February 1, 2013

WHFB Swedish Comp system 8th vs. 7th Ed

After reading a post relating to Swedish Comp (used I believe in the ETC) on Joel's blog I decided to do a bit of research into it and understand how it was developed and why its used.  Despite my initial reservations (proving that first impressions/rants online should usually remain unshared) it seems that its actually pretty good.  While I dont understand why some magic items or combos are not included I do like its ability to give you a good measure of how hard/easy your army might be - however the system is predicated on the idea that you can bring Special Characters something usually banned at NZ events.

Link to Joels post and to SCS ruleset


As an exercise I decided to copy Joel and put all of my lists through the SCS test including some of my old 7th Edition army lists, the results were interesting.

Swedish Comp Scores for my NZ Teams Champ Team

Working through our teams armies you get the following values:
  • Bo Patterson (Lizards)  - 6.6 making it powerful but not overly so.
  • John (Me with Ogres) - 8.1 which reads as balanced leaning toward powerful.
  • Stu Robinson (Beasts) - 11.6 a very balanced middle of the road army, surprised by this actually.
  • Matt Hassell (Dwarfs) - 15 so a "friendly" army leaning toward balanced.
That gives us an average score of 10.275 making the team, overall, balanced leaning toward powerful.  Would be very interested to know what the average scores of the other teams are on SCS.

My Ogres scored 8.1 because of my decision not to take certain meta-items that are in favour with a lot of Ogre players specifically:
  • Crown of Command - did think about it
  • Hellheart - never figured out how to use it properly
  • Dragonhide Banner - overpriced IMO
  • L4 + L2 magic combo with Lore of Death
  • Leadbelcher spam - don't really like the models so not something ill really use.
  • Maneaters - would if I could
  • Double Ironblaster - would if I could
As for Matts Dwarfs - thats much higher than I thought it would be.  Whats missing from his list that would lower his score appears to be:
  • MR Challenge & multiple Spellbreaking/Eater runes
  • Big block of Miners
  • Multiple runed up Grudgethrowers
  • Multiple Cannons
Very strange though that the comp system assigns no value whatsoever to Dwarf Rangers and runes such as RO Might (doubles S vs. T5 or greater), RO Resistance (re-roll AS, strange when Dawnstone is comp'd) and others combos such as Longbeard Rangers with GW.

SCS scores for my Dwarf Tournament Lists 8th vs. 7th
First up is my bog standard 8th Edition Dwarf army list that I basically don't see myself changing, except maybe to swap the Gyrocopter for one of the warmachines.

8th Edition Dwarfs
Runelord
w. Shield, RO Resistance, RO Stone, MR Balance, RO Spellbreaking, RO Furnace (-36)
Thane
w. BSB, MR Gromil, RO Fire, RO Resistance, RO Furnace (-13)
30 x Warriors
w. Full command, GW (-16)
30 x Warriors
w. Full command, GW (-16)
16 x Quarrellers
w. Musician, Shields (-6)
30 x Hammerers
w. Full command, RO Battle (-40)
20 x Miners
w. Full command (-20)
Grudgethrower
w. Engineer, Pistols, RO Accuracy, RO Penetrating x2 (-7)
Cannon
w. Engineer, Pistols, RO Forging, RO Burning (-10)
Organ Gun (-5)

And (-16) for Warmachine Points and I get a total of 185.  Subtract from 300 & divide by 10 = 11.5 - so balanced apparently.

Now compare that to the Dwarf List I managed to finish 9th with at Skitterleap in 2009 under 7th Edition and the number changes dramatically.  That list was:

7th Edition Dwarfs
Dwarf Lord
w. Shieldbearers, RO Resistance, RO Stone, RO Cleaving, MR Swiftness, RO Might, RO Warding, RO Furnace (-8)
Runesmith
w. Shield, RO Spellbreaking x2, RO Furnace, RO Stone, RO Fire, RO Striking (-24)
Thane
w. Battle Standard, MR Gromil, RO Furnace, RO Cleaving, RO Might (-13)
20 x Longbeards
w. Full command, Shields, RO Stoicism, RO Battle (-5)
10 x Warriors
w. Musician, Shields (-1)
10 x Warriors
w. Musician, Shields (-1)
10 x Quarrellers
w. Musician, Shields (-4)
10 x Quarrellers
w. Musician, Shields (-4)
18 x Hammerers
w. Full command, shields, MR Grungi (-17)
18 x Hammerers
w. Full command, shields, RO Courage, RO Sanctuary (-17)
Organ Gun (-5)
Gyrocopter (-2)

Very, very different list all about points denial and anti-magic.  All up this 7th Ed list comes in at 19.9 which makes it as friendly as they come almost slap me in the face with a wet bus ticket while I bend over and let you give me one friendly.

I posted a while ago on what 8th Edition has done for Dwarfs and SCS seems to bear that out although I assume that the scoring system has changed since 7th Edition.

Read my thoughts on how Dwarfs have faired under 8th Edition WHFB here.

Looking forward to the NZTC - but quietly trembling at the pain and cheesy broken hurt that is going to come my way from some quarters.

4 comments:

Jeffrey Kent said...

Indeed, I'll be interested to see the team lists when they're out. I would bet money that the winning team's score with all four teams added together won't be more than 10.

Joelatron said...

Very interesting. I had never thought to compare scores with how a 7th list would look like.

I think "Swedish Comp" is very similar to how 7th ETC comp worked.

What I find fustrating about it is that (like all punitive systems) it encourages "Stealth cheese" and the fact that some armies fair far worse that others despite table top success/failure.

I wouldnt use it as a comp system personally, but it is an interesting "objective" gauge of the power levels of your armies (if you agree with the weight given to certain combos).

John Murrie said...

I agree Joel its not a system I would like to see used - Pete Lite works extremely well - but I do like it as a system for comparing armies.

I'll work my way through my other lists as well to see how they faired.

Jeffrey Kent said...

I think it would be interesting to give it a go at least once as a tourney comp system. My prediction though is it would favour soft lists that are geared towards total point denial who go for small losses but take out the wins due to having higher scores. I'm not sure that's the kind of warhammer I want to play.

Pete-lite is fine if your goal is to let everyone take their toys but realistically it only actually limits the most extreme and abusive builds. In no way does it actually effectively comp the top tier armies in my opinion.