40K Editorial: This is Not 1984
Big brother is not watching you.
You are not required to agree with everything that you read. Each of us as a gamer has been gifted with a mind, so we all need to use them for the betterment of the hobby.
It is easy to repeat what is said most often and most loudly by pundits on the internet, but majority does not always make right. Simply cheering when others cheer or booing when others boo does not help the community. I am not saying that we must all give each other hugs and wear kid gloves, just that it is a good thing to look at things with an open mind and make decisions based upon our own experiences.
The average gamer plays only in a limited geographic area against a relatively limited pool of players and lists. For this reason, most gamers’ real world experience with many of the near limitless lists that exist in a game with as many variables as 40K or Fantasy is small. For most people, the closest they come to the supposed super lists we hear of is simply reading about them on the internet. We can all theorize about what we see and read, however theory only take us so far. The game must be played and theories must be tested in order to see what actually works in reality and what simply looks good on paper. Claiming a list or tactic is good when you have not actually tried it or seen it played, is not helping the overall gaming community or progressing play.
Experience trumps theory.
So allow yourself to acknowledge the possibility that other gamers play the game differently than you may be used to and that they may very well be successful in doing so. You do not have to agree with everything everyone says of course, vigorous back and forth is what moves ideas forward and improves them. But to dismiss something out of hand only limits you. If no one proposed new ideas we would never progress.
It never ceases to amaze me to see how creative players find new ways to win that I had previously not considered. By maintaining an open mind, you allow yourself to continuously grow and improve as a player. As soon as you think you know everything, you stop learning and stagnate. Players that retain an open mind will be able to consistently learn new tactics and improve.
Tournaments are a great way to expose yourself to new play styles, lists and players. They are fun events that draw the best talent in the gaming world. They form the only baseline for determining what works and what does not against skilled, competitive players as these events occur in the reality of the game, not simply in theory. And for those who say tournaments prove nothing, then please explain how exactly one is to prove who is a good player and what ideas work? The answer to that is that there is no other way. Saying tournaments count for nothing is like saying the Super Bowl doesn’t prove who the best (American) Football team was that year. Sure some teams may have been better on paper (I’m a Chargers fan, I know this line of thinking all too well) but the reality of the situation is that you have to prove you are the best by playing the game. Nothing else matters.
If you were to believe what is touted on the net as the best lists without question, you would expect to see tournament results indicative of this, with nothing but the “best” lists in the rankings. If you follow the results you will see that this is almost never the case. Good players regularly win with lists that fall outside the bounds of conventional wisdom. Let’s take a look at a few recent tournament results in terms of battle points (games won):
http://www.themechanicon.com/1/category/2009-archives/
2009 Mechanicon (1,850 pts):
Top battle points: Jeff Payne: Eldar.
Second: Casey Campbell: Chaos Daemons.
Third: Nick Nanavati: Nids.
Tied for fourth: Chris Dubuque (GO Jawaballs!!!): Blood Angels and Rob Baer: Imperial Guard
Note: Not what you would expect, and not all Mech. Armies many consider to be weak were performing well.
http://broadsidebash.com/results.php
2010 Broadside Bash GT (5 games 2,000 pts):
Top Battle Points: Toby Walker: Foot Eldar.
Second: Brad Townsend: Spave Wolves (Long Fang and Razorback heavy).
Third: Dave Fay: Pure Death Guard Chaos Space Marines (no lash, no oblits).
Fourth: Steve Sisk: Space Marines bike army with Scout Bikers, and Land Speeder Storms, also won best overall.
Fifth: John Herman: Mechanized Imperial Guard
Note: Mech IG, while representing 7 of the 45 armies present, had only one army in the top 10 in battle points. And again, not all mech lists in the top spots, showing unconventional armies performing well including Foot Eldar and Bike Marines, both of whom went undefeated.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/284231.page
2010 UK GT
“For those of you that don’t know, UK GW’s GT is 6 games at 1500 points, and you play in 3 “heats” in the fall to qualify for the finals that was held last weekend. There is no comp, no sports and no painting scores so it is battle points with victory points as the tie-breaker.
They had a lot better spread of armies than they have had in the past, Lash Chaos is still a very good combo no matter how people say that Mech stop it (the Oblits just blast you out of your tanks).
The Tyranid codex is still new, and there were only 2 tyranid players there that finished in the middle of the pack.
There were 2 surprises though. The first is that there was no IG in the top 10. Maybe it is not as good at 1500 points. The other surprise was that there was a necron player in the top 10, which goes to show you that every codex has a list that can win if you are good enough player.”
Thanks to Blackmoor for sharing these figures and his commentary.
1:Chaos: 2 lash 6 oblit raider army.
2: Chaos: 2 lash 9 oblit army.
3: Space wolves, With 3 rune priests, 2 Squads of long fangs, 4 units of tooled up grey hunters.
4: Space Marines
5: Necrons: Lord on destroyer, 6 wraiths, monolith, 5 destroyers, 7 immortals, some warriors.
6: Chaos: Khorne daemon prince, 2 raiders, 2 rhinos, 3 units of zerkers + Khorne terminators
7: Chaos Daemons: Fate Crusher
8: Orks
9: Orks
10: Eldar
Not the typical armies that one would consider to be “the best.” A good player can and will win with any army.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/284231.page
This is a running compilation of tournament results, thanks to Fetterkey for compiling this.
February 5th-7th, 2010: Gottacon (1,750 points, 44 players, sports/paint/”bonus,” no comp):
Winners
1st most Battle Points (2nd Overall): Imperial Guard (Doug Lawrence)
2nd most Battle Points (5th Overall): Chaos Dæmons (Daniel Hope)
3rd most Battle Points (1st Overall): Eldar (Bryce Jensen)
January 15th-17th, 2010: Seattle Conquest Slaughter GT (2,000 points, 77 players, sports/paint, no comp):
Winners
1st most Battle Points (1st Overall): Chaos Space Marines (Chase Lindo)
2nd most Battle Points (2nd Overall): Space Marines (Zen Zheng)
January 16th-17th, 2010: Toywiz Conflict GT (1750 points, 30 players, comp/sports/presentation):
Winners
Most Battle Points (and Best Overall): Imperial Guard (Alexander Fennell)
2nd most Battle Points (8th Overall): Fatecrusher Dæmons (Jeff Omundson)
3rd most Battle Points (2nd Overall): Blood Angels (Chris “Jawaballs” Dubuque)
Again, we see players winning with a wide variety of armies, not all mechanized, and several armies considered to be lower tier if one follows conventional thinking.
http://battlefoam.com/catalog.php?item=143&ret=catalog.php
Wild West Shootout GT
The results page is down, but I know Blackmoor won with his Eldar.
First Place: Foot Eldar
2009 Adepticon 40K Circuit Invitational
It took a little digging to find this info, so thanks to Muwhe for helping me out with this.
1 White, Brian: Chaos Space Marines
2 Chester, Brad: Chaos Demons
3 Reidy, Thomas: Orks (goatboy)
4 Kim, Bill: Chaos Demons
5 Murphy, Paul: Orks
6 Hermann, John: Eldar
7 Twitchell, Mike: Unknown
8 Cook, Justin: Tyranids
9 Kallend, Alex: Unknown
10 Mohlie, Ben: Imperial Space Marines Variant
AdeptiCon 40k Championship
1 Flores, Christian: Space Wolves
2 Bajramovic, Alan: Orks
3 Walsh, Mike: Unknown
4 Arneson, Ragnar: Chaos Space marines
5 Bostedt, Colin: Chaos Space Marines
6 Farrell, Kevin: Chaos Space Marines
7 DeVries, Tyler: Chaos Daemons
8 Wolf, Jonathan: Imperial Guard (jwolf)
9 McRoberts, Shane: Daemonhunters
10 Swanson, Gregory: Imperial Space Marines Variant
There are some surprises again, JWolf placing top 10 with Imperial Guard (4th Edition book which was terrible in 5th ed rules) and Deamonhunters, which takes some real stones to play at a tournament like Adepticon. In the invitational, two of the top three armies are not Mech, again showing that you do not have to go with conventional wisdom to play competitively and win.
The point of all of this is that the game is wide open and that you should not limit yourself to sticking to the status quo. By expanding your expectations to encompass new ideas, you only improve your skill and increase your enjoyment of the game. The reason we see “weak” armies performing well at tournaments is because player skill and experience factors into the equation in a way that theory and math hammer can not quantify. Therefore, in the end it is the player, not the list that matters, although the list is a big factor. Ultimately each gamer must think for him or herself and determine what works for them and what does not. Do not get caught up in the Emperor’s New Clothes Mentality of agreeing with the majority as to the merit or fault of an idea without seeing evidence.
Wouldn’t you rather win a tournament with Grey Knights than Mech Guard? In order to do it you must first believe that you can. Make your own way and reap the rewards of success. Far better that than sitting on the sidelines making claims you do not support with actions. The ones that count are those that step into the ring and compete and try their own ideas, even if they fail to win.
While champions are remembered, no one ever erected a statue for a critic.
