compare fob and equinox

[richardbarby]

have a look over the results of the 2 simalr numbers of players but one under 7th one under 8th

same players generally in almost the same place and same armies in almost the same place as well

doc 1st
skaven 2nd
pete 2nd both times
josh top 10 both times
these are some of the better examples. i find it funny all the changes to the rules and some things are about the same

[Derick]

Yes, I'm always in the bottom 10

[richardbarby]

working harder than everyone else because your holding the table up 

[Josh]

I was interested to see the favoured armies of 7th still doing well in 8th. Demons, Dark Elves, Skaven, WoC, HE and Lizards.
Incredibly tight positioning of about half the field going in to round 6 was great to see. IMO more incentive needs to be given to the weaker armies (yes, they are still weaker) in order to encourage more diversity in 8th tournies.

[Big D]

5th place (before 5 point veto penalty) for my Dwarfs show that the "weaker" armies can compete. I think the problem at the moment is that most of the people that currently play the so-called weaker armies are generally the less-competitive type of player, who have not (or will not/cannot) work out how to make the new rules work for them.

[Josh]

That's the reason why a greater incentive needs to be offered. Army books have never been, and never will be equal. IMO 8th ed made some good steps towards narrowing the gap between the more powerful and less powerful armies, but the gap is still there and as long as it is, players who want to win tournaments won't take those armies.

[richardbarby]

what do you recomend to even things out the gaps smaller than 7th but still there i would agree with you there josh

[pete dunn]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say player skill may also be a component

[Big D]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say player skill may also be a component

Undoubtedly. The top end tournament players are there to win before anything else, so naturally they will shy away from the lower-tier armies in favor of the armies that will give them the best chance to podium. Hopefully, now that 8th has evened things up a bit we will see more of the top-tier players indulging in some of the less favored armies, that they may have always liked the look of but never saw the competitive side of.

[Josh]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say player skill may also be a component

Of course it's a component. But I'm also going to go out on a limb and ask if Tony would have won FoB if he was using Orcs and Goblins? Very, very unlikely. Tony won because he combined skill, luck and army selection to come out top dog (I don't care if someone's decided that XYZ are more powerful than demons and blah, blah, blah... they're still a very good army and can roll with the best of them).
I'm not really posting to stir the bucket or cry OMGWTFBBQ over certain armies. I'm merely attempting to point out that some armies aren't being represented, and I really like diversity in tournaments.

I've always thought that offering a best general award for each army is a great way to diversify armies. Those awards would also add a second level of competition and offer rewards for those that may not be aiming for the top (like me ).
That system also has the benefit of not being comp related... that can't be a bad thing.

[Dirty_Vod]

Hopefully, now that 8th has evened things up a bit we will see more of the top-tier players indulging in some of the less favored armies, that they may have always liked the look of but never saw the competitive side of.

Sorry to disapoint you but I've been playing warhammer for 23 years now and the only armies that I have EVER liked the look of are Undead and Daemons.  That's unlikely to change much any time soon.

@Josh - you mention that certain armies are under represented, here's the list of armies at FoB this year.  apart from a lack of bretonnians looks like a pretty even distribution to me...

Bretonnia   0
Empire   2
High Elves   2
Wood Elves   1
Dark Elves   3
Dwarves   2
Chaos Dwarves   2
Lizardmen   4
Orcs and Goblins   2
Warriors of Chaos   7
Demons of Chaos   2
Beasts of Chaos   1
Skaven   3
Vampire Counts   3
Tomb Kings   2
Ogre Kingdoms   1

[Glenn Patel]

...and hey, my curse is reborn: I played and lost to EVERY SINGLE DAEMONS PLAYER AT THE EVENT! >.>

rassum frassum.

[Josh]

~ARGUABLY~

Stronger armies:
High Elves   2
Dark Elves   3
Lizardmen   4
Warriors of Chaos   7
Demons of Chaos   2
Skaven   3

Middle armies:
Empire   2
Dwarves   2
Tomb Kings   2
Vampire Counts   3
Wood Elves   1

Weaker armies:
Bretonnia   0
Chaos Dwarves   2
Orcs and Goblins   2
Beasts of Chaos   1
Ogre Kingdoms   1
Dogs of War   0

21/37 or 57% taking stronger armies, 10/37 or 27% taking middle armies and 6/37 or 16% taking weaker armies. This indicates that either a) people like playing the armies that just happen to be stronger than others, or b) people want to do well at tournaments and take armies that lets them do that. Thus the under representation I mentioned.

I'd just like to see some more effort in all tournaments (hopefully including Equinox next year) to encourage those players who want to take a weaker army, but feel if they do there's nothing to aim for.

[PaW]

Josh, remember harry came first at call to arms 2 years ago, using orcs ang goblins.. I think its quite probable

[Fujin]

Or Harry is a better player than Vod. Or the field was weaker. Or had favourable draws.

Ah, the wonder of variables.

Sorry to disapoint you but I've been playing warhammer for 23 years now and the only armies that I have EVER liked the look of are Undead and Daemons.  That's unlikely to change much any time soon.

I call BS Mr Werewolf-themed Warriors of Chaos.

[Josh]

Josh, remember harry came first at call to arms 2 years ago, using orcs ang goblins.. I think its quite probable

Not probable, but remotely possible. I do know that encounter and still consider Harry a freak of nature, so discounted it. 

[pete dunn]

Dwarfs are one of the stronger armies in the game IMO

And BITD I did get 2nd and 3rd at two GTs with Ogres (including playing your TKs in Round 6 if I remember  )

[Fujin]

Comp-boost for the win Pete? Or did you accomplish it the good old-fashioned honest way my smashing all your opponents?

[pete dunn]

no comp...at either events.

Did win Sports at Auckland though?

[Josh]

Dwarfs are one of the stronger armies in the game IMO

And BITD I did get 2nd and 3rd at two GTs with Ogres (including playing your TKs in Round 6 if I remember  )

Care to see if that happens again?   
lol

I'm hoping that this thread doesn't degenerate into a 'this is better than that' sort of thing. I'm merely offering my opinion as to a possible way that we can increase the attendance of less favoured armies in tournaments, that's all.

[Dirty_Vod]

I call BS Mr Werewolf-themed Warriors of Chaos.

Was only thinking about that because;

1 - it was fluffy-con
2 - I can't use my werewolves as Ogre Dogs of War for my VC anymore.

Besides if I did that now I'd be accused of power gaming because WoC are top of the tree in 8th and are better than VC or Daemons now...

[daemion]

u accused of power gaming vod u old gimp? never.

[Fujin]

Besides if I did that now I'd be accused of power gaming because WoC are top of the tree in 8th and are better than VC or Daemons now...

Lol, beat me to is Daemion Vod - accused of being a power-gamer?!?!

Madness!

[Big D]

I'm merely offering my opinion as to a possible way that we can increase the attendance of less favoured armies in tournaments, that's all.

Well I will be doing my bit. I plan on expanding and using my dwarfs for a long time to come.

[richardbarby]

I'm merely offering my opinion as to a possible way that we can increase the attendance of less favoured armies in tournaments, that's all.

Well I will be doing my bit. I plan on expanding and using my dwarfs for a long time to come.

i will see if i can goloum and  blunderbuss my way up there as well