Thought it a good time to start explaining rough guidelines around how the composition scoring will work. It centres around 4 main areas: Theme, Variety, Effectiveness, and Cliche Selections.
Before I jump in to these main areas, a very important point to stipulate is these are all geared towards your opponents army. At no stage is your army mentioned. This is intentional, and I'll be stressing this on the day, at no stage should you be considering how this army stacks up against yours. Or how it will play against yours. Try and divorce yourself from your own army and how it could potentially do better or worse against the particular army you are facing, focus purely and solely on your opponents army.


Theme - It's own little area of comp, rather than letting it rule all decisions regarding your scoring. Essentially, with out looking at the physical army, do you see an inherent theme in the list. You may wish to read the players background/fluff to better understand the theme in the list as some army types (necrons, nids, dark eldar for example) are difficult to display a theme for. Is there anything that really jeopardises or contradicts the overall theme. Example: Speed Freak Biker army with a Basilisk.
Now, I admit this is quite subjective and we all have differing beliefs on strong themes for given army lists. This being the case I would err on the side of caution before truly marking them down. This will be a sliding scale between Strong and None.

Variety - I believe that an army with little variety can be a tad boring to play against. So, variety in your list is very much encouraged, it adds character to your leaders and units. Variety can come in many forms, unit selections, wargear options, unit sizes, vehicle upgrades, veteran skills, doctrines... the list goes on.
Every list, no matter how narrowly themed or restricted by their Codex can still have a decent amount of variety. Having a Deathwing army (old version) as an example, is no excuse. Variety can be injected via selecting tac and assault termie squads, mixing up the heavy weapons, dreadnoughts, landraiders... differing wargear options for sgts, differing unit sizes... get the drift of what I am saying?
Now, there will be times when variety may be dampened by theme requirements. Chaos sacred numbers are another good example, keeping to scared numbers is fine, btu if all the untis have the exact same options, that's when variety is suspect. Mix up the weapon/wargear/veteran skills options a bit.
Selecting 3 of the same special category (Heavy/Fast/Elite - 3 dreadnoughts as an example) borders on killing variety. Now, your theme may save you but if there was a decent option in the same category which has been overlooked then expect to get hammered. Yet again, it's a sliding scale between lots of variety and multiple carbon copies (minimal variety).

Effectiveness - What I want to see at Liber is balanced armies. What do I mean by balanced? An army that has a good mix of assault and shooty, static and manuervable units, hard hitters and those that require a tad more skill to get the value out of them. Granted, type of Codex would be taken in to consideration, some are more flexible than others.
A balltearer of an army with no weaknesses and purely tooled up to WAAC should be shunned. A balanced army is one that will test the skills of the player using it, not one that is necessarily underpowered and hamstrung, but one that has noticable strengths and more importantly, weaknesses.
So, the sliding scale for this is interesting... top marks for a well balanced army, moderate marks for a slightly unbalanced army and bugger all for tooled peices of shyte. Ask yourself the question, if I was using this army, would I find it a reasonable challenge to play/win with? Or would it be a no-brainer? We come to play at Liber Animus to test ourselves, as much as our opposition... I want you to be thinking about how you can win with your army, and this will happen if you have a balanced army. Ripping through your opponent without raising a sweat is no challenge at all, and isn't that enjoyable for either player.

Cliche Selections - One thing I loathe is rocking up to a tournament and seeing the same old combinations, the same power plays, the most efficient unit selection. Cliche selections sh!t me to tears, they really do. One is okay, but once they start mounting up I quickly lose interest in the game.
Space Wolves with Wolf Scouts are okay... but then add the pack leader to them, throw in a Ven Dread... Blood Claws packed to the gills with power weapons & fists, vindicator... it all gets a bit sad. Blood Angel armies with Jumppack Chaplain, naked Vet Sgts in minimal squads and it starts to smell a little.
And I guess that's what I'm getting at... it's when the cliches starting adding up that I get annoyed. I love seeing selections in an army list that I don't see that often... Space Marine Captains are scarce these days, eh? Space Wolves using an Exterminator... leaderless Death Company in a rhino... an ork battle wagon... ratlings... scourges... These types of options will help moderate my angst towards cliche selections.
Another thing to clarify is theme/army specific options, or signature choices. Options that are signature to a given army type (theme) is not a cliche selection. An EC lord having combat drugs and a doom siren is not cliche, that's a very much in theme selection. The cliche option would be to add a Dark Blade and Deamonic Strength as well... that is a cliche selection.
You've got 2,000 points at your disposal, why not grab a few units that you usually stear clear off. Sliding scale again between bugger all cliches and nothing but freakin' cliches!

Now, these are still in draft format, but I'm just throwing up my thoughts so far... please add comments. As you can see, this ties in very much with my Spirit of Liber Animus rant. I'm really trying to get across what I would like to see at LA4... and still thinking of adding more categories

Cheers,
G

Just a thought here Kane - and just an observation not a complaint..

It seems to me that some of your categories may be contradictory.

Theme - Usually people enforce their theme into army selection by restricting their army choice in certain areas or a defacto version of this by focusing on picking certain styles of troops. Wouldn't this potentially clash with the others? (especially variety?) And usually the counterpoint to this is to take a few of the 'cliched' army picks to bolster the strength back up.

Of course I'm assuming that we're not going to get any themes that include home grown marine chapters that have assault cannon factorys on their homeworld for example..

R

I'm worried by the clash of theme vs variety Tuck. A strongly themed army that is balls to the wall, say FA, even though it has taken a variety of choices, looks like it might dip in variety even given your guidance above.

It is a devil of a thing to put a finger on, complicated by the ability of some 'dexs to sidestep the restrictions.

Thinking on some lists from last year, say Brad's wych cult, very hard to get variety in wych squads. Sure you can tweak around the edges....but they have only two possible assault weapons...well, you know what I'm trying to say, it is going to be dex dependant a little bit.

...and I guess the latest musings rule out the powerhouse kroot eh ?

....Rargh....<snap>....I just take a long time to post !

not happy with your slide from effectiveness to balance, then to a spread of units.

if someone has a static guard army, i can;t see how we expect them to have serious manoeverability, hell it starts to look like they are just puttting in the manoevering to get around their inherent disadvantage in that area.

Similarly it could be said that adding a basilisk to a biker army balances it out, as you have spread some units from all fast to some static.

Also what has effectiveness got to do with balance? you could have the most balanced army in the world, one that ticks all the boxes for spread of units and it could be utter drivel on the table (esp if stu has it ).

and when you say a challenge to use, is that the first time i ever used it or after my 20th game? becuase the point of practising is so that the player knows how to play well without worrying about its weaknesses. all that is left is how it goes in various scenarios and vs variosu opponent armies.

The theme seciton looks clear enough

variety is a kick in teh teeth for necrons and other mono themed armies (ravenwing, pah no variety it was all bikes and speeders)

Effectiveness is a mess imho

and cliches, eye of the beholder i am afraid, there are only so many options in 40K, should i mark an ork player down becuase his warboss has apower klaw, i mean an uge choppa would not be cliched, but they are rubbish.

its a good direction to give, but i think it still needs work imho.

AL

Yep, understand the possibility of Variety vs Theme clash, but the explanation of variety kind of caters to narrowly focused themes. There are a lot of things that can be done to inject variety, as mentioned above... unti sizes, character wargear options, transport upgrades... only taking Wych squads shouldn't mean you can't inject some variety in other ways.

And yes, specific codices need to be given a bit of leniency in this area (Necrons anyone?). I'm hoping people take this on board when marking, applying some common sense. An arbitrary "Well, he only selected Wych squads" would be a stupid call. What else was selected? Warp Beasts? Skyboarders? Jetbikers?

So, admittedly some themes may appear to struggle to obtain variety, but there are ways of ensuring variety nonetheless.

Keep the comments coming!

Cheers,
G

Stu could someone taking a FA themed space marine army take a land speeder squadron, a bike squadron and an assault squad?....

id call that theme and variety.......Though I do agree with you.


Kane, as I think this will be my first piece of positive feedback for liber:P, I think its a good set of guidelines.........



One suggestion, that doesnt effect your guidelines, would be to remind players to maybe ask thier opponent the theme before the game if they cant clearly see it.

the first thing that pops into mind would be....say the KoS that has the bikes and a basilisk...ON PAPER. In game terms the lisk may be counting as a fighta bomba etc?...........

Or my current army diary, it looks like a lot of toys on paper, which i is haha, but it does have a theme and reason behind the choices.




that is all.

I like the ideas but agree care will be needed.

I tried running a duplication category in my comp guidelines for Cryx Cup and it quickly came home to me that Necrons, Tau, and to some extent nids, all have good reasons for duplication. I like this idea of "variety" much better, I'd just like to point out that players will need to use their heads a bit and consider the army they're looking at..

For eg, a Necron army might have 4 rather similar warrior units, yet take Wraiths, flayed ones, Pariahs, and be really cool, or it could have 9 Destroyers and a Monolith Plus Res Orb/Veil...

Some nid armies can easily justify a bit of duplication within a theme... Although many nid players try to take this a bit far, forgetting the variety that is possible in the list. I mean even a Genestealer army dopesnt have to have the same unit types, each Genie squad could take a different biomorph combination...

Obviously imperial Guard will have some tendancy toward duplication as well.

But as you say, take a couple of different units (Heavy Weapon platoon?) in these cases.

So long as we all bear in mind the army we mark it will be fine..

I imagine you'll be looking at these as seperate tick/flick categories, so no worriesa if an army is strong in one area but not anohter.

Al, as mentioned above, this is not required for all, codex needs to be taken in to consideration. Your example of a static guard army, if all that is selected is heaps of footsloggers and big tanks, then it would be lacking balance. The odd transport wouldn't go astray, neither would such units as hellhounds, rough riders, sentinels, etc.

As for the biker example, what's wrong with taking a few guntrukks? This I would suggest fall more inline with the theme and show better balance.



"A balanced army is one that will test the skills of the player using it, not one that is necessarily underpowered and hamstrung, but one that has noticable strengths and more importantly, weaknesses."



Player practise doesn't get considered in army comp. I don't give a heave how much your practise with the army, it's more about the player facing you seeing the perceived strengths and weaknesses in your list.



My god, that's nigh on a compliment Al, cheers!



Read the explanation a bit closer please. Yep, Ravenwing could be all bikers and speeders, hell, that's what I'd hope for in a strongly theme RW army. But do all the units have to be the exact same fit out? All the speeders the same? All units the same size? All the sgts have the same wargear?



*Giggle* Take the 'humble' out of 'imho' Al



*sigh* Mate, read my explanations more carefully. It's when the cliche options start stacking up that they become annoying, one or two is okay... but a whole list of them is down right depressing! And yes, agree it's eye of the beholder, welcome to peer comp!



Thanks for your comments Al, in all seriousness I appreciate the feedback... what would help even more is possible alternatives or re-wording. It all helps.

Leigh, noted re: theme request. I expect players to give a breif reasoning behidn the selections to help with theme determination.



Alex, you're spot on the money. Each codex is very different to the next and this should be taken in to consideration when marking. Your necron example is a good one.

Cheers,
G

:armata_PD

TAKE WHAT U WANT TO PLAY WITH!!!!

TAKE WHAT U LOVE TO CONVERT/PAINT!!!!

TAKE SOMETHING FUN!!!!

THEN FACE THE MUSIC AND TAKE IT LIKE A MAN!!!!

P.S There should'nt need to be a referendum on what is acceptable we all know what is not! Or Kane will Have your balls

Lea,

Please tell your mum to cut back on your green pills.

Cheers
Hagen

like it Kane... now can we get over the whinging please and get ready for a kick ar$e tourny?

Amen brother!!! Is it just me or is there alot of that going around this year?

tell me bout it... im spending the best part of 1500 bucks plus time away from loved ones while painting for this tourny... and at the moment im wondering why im bothering...

people its a wargame... we play with toy soldiers... together... in a big group...having fun...

can we go back to this?

i think some people really put a lot much emphasis in winning this tournament, more so than a normal tournament due to the fact that its an invite tournament with great players from all over so its probably harder to win than most.

me i dont care........... ive won it

me I don't care either.... and I've NOT won* it!

*nor am I particularly expecting to make a major tilt at it this time! Im in it for the fun, and the chance to beat Paenitentia + Little Horus! Ha!

ps, ok, so I lied, I do care about comp isues, but U already knew that! Just that it won't rule me on the weekend... an improvement on last year would be nice but Im out to build the DA Army i think is gpoing to be the most fun, for me and hopefully opponent, except David

Unlike many generals, Ive been awaiting neew dex + models to finalise my army - Im thinking the full Ravanwing squad looks too tasty not too take, for one!

Spektre/Speedy: I posted this up on purpose, to get a bit of discussion going and to try and get closer to a consensus between differing gaming groups. It's very important people are allowed to post their queries/complaints so that we can discuss them.

I posted these 4 areas up because this is what I look for in an army I build, and what I like to see across the table. Hopefully, people are of a similar (not necesarily the same) way of thinking and will take this on board when scoring.

To be brutally honest, I don't think anyone will be getting hammered by this scoring, I will be leaning towards being generous when I score, I'll be encouraging everyone actually. These areas should be okay for the vast majority of armies that rock up.

Cheers,
G

Kane One thing I didn't understand from what your wrote..


do you mean taking 3 units of assault marines is killing variety or is taking 3 fast attack choices is killing variety?

I'm interested in some examples in strong themes for
Tau (aside from how many devilfish I'm using)
Dark Eldar Kabal (other than boat army or not)
Necrons
Tyranids (other than am I flying/leaping or not)

I'm happy that the Imperial and Chaos armies have lots of examples of themes and in some cases special rules / changes in army composition to support the theme. Some of the other races don't seem to me to have the same options for defining the theme.

Also it's quite hard for people reading the theme to differntiate theme from an attempt to crowbar in some combo.
The number of LaTD armies that have just raided the local imperial arms factory just prior to it shipping its las cannons and plasma guns to the nearby space marine chapter is quite high. Must be next door to the Dark Blade emporuim and across the road from the assault cannon factory.

I've been very interested in these comp discusions, this is the frist time I have ben lucky enough to be offerend an invite to Liber.
I have seen people take armies to tournaments internationally before including when Bob Hook came to NZ to play in the GT. His army apparently did OK in the Aussie tournaments for comp but all the NZers hated it.

So I don't want to bring something that won't be well recieved. It might be OK at the Warlords but might not be OK in Australia.

The first version, although, if you mixed up options within the assault squads this would placate me somewhat, as would a plausible theme, to a degree.



This is where I need to update the theme piece to include checking out a players background, because some themes ain't that easy tp pick up from the list alone.



I don't know, it's not that hard



A theme that is merely there to justify cheesy choices should be pretty easy to see.



I wouldn't concern yourself too much about it, bring a strong theme, varied yet balanced list and stear clear too many cliche choices and you're set.

Cheers,
G

The first post in this thread should be a helpful guide when constructing your list...