OFCC Announcement

[Raindog]

1) All lists are now due on August 1st.

 

This is an extension from the previous date of July 1st.

 

2) The ratings system will now be pass of fail. 

 

There will be no grading or points modification system.

 

This is not an excuse to take beat down armies. The committee will reject over powered lists. We are still looking for fun and fluffy not net lists and razor sharp competitive lists.

 

The comp restrictions will remain.

 

Cheers,

RD

 

[wisetiger7]

May we ask how the changes came about regarding the deadline, ratings system, and points modification?

And why 5 days before the original deadline?

[King Mekhet]

Big fan of the comp change. Though I'm absolutely behind the spirit of the old system, dividing battlescore by comp was pretty punitive...especially when there's not very much guidance on what a '3' rated list should look like.

[Raindog]

May we ask how the changes came about regarding the deadline, ratings system, and points modification?

And why 5 days before the original deadline?

1. Too many people grumbling about the comp.

 

2. I want to encourage more teams to sign up.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Hmmmm...... Hope players that grumbled remember this is a fun event and leave their d£€# list at home. In fact I hope the WAAC players just stay home.

 

(Chances are the ones who complained the most will try to bring filth to a fun event. )

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Question, will the captains, that includes me, be held responsible if players bring lists not in spirit with the event?

[thatdave]

Lists still must pass the scrutiny of the Rating Committee. The fabled '3' grey area is now larger with the pass/fail system, but there are likely to be a few lists that get rejected.

 

The captain submits the lists to the RC and has the responsibility to make sure the lists meet the basic requirements prior to submission:

 

1. Formatted correctly?

2. Legal list?

3. Math correct?

4. Fit the spirit of the event?

 

The team is penalized for any infractions.

[Myster2]

Question, will the captains, that includes me, be held responsible if players bring lists not in spirit with the event?

 

Yes, the OFCC committee will bar anyone that brings a cheesy list and thier captain from any alcoholic beverage for the entire weekend. You have been warned. 

[Kremmet]

Hmmmm...... Hope players that grumbled remember this is a fun event and leave their d£€# list at home. In fact I hope the WAAC players just stay home.

(Chances are the ones who complained the most will try to bring filth to a fun event. )

Speaking as a new OFCC player who is not part one of the "main" metas (Portland and Bellingham respectively), I can say that the old comp system was unnecessarily complicated. It wanted me to build a "3" and yet gave basically no guidelines to do so. Of course comp is always going to be subjective and having a panel of judges definitely helps even things out, but I don't personally know any of those people nor am I in an area where a bunch of people go to OFCC each year making it basically impossible to guess at a "3" list (although my team has been rather helpful in my list construction in pointing out what I should and should not take).

 

On top of this the pass/fail system still keeps everything intact with the exception of the rather strange battle points division system. If we're playing "just to have fun" as you protest then that system is entirely unnecessary as the battle points themselves are unnecessary. The only reason to argue otherwise would be to try to push some subjective agenda about what a "real" list looks like which would be a strange thing to go on a crusade for at this event given the pass/fail list comp system.

 

Lastly, and in my opinion most importantly, on the topic of the previous list guidelines, the idea of making a "themed list" without including any fluff names seems counter intuitive to me. If the idea is to limit power choices as previous posts indicate, then talking about theme is the wrong place to do it. Similarly if you think theme is only determined by picking units with similar sounding unit entries (eg only Night Goblins and no regular goblins) then you're either possessed of little imagination or putting too much onus on the list limiters that make themes fun. Stating that themes need to be evident in just the unit entries taken and army name limits so much of what you can do (and puts a very strong bias towards armies people have seen the models for) that I find it interesting to say the least that it was included as one of the very few list building guidelines.

 

So, no, the idea of someone bringing a "WAAC" list to this event seems absurd and the idea that these changes to the comp increase the chances of them even more so.

[thatdave]

You can name your army list entries to your heart's content. Just don't do it on the list that gets submitted to the Rating Committee - there is enough information on 80-100 army lists without having to sort any extraneous items.

 

And you are correct in that WAAC lists will not be allowed , even if one somehow slips by a captain the Rating Committee will not let it through. But in a friendly environment like the OFCC a WAAC list may not look like what many players might have in mind. The overall list power level is lower at the OFCC and as a consequence it takes less power gaming to get to the domination level than it would at a typical tournament.

 

Players themselves should be the first line of defense against this, team captains should be second and the RC is the final line.

[dkieft]

I for one would like to say "Woot!"

 

So I will say it...

 

 

Woot!

[King Mekhet]

You can name your army list entries to your heart's content. Just don't do it on the list that gets submitted to the Rating Committee - there is enough information on 80-100 army lists without having to sort any extraneous items.

 

And you are correct in that WAAC lists will not be allowed , even if one somehow slips by a captain the Rating Committee will not let it through. But in a friendly environment like the OFCC a WAAC list may not look like what many players might have in mind. The overall list power level is lower at the OFCC and as a consequence it takes less power gaming to get to the domination level than it would at a typical tournament.

 

Players themselves should be the first line of defense against this, team captains should be second and the RC is the final line.

Trouble is that I have no idea what you (or the ratings committee) thinks is a WAAC list. If there were example lists posted for each army that had received a '3' rating then we might have some idea, but as it stands many of us here are shooting in the dark.

 

Moreover, I have extreme issues with conflating a "fluff list" with something that isn't "WAAC." A big block of witch elves with the cauldron, paired with a big block of executioners and dark riders, is a "fluffy Khainite list." It's also hard as coffin nails. Mono nurgle demons or warriors is a "fluff list," but is hard as nails. An all-mounted Empire army is a fluff list, but it hits like a ton of bricks.

 

Some armies don't even really HAVE "fluff" choices. What does a "fluffy" VC list look like? A fluffy TK list? Does that just mean taking [big bad swear word]ty choices? Does a giant in a WoC netlist make it fluffy? I really have no idea.

 

The pass-fail system makes that fair, in that people with no past experience with the event and the kind of lists people bring aren't getting essentially arbitrarily penalized. We're told if our lists are too hard, and that's that. 

[Myster2]

Trouble is that I have no idea what you (or the ratings committee) thinks is a WAAC list. If there were example lists posted for each army that had received a '3' rating then we might have some idea, but as it stands many of us here are shooting in the dark.

 

Moreover, I have extreme issues with conflating a "fluff list" with something that isn't "WAAC." A big block of witch elves with the cauldron, paired with a big block of executioners and dark riders, is a "fluffy Khainite list." It's also hard as coffin nails. Mono nurgle demons or warriors is a "fluff list," but is hard as nails. An all-mounted Empire army is a fluff list, but it hits like a ton of bricks.

 

Some armies don't even really HAVE "fluff" choices. What does a "fluffy" VC list look like? A fluffy TK list? Does that just mean taking [big bad swear word]ty choices? Does a giant in a WoC netlist make it fluffy? I really have no idea.

 

The pass-fail system makes that fair, in that people with no past experience with the event and the kind of lists people bring aren't getting essentially arbitrarily penalized. We're told if our lists are too hard, and that's that. 

 

This is my second OFCC. Last year I created a few lists and submitted them to our team captain who has played in OFCC quite often, he helped me tailor my list down to what he felt would be an acceptable level. My understanding is that since OFCC is an invitational event their should be someone who has been there before that can help you tailor your list down if it's too strong. If you do not have that, post it on the forums here and let people weight in on it. 

 

(Extra rant feel free to skip)

Also, and this is just my opinion, if a person is consumed with the idea of winning games or only playing matches they feel are "fair" then OFCC may not be the correct place for them. Last year I played on a board that had a huge lake in the middle, i played lizardmen magic heavy army so i had a big advantage from the start. My opponent and I just laughed and played the game out and enjoyed the environment and talking about the armies and strategies. 

 

The very next game we played random deployment and 80% of my army was stuck on the far right side of the board and the slann and his poor cohorts were stuck on the far left side of the board staring at a bunch of skull crushers. Again my opponent and I both thought it was humorous and we had a good time discussing basing strategies as he had a really great looking army. 

 

Neither game was "fair" and neither my opponents or I cared in the slightest, we just enjoyed playing and talking and checking out all the really well done armies. 

[Burk]

This is my second OFCC. Last year I created a few lists and submitted them to our team captain who has played in OFCC quite often, he helped me tailor my list down to what he felt would be an acceptable level. My understanding is that since OFCC is an invitational event their should be someone who has been there before that can help you tailor your list down if it's too strong. If you do not have that, post it on the forums here and let people weight in on it. 

 

(Extra rant feel free to skip)

Also, and this is just my opinion, if a person is consumed with the idea of winning games or only playing matches they feel are "fair" then OFCC may not be the correct place for them. Last year I played on a board that had a huge lake in the middle, i played lizardmen magic heavy army so i had a big advantage from the start. My opponent and I just laughed and played the game out and enjoyed the environment and talking about the armies and strategies. 

 

The very next game we played random deployment and 80% of my army was stuck on the far right side of the board and the slann and his poor cohorts were stuck on the far left side of the board staring at a bunch of skull crushers. Again my opponent and I both thought it was humorous and we had a good time discussing basing strategies as he had a really great looking army. 

 

Neither game was "fair" and neither my opponents or I cared in the slightest, we just enjoyed playing and talking and checking out all the really well done armies. 

 

 

CONGRATS.  You just got me first ever "like"  

[Drak]

I could provide numerous examples of a "fluff" VC army, but you'd also have to start by defining the term fluff. for me it's a list that tells or compliments a story or background. lists built upon that kind if premise can be more inclined towards "fluff" choices. the easiest form to follow is to build a list that adheres to the "blood line" perspective for VC.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

I was watching Table Top the other day and Will Wheaton explained it the best. If you play the game to only win then you are only having fun if you are winning, but if you play the game for the experience then you are having fun playing a game.

 

Players that bring lists built to Win At All Cost are not having fun unless they are winning and chances are their opponent will sense that and not have fun playing them. So build a competitive list but keep your opponent's game in mind too. There are two players at the table and both should be having fun.

[MexicanNinja]

I was watching Table Top the other day and Will Wheaton explained it the best. If you play the game to only win then you are only having fun if you are winning, but if you play the game for the experience then you are having fun playing a game.

Players that bring lists built to Win At All Cost are not having fun unless they are winning and chances are their opponent will sense that and not have fun playing them. So build a competitive list but keep your opponent's game in mind too. There are two players at the table and both should be having fun.

I'm going to have to disagree with that statement. Some groups build those kind of lists to improve on tactical decisions. Anyone who thinks a list can't be beaten is wrong. Show me a waac list and I could most likely give you a counter to it.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

I'm going to have to disagree with that statement. Some groups build those kind of lists to improve on tactical decisions. Anyone who thinks a list can't be beaten is wrong. Show me a waac list and I could most likely give you a counter to it.

Yes, I hear what you are saying. I still play you and Raindog full well knowing I am going to get beaten because you both are more experienced players that are more tactical and build better lists. I learn a lot. But you both play for the Experience not just to Win, so I enjoy our games despite the spanking. (Of course my goal is to get to a equal level one day.)

 

The other kind of player only wants to win and the feeling you get is completely different. Even though you maybe losing horribly where they have all the VP they are still hell bent on savoring your bad rolls.

 

There is a difference. And I still would like a game against your OFCC list this summer.

[dkieft]

I'm going to have to disagree with that statement. Some groups build those kind of lists to improve on tactical decisions. Anyone who thinks a list can't be beaten is wrong. Show me a waac list and I could most likely give you a counter to it.

Having "a" counter to it legal somewhere in the game doesn't make it fun to face in a once a year event. If I make a super hard list and play my friend, then he can build to counter it next time. But if you have a well balanced list (as in competes well in most aspects and doesn't steamroll phases/certain armies) and run into a list that you lost against before showing up that day it is not fun. Yes, there are always bad batch ups, but we are looking to limit those. And if your idea of a fun game is steamrolling the other army the OFCC team event is not for you.

[MexicanNinja]

I was in no way referring or suggesting those lists are for ofcc. I was just disagring that people don't have fun when playing with those lists. That's all. I have played several lists throughout my years which could have been considered a waac list and had fun playing the game. I have also played lists which weren't considered a waac list and had a horrible time. It's not always the list and sometimes the opponent.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

I was in no way referring or suggesting those lists are for ofcc. I was just disagring that people don't have fun when playing with those lists. That's all. I have played several lists throughout my years which could have been considered a waac list and had fun playing the game. I have also played lists which weren't considered a waac list and had a horrible time. It's not always the list and sometimes the opponent.

This is where we agree 100% my friend. It is the Player that is WAAC, otherwise the list is a Top Tier list instead.

 

But a player that brings a Top Tier list to OFCC, other events are fine, is a WAAC player ruining it for everyone involved. (Both players, captains and the event organizers.) Heck, I'll play your Filthy DE list when I get WE and a CoB. Hellebron would be fun to play against you. But on Our time when we plan that game, not a Fun event.

[MexicanNinja]

Just beacause someone brings a top tier list doesn't mean they can effecively run the list. I also have zero interests in ever running helebrone.

[wisetiger7]

I think I agree with MexicanNinja on this one.

 

First, he never said OFCC is the place for WAAC lists/players. I think we are all in agreement there.

 

Secondly, I agree, there is a time and place where WAAC can be enjoyable. Our group plays some very tough lists against each other once in a very long while. And a lot of the time, we bring lists that we think are average-hard lists, but end up being way OP. That is usually the last time we play those lists, because as a group, we like friendlier games. But I agree with MN in that for the most part, WAAC is an attitude, not an actual list.

 

Every list will have strengths and weaknesses. Yes, sometimes weaknesses won't be too apparent, and strengths will overshadow them. But the way the game is built, if your list is strong against one or more armies, it doesn't necessarily mean it is strong against all armies. There is a sense of balance established within the foundation of the game. There will always be some weakness to exploit. Sure it won't always be apparent. Sure you might need to retool a list to beat the hard one. And then they will retool theirs to beat yours, etc. Similar things happen in real battle. If you lose a battle, you analyze where you were weak, and compensate for it, or find a weakness in your enemy, and exploit it.

 

WAAC is an attitude, more than anything. Yes there are broken lists. Yes there are really hard-to-beat lists. But there are ways to beat them. IF, however, you and your opponent agree to bring the cheese, and you don't have the WAAC mentality, then yes, you can still have an enjoyable game, even if the both of you bring WAAC-y lists. And even with a WAAC mentality, if you can enjoy the game even if you lose, then yes, that could be good to. Who wants to play against someone who gives up before the game even starts? You play to win. You don't play to lose. The difference is grace. If you can have grace in victory or defeat, that, I believe, is prominent in the Spirit of OFCC. That, I believe, is what MN is trying to say.

[MexicanNinja]

I would just like to take this time to relect on the fact that wisetiger7 and myself agree on something. I' tappin the rockies right now!

[dkieft]

For the record, I have played many a douche with softer lists. You guys are correct that it is very much about attitude, and attitude can very much make a bad game fun. 

 

But, at an invite only everyone is awesome type event like OFCC, we have already sent the dicks all home. The attitude part is already taken care of. So now we just want to make sure everyone is on the same page in in acceptable list power in an attempt to make as many fun matchups as possible.