marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Jul 31, 2017 5:57:04 GMT
Eh, I've always found the game is mostly decided by a combination of target priority and positioning. Yes in a certain level. After playing the game for a while, those things become quite elementary and obvious.
|
|
|
Post by Azahul on Jul 31, 2017 6:06:15 GMT
Yes in a certain level. After playing the game for a while, those things become quite elementary and obvious. Target priority does, certainly. Positioning... at least in its most intricate, reactive sense, no, I don't think that ever becomes obvious.
|
|
|
Post by celeb on Jul 31, 2017 6:18:10 GMT
If both players played perfectly, then the list matchup and dice would of course be the deciding factor. But even the best players make mistakes. Even at high level, positioning, strategy and tactics are having a big influence on the outcome. Matchup and dice are secondary. The problem is that you can't really teach positioning in the forums that is why on forums, there is usually list advice going on. On game night, we usually analyze games and if the matchup isn't completely one-sided, there is often a way to victory.
|
|
Deller
Junior Strategist
I’m on a Boat
Posts: 605
|
Post by Deller on Jul 31, 2017 7:03:32 GMT
Tl;dr tech advice is easy, strategies are harder to convey over text. You see more posts about teching because this is a forum. Taking the following as a hypothetical example; when I stumble across a thread like lormahordes.freeforums.net/thread/1866/beat-defensive-circle it's really impossible to give any real help that isn't tech. Just off the OP the only information I have is 5 Casters he plays and 6 Casters his opponent plays. What I don't know: 1) any lists that have been played, 2) either player's play style. 3) what strategies have failed. 4) what models the person asking for help owns, and are they willing to make purchases. 5) what gameplay mistakes they've been making 6) what gameplay mistakes does their opponent make that they've failed to capitalize on. What I do know is what Legion tech I've seen work into circle in the past, so that's the advice I offer. I can't really offer any strategies because my strategies might not be applicable to what his list is trying to do if my main caster is Kallus1 and his is Abby1 Oracles. "Throw away some troopers to bait out his beasts" might work for Kallus1, but Oracles doesn't really have throwaway models. A strategy might be great against Morvahnna1, but terrible against Kromac. I simply don't know enough about the situation to offer strategic advice, so I don't.
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Jul 31, 2017 8:45:56 GMT
Yes in a certain level. After playing the game for a while, those things become quite elementary and obvious. Target priority does, certainly. Positioning... at least in its most intricate, reactive sense, no, I don't think that ever becomes obvious. Well, let's disagree then. My rose-tinted glasses have been broken long time ago, when it comes to strategy in wargames. Especially when those with full pre-measuring. I don't mean such games are bad, WM/H doesn't require ANY strategy or remembering not to fail is easy, but it is what it is. Dice resolve, unfortunately, quite many critical situations in larger scale minigames. Some smaller games circumvent this issue pretty well, but have other problems. Most simple example in WM/H is caster assassination. Both players know if, when and how it can happen. Maybe their risk assesment or luck is lacking, but the fact remains there isn't much else. You can't strategize your opponent to get his caster killed, unless some "whoops" and "gotchas" are involved. In my mind this type of gameplay has little depth strategically and, as I said, is pretty elementary after playing a bit. Furthermore, few dice rolls affect heavily in this example - and in many others, although not so fatally.
|
|
|
Post by Azahul on Jul 31, 2017 9:07:16 GMT
Sure man, you're welcome to disagree My experience has been pretty different. I play with (and technically am, I guess) a number of Australian WTC players. One of the best players I know reckons he can count the number of perfect games he's played on one hand. I'm not sure I can even claim that much. But I do know that when I play, I feel like I play the player a whole lot more than I play the list on the table. Perfect information just does not lead to perfect decision making, particularly when you're actively putting pressure on the opponent, pushing them to spend their 'caster's resources and come forward for an attrition advantage. Which is a milieu I'd rather be in than a more jaded idea that the game usually comes down to dice. I like to believe that I win my games, and I'll happily take that rose-tinting
|
|
|
Post by octaviusmaximus on Jul 31, 2017 9:33:10 GMT
B: 40K has more randomness at the unit element, not at the environment element. Not sure if I got what you meant, but WM/H is one of the most random games out there when it comes to a single game. Over the course of many games it evens out nicely though. WM/H is very random because some dice rolls have too big of an impact in the state of the game, and all the information is open. I also think this is why we talk about list building and meta; the actual gameplay of WM/H is often simply executing, remembering things by heart and relying on key dice rolls. The bigger game happens "outside". I have absolutely no idea how you can say that WM/H is the most random games in a single game.
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Jul 31, 2017 9:51:13 GMT
Funny you should mention that. Not more than two years ago (if I recall correct), certain moops got diced on a World Championship deciding match, and "my" country won. I'm not saying he couldn't have played it better, but there was a concrete example how big effect a dice roll or two can have. He already practically won, but then he decided to throw bad dice 'cause relying on a high percentage success rate. Not a lot of strategy & whole lot of bad luck, and all his work on previous turns was made completely pointless. Also I think we're looking the thing in a different way. I agree WM/H is a good and complex enough vessel to measure player skill in a course of few games. However, I don't think it's nearly as good at that as it could be, or some competition and other games can.
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Jul 31, 2017 10:13:59 GMT
This exemple is biased because it was assassination. Assassination tends to rely on a couple of rolls to make it a "sure thing" or "OMG roll high, plz!"... I wasn't pretty to watch but I have to say if your assassination starts by throwing your 0 camp caster up the field to apply a debuff you're tempting fate I don't think WM/H is a very random game... The Australians proved it by having great results in the major events they played for a couple of years and culminating in 2nd and 4th place at the WTC.
|
|
|
Post by celeb on Jul 31, 2017 10:41:00 GMT
Funny you should mention that. Not more than two years ago (if I recall correct), certain moops got diced on a World Championship deciding match, and "my" country won. I'm not saying he couldn't have played it better, but there was a concrete example how big effect a dice roll or two can have. He already practically won, but then he decided to throw bad dice 'cause relying on a high percentage success rate. Not a lot of strategy & whole lot of bad luck, and all his work on previous turns was made completely pointless. Also I think we're looking the thing in a different way. I agree WM/H is a good and complex enough vessel to measure player skill in a course of few games. However, I don't think it's nearly as good at that as it could be, or some competition and other games can. You also said: So, you say that Moorhouse's opponent willingly gave Moorhouse the high probability assasination and banked on him failing two boosted 7s? If the strategy in this game is so obivious, why are top players consistenly winning tournaments or playing X-1? Dice do happen and can decide the outcome of a game, sure, but they are not everything.
|
|
|
Post by 36cygnar24guy36 on Jul 31, 2017 10:47:19 GMT
Funny you should mention that. Not more than two years ago (if I recall correct), certain moops got diced on a World Championship deciding match, and "my" country won. I'm not saying he couldn't have played it better, but there was a concrete example how big effect a dice roll or two can have. He already practically won, but then he decided to throw bad dice 'cause relying on a high percentage success rate. Not a lot of strategy & whole lot of bad luck, and all his work on previous turns was made completely pointless. Also I think we're looking the thing in a different way. I agree WM/H is a good and complex enough vessel to measure player skill in a course of few games. However, I don't think it's nearly as good at that as it could be, or some competition and other games can. You also said: So, you say that Moorhouse's opponent willingly gave Moorhouse the high probability assasination and banked on him failing two boosted 7s? If the strategy in this game is so obivious, why are top players consistenly winning tournaments or playing X-1? Dice do happen and can decide the outcome of a game, sure, but they are not everything. I thought Moorhouse won that game? he tweeted that he was just about to didn't he?
|
|
isotope
Junior Strategist
Posts: 634
|
Post by isotope on Jul 31, 2017 11:36:31 GMT
Recently I've left my caster a little too exposed. Every time my oponent has fallen short on the assasination leaving their caster on 0 camp 6" from me and their turn ends in " well, good game". I typically play for attrition leading to scenario win systematically dismantling my oponent while minimizing risk. Part of the game is doing your best to minimize the randomness as much as possible.
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Jul 31, 2017 11:47:10 GMT
Also yeah if you ask how do i beat [blank] we give you counters. If you put up your list and ask for help you usually get something tactics related.
Its even better if i see you paying the list cause then i can point out tactical errors i see
|
|
|
Post by jisidro on Jul 31, 2017 11:52:21 GMT
You also said: So, you say that Moorhouse's opponent willingly gave Moorhouse the high probability assasination and banked on him failing two boosted 7s? If the strategy in this game is so obivious, why are top players consistenly winning tournaments or playing X-1? Dice do happen and can decide the outcome of a game, sure, but they are not everything. I thought Moorhouse won that game? he tweeted that he was just about to didn't he?
He did...
|
|
|
Post by flamigant on Jul 31, 2017 12:05:38 GMT
The undeniable truth is that we are back in MK2 where we have to build list to counter certain matchups who are otherwise to difficult to overcome outside of the right strategy or dice rolls. I really thought PP would have avoided this with the introduction of MK3 but here we are again... My meta is dying and we are not even able to attract new players because of the bad rep this game is getting. 40K 8th edition is suddenly surging again... PP better watch out and hopefully MK4 will usher in a new era.
|
|