Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Someone Call Greenpeace!!!!!

The lists are up for the NZ Masters and I ran my eye over the 40k lists this morning. You can find them here.

All I can say is “I’m astounded”. These guys plead for No-Comp and then come up with this.

This is going to be like watching a Norwegian Hunting Party on a Baby-Seal Clubbing Expedition. Of the lists posted, only three are what I would call competitive no-comp lists (Note: Hagen Kerr’s IG is missing – but given his desire to be loved I’m not expecting competitive).

There are three truly competitive lists there:
  • Charlie St. Clair’s Space Wolves
  • Doug Sainsbury’s Grey Knights
  • Jack Dunn’s Dark Eldar
If these three do not all finish in the Top 5 then call me a stegosaurus.

So you know that people will turn up with lists like these then what do you bring?

Well, not Tyranids. Not Chaos. And not Eldar.

I’m guessing after this weekend that a lot of people aren’t going to be as keen on No-Comp as they were before.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Why do you think that is? Lack of no-comp concept comprehension? A steadfast belief that they can get the job done regardless of the odds? A sense of rampant self-defeating "whats the pointism"? A genuine desire to not be "that guy" to allow self righteous "At least I'm not that guyism"?

    Help me understand the 40k brain..

  3. I think some of it is can't get the army finished in time, at least that is what I think the reason for Dan and David's lists being Nids and Sisters respectively.

  4. WTF is up with all the Eldar? I agree with you Pete, I thought this is a No-Comp event?

    I'm with you on the predictions too.

    Go Venom/Razback spam!

  5. Ok see, here's the thing; there has been a lot of talk over the last couple of weeks about showing up to an event (especially one such as masters) with unpainted armies. Now I can't speak for everyone else, but I can't stand speed painting armies for tournaments and would much prefer to take my time with armies I will be playing with for a long time; one of the reasons I'm bringing my 'nids.
    I think that you perhaps aren't giving some of us enough credit; without resorting to borrowing (can't stand the idea of it tbh), some of us just simply HAVE to bring what we own, which just isn't DE, SW or GK. Maybe I should see if Phil will let me push paper cut-outs around the table instead, at least then I might "win" a game....

    I will happily admit that mine isn't the strongest list out, even for the "weak" nid book, and am expecting to get shot off the table quite quickly. HOWEVER, there is only one army in that list that would have me believe the game is over before it begins, against all the others I think I can at least make a game of it....
    Having watched Doug develop his list from the ground up I was fully aware that those kind of lists would show up, still took 'nids, guess I'm just a baby seal tho.....
    Oh and for anyone else who isn't playing in masters but comments on how weak the lists all are, I hope to see you with a "real" list next year sometime....

  6. Not sure if Anonymous is Damian, Daniel or David. Please take the comments as they were given - as a comment on the lists and the desire to go no-comp, rather than on the players.

    What I find strange is why there has been a clamour for no-comp from Masters contenders all this year for no comp if they weren't intending to bring lists suited for a no-comp event. You don't ask for a gunfight when you only own a knife - not if you are looking to win.

    Top end NZ tournaments have always required painted armies so to say that the requirement is a surprise is a real cop out IMO.

    >Oh and for anyone else who isn't playing in masters but comments on how weak the lists all are, I hope to see you with a "real" list next year sometime.... <

    This comment is very confused. You don't need to be at the Masters to pass judgement on how strong the lists are. Any jub with access to the internet has the ability to compare the lists.

    No comment was made on the skill level of the players - they are at the Masters because their performance warrants it.

    However it doesn't change the fact that baby seal lists are mixing with Apex Predators.

    That doesn't mean that the "seals" can't win the event....just that the playing field certainly ain't level

  7. I think that if so many people are taking "lower tier" codexes, the fight for 3rd through 12th will be interesting.

    Charlie and Doug are the only lists that look "American"/"Net list" and certainly given their ability as generals, it'll take quite a bit to push them off the top 2 slots.

    that said, some of the other guys are solid players, and while their lists aren't "cutting edge" i don't think they have to be given the competition (for 3rd place)

    I don't think that's a problem. As a guy who opted out of playing 5th because the Chaos Codex took away your joy for 40k, Pete, I'm surprised you're giving others a hard time for playing the armies they clearly enjoy depsite their disadvantages against the "top tier" codexes.

    That these guys got to Masters playing "weaker" codexes says to me that Kiwis are still playing what interests them rather than what's powerful. i can see the other side of the coin (if you're plaing to win, why handicap yourself) but think i like things this way.

    and given the armies we're seeing, i guess i'm not the only one.


  8. It was Daniel, and yes I do only own knives, knives are fun.... So are gun fights.

    I'm a fan of no-comp, regardless of what I take I WILL be playing to win. Irrespective if I am taking the dinner knife I found beneath the sofa I would much rather see no-comp as it takes away the very questionable and opinionated comp score. So yes, I am keen on no-comp tournaments, but who cares what I take....?

    Not once did I disagree with the painting requirements, and I never will. All I really said was that I couldn't have an army done for this event that was net-listy enough to compete; and I know others are the same. So 'nids it is.

    And as far as that other comment goes, in such a small community as ours, it actually hurts to hear people putting others down so much. I was the one who wrote my list, it seemed to work and I enjoy it. To hear my "list-building skill" (not that mine really exists tbh) described that way kinda sucks :(

    Maybe next time pass judgement in a slightly smoother manner?

  9. Wes,

    See my comment above. The comments are directed at the list strength


  10. PS: didn't mean to disrespect Jack's list. also looks very much like what you'd find on the net/in america but not sure it's the same level of "i win on T1" that charlie and doug have.


  11. I was talking about lists too Pete:

    If 8~9/12 of the lists are "baby seals", then i'd take that to be the community's preference and applaud them for playing what they want. (i know the other 3 are as well, but it takes more resolve to handicap yourself at a competition)

    i guess i'm surprised that the expectation is that by lifting the supposed "comp penalty" that people will suddenly all play Grey Knights/IG/Space Wolves.

    i always figured people would keep playing what they liked over what was most powerful for the same reasons you don't play much 40k right now: they like some armies best and only want to play those armies.

    if that makes them "baby seals", so be it.


  12. Daniel,

    Thanks for identifying yourself.

    >And as far as that other comment goes, in such a small community as ours, it actually hurts to hear people putting others down so much. I was the one who wrote my list, it seemed to work and I enjoy it. To hear my "list-building skill" (not that mine really exists tbh) described that way kinda sucks :(

    Maybe next time pass judgement in a slightly smoother manner?<

    Again you seem to have missed the message.

    The comments are directed at the relevant strengths of various lists. Nobody has put you down or passed judgement on your skill.

    It's regrettable that you've taken the comments as a personal attack.

    Let me be clear as to the two messages I've passed:

    Some lists are stronger than others.

    I am surprised that people pushed for no-comp if they were ill-equipped to bring a list to compete at a no-comp tournament.

    No offence was meant to you. You've taken offence and that's regrettable. However it in no way invalidates the messages.

    We'll have to agree to differ


  13. I have to agree with Dan here. It will take a bit of time for the NZ scene to come to the level of "net list" that is found in america, if it ever will. Also it will take some time for people to build and paint the lists that fit into a no comp enviroment. I also think in Nz the majority will build the lists they want from the codexes that they want to take. I built my eldar because I wanted to play with them not because they were the highest tier codex out there, and I am a competitive NZ tournament player.

    The best thing about the no comp is that it takes away a score that provides constant problems and argument. Considering the response from people for the first no comp tourney in nz for a while (ott) I hope to see the trend continue.

    Also as a point of interest Doug lost to Haydn with these exact lists only a week or two ago, so I don't believe that the top places are set by a long way.

    My 0.02


  14. But Wes, you and I know that all codexes are not made equal.

    Therefore why, if you want to give yourself the best chance of winning the Masters wouldn't you bring a top tier no-comp list? There's probably 6-7 books you can choose from - SW, IG, GK, DE, Orks, BA

    However if you are going to the Masters to have a good time with a list you are comfortable with and want to play then you probably shouldn't be surprised if people a) notice that and b) think you'll have to play very very well to compete for the top positions.

    Hey it's just my opinion....

    I'd love to see one of the "baby seal" lists win.

  15. Mark,

    That's all great but again I think you've missed my point.

    I have said three of the lists are more competitive than the rest. I haven't said Doug, Charlie or Jack (whose had 4 games in 12 months) are. They have got the strongest lists.

    That doesn't mean they'll win. What it means is they should have higher expectations of winning.

    I'm pretty sure as well that if No-Comp becomes the norm (which is what the community wants) then lists will gravitate to the strongest builds. Because if you are competitive then you will want to give yourself the best chance of winning.

    As you've said it might be too soon at this event but give it 3-6 months as no-one likes being roadkill.

  16. Sorry if it seemed to come out like teenage whinging, was just a little annoyed. I completely understand where you're coming from in terms of comparative list strength, it's just comments like

    "All I can say is “I’m astounded”. These guys plead for No-Comp and then come up with this."


    "So you know that people will turn up with lists like these then what do you bring?

    Well, not Tyranids. Not Chaos. And not Eldar."

    seem to say a lot more about the players and what they chose to take, rather than the lists themselves. My apologies if I interpreted it incorrectly.

    Yes I want no comp tournies, no I am not going to go out and buy an army specifically for it. One does not have to entail the other is all I am trying to say; especially as I want to run something else.

    I am under no illusions as to the relative strengths between each book and realise it will be an uphill struggle against certain lists. Oh well, I will enjoy it all the same.

    Again, sorry if I came off the wrong way, I guess I just interpreted too much into some of the original comments.


  17. I think it's hard for people to separate lists from familiarity with the list from generalship.

    I know you're doing it, but not everyone here is or can.

    Obviously masters will be decided by the general who understands his list, and his opponents lists the best so i figure that's why the "baby seals" have a hope. they're counting on Jack's 4 games in 12 months or Charlie's busy schedule (that limited his number of space wolf games) to help them along.


  18. *cough* 2 games

    I'm coming in well-prepared

  19. Jack I have one question about your list, its the only one that sort of confused me. Baron without Hellionbomb?
    Not playing but probably going to be hanging around watching during masters.

  20. For clarification, it may look like a net list. It may even BE a net list, but i didn't look on the net when I wrote it.

    As this is a no comp tournament and it seems that no comp is the way tournaments are heading (and as Charlie pointed out and continues to prove) winning all your games means you should win the tournament even with comp. Strong lists are going to become the norm, for me anyway.

    So I personally took an army that I liked the look of, wrote something as hard as I could and added a twist that makes it personal to my playstyle.

    I still think most codex's are viable and indeed strong in the hands of a good general. Though codex's like Nids and Eldar mean there are only really one or two builds you can make out of the dex as opposed to BA where there are a few...


  21. Doug, the thing with "net lists" is that they tend to just be logical conclusions of list building with maximum efficiency and power in mind.

    As such, a bunch of our lists can look similar to "net lists" without having been built that way.

    There's also nothing wrong with this at all, so you shouldn't feel offended or slighted in any way, and you shouldn't feel the need to explain yourself :)

  22. Well All I'm gunna say is that My DE were not painted so I could not take them. I'm playing a list similar to Jacks but with the Hellions.

    And on Eldar being a weaker codex. Yep I fully agree. But I believe in my ability in them and I'm hoping to give those that have hard lists a hard time. I find that with my experience I am able to take on most people without to much of a smashing (charlie being my only really hurdle in recent times).

    I love no comp for two reasons. 1 - as I run tournaments I love the fact there is no complaining after about comp scores. 2 - I do not have to stress about what I take and wonder will i get hit for this. It makes the whole experience more fun for me.

    But yes Pete I do agree. There are some softer lists however there are some very good players too. I do want to take a harder codex, but not at the expence of having a painted army at this point


  23. @shadowmancer, the baron still does very nice things for a beastpack squad, and that is one hell of a beastpack.
    On top of that, hes dirt cheap, and gives the bonus to the roll for going first, what's not to like!

  24. Haha Haydn, no "Wolf lord Charlie on Thunderhusky Cavalry Aska" this time around, though I feel it's an element I can function without strongly as the result has given me a more solid and cohesive midfield, bolstering my staying power :)

  25. @Charlie, I don't doubt that the Baron is good, its more I couldn't understand from a look at the list and what the Baron allows for with all the rules he has. But yeah I can see that as a nasty combo.

  26. Also I would like to take this opportunity to call Hagen old, not like - on the wrong side of 40 old, but really REALLY ancient and decrepit.

  27. Dammit I wrote a massive reply which got eaten by the internet :(.

    So lets try that again, first off; while I have no problems whatsoever with you calling out lists as being weak if that's your opinion (as long as you are happy to back it up with some reasoning if someone questions you on it, just saying 'your list is shit' is just flaming) I would suggest you don't use the term 'baby seals'. Its a term coined by Stelek and other parts of the hyper competitive US scene and refers to terrible players not terrible lists, so using it the same sentence as Masters doesn't go down so well (hence the offence some people took even if it wasn't your intention).

    I strongly disagree about only a handful of codices being viable if you expect to win Masters. Aside from Necrons (only because they can't use their new book) every codex has at least one highly competitive/netlist build which could do well, the only thing which really changes is how flexible they are. Tau, Eldar, Daemons, Chaos and Sisters and to a less extent Nids and Orks have very limited options if they are going for a competitive list, but they can still field them and compete with the so called overpowered GK, SW and IG books.

    I agree that some of the lists aren't particularly optimised, but there are certainly more than 3 competitive list there. On top of the 3 you have listed, 2 of the Nid lists are very solid, the Templars are strong and 3 out of 4 Eldar lists are good. Assuming they have players who know how to play to the strengths of their list there are about 8-9 lists there which I would consider roughly equal in power level, and another couple very close behind.

    Honestly only Charlie's Wolves (which is almost identical to my mates Wolves which I know I can beat), Doug's GK's (never faced a Henchman spam list, but once the Dreads die not much can hurt me) and Hen's Templars have the combination of firepower and durability which seriously give me pause.

    Personally these are all roughly the kind of lists I was expecting, they are more or less the same lists which everyone has been running in tournaments with comp all year (and all getting 2's rendering it pointless). I would be very disappointed if anyone has a whine afterwards at being beaten by a 'netlist' etc (beyond the friendly jibe stage of course), everyone knows what to expect.

    Either way I'm really looking forward to this and I'm sure it will be a great weekend of gaming for everyone. At the end of the day the players are still by far the biggest factor in the result of a tournament. I just wish I could get some more practice games in :)

  28. One thing to keep in mind Rob, the term "baby seals" long predates Steleks little vitriolic cesspool, and Pete long predates the internet. It's probably a term he faxed off to rival banks when the empire was looking at colonizing a few more little islands down near that big prison island they possessed.

    I think Pete's been pretty clear that he has only aimed criticisms at the contents of the army lists, not the people who wrote them, nor the tactics those people use to play that army.

    I'm sure we can all think of dozens of examples of good players doing well with bad armies, and bad players doing poorly with good armies.

    I do also have to disagree that only such a small handful of dex's can win an event like this. Personally I think:

    SW/GK/BA/IG can all make very solid, and forgiving lists that should have a high chance of taking it out.
    DE/SM/ORKS also have a great chance at taking it out, but require a bit more finess. The likes of Ben Mohlie have shown us that SM can still go toe to toe with the big boys when played with the right mind frame.
    TAU in the right hands, perform well with the meta that this event seems to have gravitated towards.

    Deathwing, Black Templars I feel would have a reasonable shot, but are far too draw dependent.

    Eldar are going to be interesting, the reality is we're talking about winning this event, not doing well at it. To do that, you generally need to win every single game. Unless you do an unlikely dodge, you're going to run into the likes of the IG, and you're going to be in for a very bad day. That being said, a bit of luck could see you through handily - the right mission, the right reserve rolls, the opponent being a bit of a muppet - nothings completely off the cards.

    Nids - sorry, but I don't think these guys have a shot at the event at all, unless Jack loses some of his early games and they dodge him. I know Jacks only played a couple of games this year, but if I had those particular nid builds and I drew that army, I don't think I would bother deploying, especially if there was a bar on site and I could tempt Jack into having a yarn for a couple of hours instead. I also think you're going to struggle with the GK's - there are various nid measures that can be taken to reduce the threat of GK's, but none of these have been taken.
    With just one jaws and none of you being particularly tervigon heavy, I wouldn't expect any auto lose going on vs the wolves, it will be difficult but by no means impossible.

    Chaos - Bartosh's lash gets shut down heavily by the wolves, eldar, as well as having few worthwile targets against the IG/GK. Fozzys list is like a slightly less scary version of this.

    I really don't know what to make of the sisters... I don't see them winning all their games though.

    Daemons - there is just too much out there that daemons struggle with these days to get a 100% record.

    I've probably missed some out, but I'm off to bed so that will have to do :) All of the above being said, its a game of dice and toy soldiers, so anything could happen.

  29. (a lot of the above is voided if nobody goes 6/6 for a change also :O! I predict someone will however).

  30. Nids are fighting uphill against DE, but no moreso than DE are fighting uphill against Grey Knights or a good IG list if one shows up (Psyker Battle Squad is a nightmare for the Beasts).

    Eldar are very matchup dependent (mission and terrain wise) against Guard and Wolves, but they have never been an army which wins fair fights anyway.

    I know I haven't been to Masters before but I think going undefeated this year will be very tough as most of these lists have at least one other list which is a very tough matchup. Wolves vs DE, DE vs GK, Nids vs GK, Chaos vs Eldar etc etc. Of course the unusually high number of Eldar armies is also going to significantly increase the number of draws due to last turn objective contesting shenanigans, which will make outright wins tougher.

    Anyway, as you said we have to see what happens on the day and whether the dice cooperate or not.

  31. Guys,

    As per my earlier comments I believe there are a range of "stronger" lists.

    >Therefore why, if you want to give yourself the best chance of winning the Masters wouldn't you bring a top tier no-comp list? There's probably 6-7 books you can choose from - SW, IG, GK, DE, Orks, BA <

    At no stage have I said you have to be using GK, SW or DE to win.

    Rather - and I'll go back to reiterate what I said at the outset - of the lists coming to the event, three stand out as stronger than the others.

    It doesn't mean they'll win but - taking player skill out - that I have higher expectations that they will.

    A simple test - If you were asked to rate the lists which ones would you rate as the strongest? I'd be surprised if most people at the Masters didn't assign the SW, GK and DE in their strongest relative ratings.

    For me their is an obvious disparity between the strength of these lists and the rest of the field.

    Again, that doesn't mean that they will win - though in this case they are being wielded by competent players.


  32. Hagen's list is a poor excuse for an optimised IG list. I'm not sure whether it incompetence on his part or his ongoing desire to be loved by the community.

    "You know I've had articles on Sportsmanship and Themeing Armies published in White Dwarf".

    Yes Hagen, you may have mentioned it :-)


  33. Hey, I'm just hanging out with the baby seals... taking the army (including the "less logical" units) that I want to take.

    I'm sure people will enjoy playing my list - it's pretty soft compared to those SW/GK/DE/Nid netlists. :)

  34. Hi, new to this.

    Isn't 'no comp' supposed to level the playing field? Going by the above - it has clearly failed. Caving to the new structure of the game so you can win might not be in the best interests for game system longevity.. Why not play it and help the community progress.

    Second, saying a list is 'soft' is always an insult to the writer, you'll never want to take a soft list so the list you are taking is the best you can manage - either due to models available or simply due to the experience you have with certain models.

    I think a solution to hard/soft list debate would be all take the same army, same list and then it comes down to movement and dice roll on the day! :-) problem solved... Boring? Yes.

    How do you pick an army? On back story? or on 'game' strength? Why even do the hobby if you pick on in game strength? Simply Google, print army list, play to techniques described online... Heck i do the same thing for a computer game when i'm stuck - use a walkthrough, but then I internally debate.. Did I just cheat? Who did I cheat?.. Myself? You?

    At the end of this i'll add that i'm not a 40k player, so i don't understand all the problems. But I know as far as Fantasy is concerned there are certain armies that are easyier wins.

    Good luck for all at masters, hopefully you enjoy playing the game for what it's worth..

  35. Are we forgetting the most important part of this hobby?? hanging out with like minded peoples an having fun. or are we all about the winning these days??

  36. You can do both, Henz... Since when did trying your best to win become synonymous with Win-at-all-Costs Twat-hammer?

  37. Thanks James, was trying to find an eloquent way to word that :)