Enlargingcloud wrote:Hey, so I saw that shilek asked this question a while back in this thread
"4) will this be the listing of points that generals can get=battle points, presentation, sportsmanship, composition and pub quiz?"
I was really hoping to know the answer to this question. I google searched, and only found this table
http://gamesummit.ca/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 764#p10764
This seems to dictate a way to give out army composition scores and I would like to know if it is the format you use.
Also I was wondering what people thought of this chart, as I feel that it handicaps certain armies who rely on a more balanced FOC to win. Some armies can easily be competitive while using 4 troops, a single HQ, and 1-2 heavy support selections. Meanwhile other armies have been built with expensive/weaker troops, and more powerful elites/HQ to compensate. It seems then that certain armies are unfairly weighed.
Also do you take off additional points for the use of special characters or known powerful units such as Nob Bikers? Personally I want to know how people react to "cheesy" lists, and if lists are denounced for being cheesy and given bad composition scores.
Joyous_Oblivion wrote:Dear god I hope Game Summit doesn't use the Cangames comp scoring. Personally, for a nationals qualifier there should be no comp, but that's me (it is a $45 entry fee tourney, no carebears here, lol)
No comp scores like that. There will be soft scores but not that. I am slowly working on the 40k and Fantasy Tournament. Just have been very busy with the non-gaming part of my life.
