with shortcuts - I plan on getting some "bag of zombies", 100 zombies about the right scale for $10 - to cover my additional raising needs. A spray and a wash and they'll do good enough if I run low on my 50 GW zombies I start with.


A lot depends on how the tournaments score wins. My events are generally degree of difficulty to keep the point denial in check, plus lots of bonus points tied to secondary objectives to make people do something each game, beyond sitting there and trying not to die. In straight up win loss formats, point denial is extremely powerful.
I rarely see such armies do well at Ard Boyz, at least beyond the Semis. I saw a teclis/folding skyscraper build win a Semis and then get cracked open at the finals by a skaven player, ha ha ha.

Typically, these lists do best at tournaments that only care about win/draw/loss. I.e. the 15/10/5 system. Under the 20-0 system it tends to be a bit better as you need big wins.

Petey
17-02-2012, 22:28
Yeah because no-one powergames in the UK :wtf:

It's a perfectly viable tactic, but ultimately fruitless - at least in places I've attended, to win you're going to need to not just edge out victory, but massacre the enemy. Mere minor victories isn't enough sometimes - which means the points-denial list just won't win first overall, which makes it a total waste of time unless you're one of those 'trolling' types I guess.

Points-denial aspects of a list is an entirely different concept. Try taking out a horde of Grave Guard with a Vampire Lord in it, if you take them on you're in one hell of a fight, if you don't then that's ~1000pts you're not getting from my army.

To my experience, America has the more beardy players.

To my experience, the English crowd has been much more Beer and Pretzels.

Your mileage may vary. In any event, we need more churlish 14 year old power gamers to look at the rules before print.

I agree with your other points.

Kalandros
17-02-2012, 22:38
Those "15 story-tall towers" were banned at some events, one guy brought some kind of lego tower for his horde of crossbow elves and he was allowed max 3 stories to shoot from - because a "suitable" model needs to be reasonable.

ewar
18-02-2012, 02:38
To my experience, America has the more beardy players.

To my experience, the English crowd has been much more Beer and Pretzels.

Your mileage may vary. In any event, we need more churlish 14 year old power gamers to look at the rules before print.

I agree with your other points.

What experience is that, if I may ask? We don't really eat pretzels in the UK.

You might be mixing up GWs stated intention of writing a fluffy gaming system ie not one designed for competitive gaming, with a generalisation about Britain (which I'm sure many posters on here would take umbrage at) :)

Petey
18-02-2012, 08:11
What experience is that, if I may ask? We don't really eat pretzels in the UK.

You might be mixing up GWs stated intention of writing a fluffy gaming system ie not one designed for competitive gaming, with a generalisation about Britain (which I'm sure many posters on here would take umbrage at) :)

Beer and pretzels is a colloquialism meaning non-serious. I have had the privilege of playing with about half a dozen players from across the pond, and while all of them have excellent modellers and painters, they played themed armies rather than whatever the flavor of the day was for WAAC armies. If you have a lot of power gamers there, I've yet to meet them here. This is also not to say that they were bad players, in fact they were very good (well, not in every case, but certainly often enough). My experience playing locally here is that there are more (percentage wise) people who just care about the win and not the other elements of the game (fluff, modelling, painting, etc); I don't like that state of affairs, but it means that there's a need for a tighter written set of rules.

My example for this was a particular games-day in Baltimore (this is going back like 6 years btw), when a friend of mine had to point out that you could take 30 Nurgle Marines in a 1500 pt army, to the book's own writer. Sorry, but when you meet the game designer/writer and they don't even have a clue about how broken they make some lists, coupled by all the British players I've played with here in the States playing fluffy non abusive armies, it makes me wonder if we don't just have seriously different gaming cultures.

bildo
18-02-2012, 08:49
well ofc we have different cultures, ours isnt based around gun ownership and oil :P (dont get me wrong, our country is scrapping with the argies, but thats only slightly to do with oil, more to do with the fact weve been on the falklands for 200years). there is a massive powergaming issue in england, mostly they are too poor from buying their (often rediculous) armies to go to america.

anyways back on topic

points denial is fine. its a tactic like any other. no one can fault skaven for taking 100 slaves in a unit, no one would complain at 50 blood letters (primarily because the other choices now suck, i know i had them, sold my 3k daemon army to buy a new one. sounds mad i know but i had a tonne of pbs and horrors, neither of which are any good any more). at what point can someone claim they arent just taking a horde (or even deathstar) and are just being cheesy. if you cant beat a 'cheesy' unit then maybe your arent the master tacticians you thought you were. 300 zombies are still only zombies

Tae
18-02-2012, 20:24
To repeat Lord Inquisitor in short: Make any characters very hard to assassinate, take a tough to kill/break megablock and fill upto 99 points with at least two chaff units.

Best one I've seen -
Slaan, BSB, Folding Fortress, 4 Disciplines (only 4 as that's the max)
1 Jungle Swarm
1 Jungle Swarm
120 Saurus with Full Command and Shields

Without removing the Slaan or Saurus you'll give away 90 points out of a 2,000 point army. Which is just about the most pathetic thing I've ever seen anyone mention/do in a game of Warhammer in a long, long time.

Warlord Ghazak Gazhkull
18-02-2012, 20:44
It isn't wrong since the rules allow it, but it certainly doesn't make up for a fun game.

Trains_Get_Robbed
18-02-2012, 21:05
Points denial whether through list building, or through play (like fleeing/turning your troops to the corners of the table) is a pro move.

DeathlessDraich
18-02-2012, 21:30
Hi, I am wondering what people think about points denial at a tournament. You would create an army not to win but rather to deny anybody who plays you to win because your army would be desinged so that you would never give up points. You wouldn't win any games but neither would anybody else. Is this possible and how mean, cheesy, or unsportsmanlike would you think this would be?
For example if some one showed up with 3 units of 100 zombies each and a few necromancers so that it would be difficult to get rid of these units in order to get victory points. These units could also sit on and deny objectives even though they will never win a round of combat. Look forward to everybody's comments.

Assuming 2500pts or 2250 pts and Battleline?

1) 100 zombies (a bad example to begin with as no sane VC player will use such a unit) is not a problem and should be accepted in tournaments.

2) A 'Points denial' strategy does not violate any rules and is acceptable by most tourny organisers. A player who designs a list to draw or win in this manner only, will end up somewhere in the middle of the final rankings anyway.
Points denial as part of the general strategy is essential in Warhammer and for some armies vs certain armies there is no choice but a damge limitation or points denial strategy! :)

T10
19-02-2012, 20:33
When playing the game you may end up in a situation where you can send your troops in to die with no gain what-so-ever, or you can move them out of harms way, achieving nothing but denying the enemy a target of opportunity. At this point you need to take note your current status and your other opportunities: If you're already losing by a bunch, or you're way ahead in the game then by all means let your opponent have a bit of fun. However, if you're close to a draw then handing your opponent those extra VP's is just plain dumb!

"Only Burnside could have managed such a coup, wringing one last spectacular defeat from the jaws of victory." -Abraham Lincoln (http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/06/07/jaws-of-victory/)

Havock
19-02-2012, 23:45
At least the lizardman list has no ranged attacks to speak of, you just need to stay out of range of the Slann's spell lore.

I'd literally go to the bathroom on my turn, or get a beer.
"Did you leave the fortress - oh wait, you are still in there, mighty fun game this is, eh?"
If he starts complaining about it to the TO I am fairly sure the TO will understand my point of view when I explain what my opponent is doing/has done.

Again: if you allow the folding fortress AND play with the 100 point difference, this is what you get. Folding Fortress = ******** = not tournament stuff.

Jind_Singh
20-02-2012, 00:55
Best one I've seen -
Slaan, BSB, Folding Fortress, 4 Disciplines (only 4 as that's the max)
1 Jungle Swarm
1 Jungle Swarm
120 Saurus with Full Command and Shields

Without removing the Slaan or Saurus you'll give away 90 points out of a 2,000 point army. Which is just about the most pathetic thing I've ever seen anyone mention/do in a game of Warhammer in a long, long time.


That's awesome!!! Well played to the poo stick who thought of THAT beauty!! I have no idea what I'd about that - other than sit as far back as I can and kill his swarms - and hope that there is a secondary mission/objective that will hand me the win!!!

redfury
20-02-2012, 03:01
The zombie thing can be undone easily. Lore of death is good for killing characters and once all the necromances are done the whole army is.

Lord Inquisitor
20-02-2012, 03:06
The lizardmen list is mediocre version of the high elf one. It's not immune to magic - dwellers and death spells can snipe the Slaan and it has no shooting to pick off enemies with. It's quite hard to completely destroy enemy units of rank and file troops with magic alone.

quietus1986
20-02-2012, 03:52
To my experience, America has the more beardy players.

To my experience, the English crowd has been much more Beer and Pretzels.

Your mileage may vary. In any event, we need more churlish 14 year old power gamers to look at the rules before print.

I agree with your other points.

In my experiences Americans try to power play but fail allot at it Europeans have better power players.
And yes I have played Americans. ( I have a sister that lived in America an know in Canada. I will not say the reason for Canada its really offensive for Americans)
Want a hard core power player than go to any European on-cumpt tournament. ( And even in a tournament like this it is not aloud to felt folding fortress or special cars )
Can't even find a tournament in my county of that aloud folding fortress.

vcassano
20-02-2012, 14:25
The lizardmen list is mediocre version of the high elf one. It's not immune to magic - dwellers and death spells can snipe the Slaan and it has no shooting to pick off enemies with. It's quite hard to completely destroy enemy units of rank and file troops with magic alone.

Gatewaying that unit would be incredible. If I used Lore of Tzeentch, and had the misfortune of playing that list, then it would be one of the few cases where I wouldn't feel dirty about 6-dicing every turn.

Havock
20-02-2012, 15:24
Only with the puppet. Likewise treason by the way.
The high elf one shoots and is immune to magic. And probably backed up by lore of life. Although beasts might be more aggravating (curse of anraheir!)

The rules for watchtowers are just wonky though, you should be able to set the thing on fire or something, prompting an immediate exit.

theunwantedbeing
20-02-2012, 15:26
Hi, I am wondering what people think about points denial at a tournament.

It's a tournament, anything goes.
So points denial is a valid tactic, it probably won't win you the tournament of course.

Now points denial in a freindly game, now that's unacceptable unless your friendly games are played in a tournament style.

Harwammer
20-02-2012, 18:41
It isn't wrong since the rules allow it, but it certainly doesn't make up for a fun game.

'The Spirit of The Game' rule (mirror side column to 'The Most Important Rule') notes the rules are just a framework to create an enjoyable game and ensuring both players -not just the victor - have a good time.

You can't correctly say Points Denial lists at a tournament is defacto un-fun at the same time as being allowed by the rules (unless one of the tournament rules is 'screw fun!').

Also I reiterate my previous post that these lists fail to secure either of the two aims of a tournament: having fun and winning games/overall.

Re: the Slaan, 2x swarms, saurus list... it may be worth mostly keeping out of range but giving him a couple of chaff units to dwellers while hoping to get through his layers of miscast protection. It gives a slight chance of win but shouldn't cost the draw. Just watch out for Cupped Hams.

W.B.G.
20-02-2012, 20:43
In my opinion it is wrong and extremely unsporting; can ruin someone elses chances at winning an event for little gain on your part.

Bookwrak
20-02-2012, 22:00
To directly reference the scenario laid out by the OP, yes, it's wrong. Making an army designed specifically for wasting other people's time is trolling in person, pure and simple, and has the disadvantage that unlike the internet, people get to see your face.

To reference the rest of the thread which doesn't carry to that extreme, no, making a list that grudgingly gives up points is a valid tactic. It's only when you push it to the point of
You would create an army not to win but rather to deny anybody who plays you to win because your army would be desinged so that you would never give up points. You wouldn't win any games but neither would anybody else. that it makes you TFG.

Steam_Giant
21-02-2012, 11:32
To directly reference the scenario laid out by the OP, yes, it's wrong. Making an army designed specifically for wasting other people's time is trolling in person, pure and simple, and has the disadvantage that unlike the internet, people get to see your face.

Would you call the person who gives you a "Rubik's cube" for xmas a troll?

I'd much rather play this "puzzle" than a one turn trick army, spam, deathstar or cannon-fest that wipes me off the board without any input from me or chance to play.


Also I reiterate my previous post that these lists fail to secure either of the two aims of a tournament: having fun and winning games/overall.

These are not the only two aims of a tournament. how about: "testing your points denial army out against determined, skilled opponents. Practising for team events".

or even: "showing off a nicely themed & painted army". Say what you like about the OP's motives, it would be a great theme.

Tupinamba
21-02-2012, 14:33
To directly reference the scenario laid out by the OP, yes, it's wrong. Making an army designed specifically for wasting other people's time is trolling in person, pure and simple, and has the disadvantage that unlike the internet, people get to see your face.

To reference the rest of the thread which doesn't carry to that extreme, no, making a list that grudgingly gives up points is a valid tactic. It's only when you push it to the point of that it makes you TFG.

That. I think that both points are being put in the same basket, which hey shouldnīt. Itīs one thing to hide a battered unit to preserve its points. Or certain armies, like WE, which rely on this kind of guerrilla warfare and shouldnīt be able to simply wipe out the enemy very often. A defensive playstyle is something Iīm 100% ok with.

But the extreme examples fall more in the category of loophole exploitation and WAAC, as an army built to win at the cost of having fun together and having an interesting collection.

As to Steam Giantīs point of "showing an interesting themed army", I canīt see what could be possibly more distant from that than the extreme examples of this thread.

Steam_Giant
21-02-2012, 16:18
As to Steam Giantīs point of "showing an interesting themed army", I canīt see what could be possibly more distant from that than the extreme examples of this thread.

I said "Theme", not "Interesting Theme" ;) and only in regards to the OP's list, not the Folding fortress armies.

Ghremdal
21-02-2012, 16:43
Oh it can be done.

Something along the lines of: Tyrant, Slaughtermaster, BSB with rune maw and 3 other heroes. Somebody has the Crown of Command. 3 sabretusks and 10 gnoblars with a banner to hide in the corner (value of chaff units = 98 points). Remainder of points: Ironguts - about 26, that's a horde 6 wide and 5 full ranks deep including characters. You have to deal with a giant horde of ironguts with the Rune Maw and the front rank entirely comprised of characters.

You can get victory points but you're going to have to get dirty. Now some armies can deal with this list well but even then you need to watch out. The characters can play the "make way" shell game. The chaff units are fast and able to prevent the enemy avoiding the deathstar.

I see how such a bullstar can be deadly, and some lists might be hard to deal with it. However I think that strong, tournament worthy lists, should be able to deal with it without too many problems. Even if you can't kill it, you would get enough characters to ensure victory points. I mean any character with a sword of anti heroes would have a field day.

But you should be able to break even that stubborn(steadfast) deathstar, if you can manage to keep beating it in combat long enough. If you keep beating it for 6 rounds of combat, it has a 96% to fail a ld check (40% with a BSB around). After 8 rounds (or 4 turns) the chance to fail one ld check even with a BSB around falls to around 80% [talking about LD 9 stubborn/steadfast here]. If you kill the BSB, the process goes faster. Basically if you can ensure that you are beating the hordestar in every combat, it will break, and usually before the game is over.

Lord Inquisitor
21-02-2012, 17:48
I see how such a bullstar can be deadly, and some lists might be hard to deal with it. However I think that strong, tournament worthy lists, should be able to deal with it without too many problems. Even if you can't kill it, you would get enough characters to ensure victory points. I mean any character with a sword of anti heroes would have a field day.

But you should be able to break even that stubborn(steadfast) deathstar, if you can manage to keep beating it in combat long enough. If you keep beating it for 6 rounds of combat, it has a 96% to fail a ld check (40% with a BSB around). After 8 rounds (or 4 turns) the chance to fail one ld check even with a BSB around falls to around 80% [talking about LD 9 stubborn/steadfast here]. If you kill the BSB, the process goes faster. Basically if you can ensure that you are beating the hordestar in every combat, it will break, and usually before the game is over.
Absolutely. I certainly don't claim such a build is impossible to beat. But ... it's not going to be easy. The tricky part is "beat the hordestar in combat" let alone "every turn". Even to the flank, you're going to be facing 5 characters (make way!) all T5 and geared up with defensive gear and putting out 3-5 high strength attacks each. The hordestar as a static combat res of 5 unless you disrupt them. Even if you hit it on all 4 flanks at once 3 characters can still make way and your basic irongut has 3 S6 attacks plus stomp each. Nasty.