500 Point Competitive Armies

[TheTravelingScaper]

Originally Posted by Cleon

Dude when you compare units in a competitive environment it's assumed you're playing 400-600ish point armies, 24 hex (sometimes lower, even as low as 16), tournament maps/glyphs, and the field consists of at least pretty solid to top tier armies. Most tournaments are also 4-5 rounds. When you're ranking units, you're looking at the unit as how it will preform in that kind of environment and used in an army where it can excel or try to reach its potential.

I'm not comparing one squad of Imperium to one squad of MacDirks, I'm comparing Imperium in an army that utilizes them strongly to MacDirks in an army that utilizes MacDirks strongly, in a competitive environment. I also really just commented on the MacDirks because they're a similar feeling as the Imperium.

The post I made was mostly theorizing about if they were 110pt anyways. Comparing them at 140pt. makes the Imperium a lot worse than at 110pt., obviously.

Ashigaru Yari is a whole different squad; they're a swarming squad that's best used in a Kato army with Harquebus, and often with Raelin. The army is a decent army, probably a B to B+ type of army as a whole. Don't really know what you're getting at here, if you were comparing them head to head or what.

I don't see why I can't use the words 'worse' or 'better'. Yes, there are situations that sway units' values. But when you rank units you're assuming an environment of what I stated in the first paragraph and how well a unit will do in that environment while trying to maximize its potential with a suitable army. I can confidently use the word 'better' if a unit is ranked A comparing to another (somewhat similar style,) unit that's ranked C-, because it is better in nearly all situations in a competitive tournament. If I was comparing an A unit to an A- unit, then obviously there's more debate and more situations where the A- unit would be more favorable.

The 4th Massachusetts Line are a better squad than the Marro Drudge going into a typical tournament, there's really no debating that.

Ashigaru Yari is a whole different squad; they're a swarming squad that's best used in a Kato army with Harquebus, and often with Raelin. The army is a decent army, probably a B to B+ type of army as a whole. Don't really know what you're getting at here, if you were comparing them head to head or what

In a somewhat transparent synergy way the EI and Spearmen are quite simliar. Quality and functionality are very different based on which you field when utilizing an army based strongly around either. Heres where i see similarity bulk quantity of swarming force(EI or Yari both melee in this case) Kiova and Kato (both figure heads that greatly benefit/and in some cases bond with a good portion of the army (Raelin could be fielded in either one and it helps boost either one defensively as she could be a buffer, glyph grabber or game closer depending on her use.

The 4th Massachusetts Line are a better squad than the Marro Drudge going into a typical tournament, there's really no debating that.

Yes this is true because in order for Drudge to be fully utilized they need plentiful amounts of hydrogen dioxide (water) and without that novelty that greatly reduces their playabilty from the real of mainstream to situational at best.

I'm not comparing one squad of Imperium to one squad of MacDirks, I'm comparing Imperium in an army that utilizes them strongly to MacDirks in an army that utilizes MacDirks strongly, in a competitive environment. I also really just commented on the MacDirks because they're a similar feeling as the Imperium

Theres a reason I put it 140 and this was exactly it. EI are a common squad. Google defines a squad as a small group of people having a particular task. If anything 3 people arent going to slay a dragon and snap the necks of 12 robotic rodents right? you gotta make the squad bigger a small number of soldiers assembled for drill or assigned to some special task, especially an infantry unit forming part of a platoon. so you can accomplish that task. Because this is the second definition: a small number of soldiers assembled for drill or assigned to some special task, especially an infantry unit forming part of a platoon. The EI form a small part of your ulterior motive. At that point once you have your 400 you just have to find a way to make it work

I don't see why I can't use the words 'worse' or 'better'. Yes, there are situations that sway units' values. But when you rank units you're assuming an environment of what I stated in the first paragraph and how well a unit will do in that environment while trying to maximize its potential with a suitable army. I can confidently use the word 'better' if a unit is ranked A comparing to another (somewhat similar style,) unit that's ranked C-, because it is better in nearly all situations in a competitive tournament. If I was comparing an A unit to an A- unit, then obviously there's more debate and more situations where the A- unit would be more favorable.

You can use worse or better they just sound inherently wrong because that one person in some random part of the world could say DW9K is the worst In the game because he only owned a MS2 and some Vampires then 7 months later he got a MS1 he fielded him for the first time and he plays him every chance he gets. And to make a long story short,his opinion quickly changed.. Now you could pick a BoV map with,Lava,Snow,Shadow, some kind of specialty piece and with those it brings Situational units that wont go anywhere else. The ones that are A to A- , they are rated so because they aren't situational at all can hold up there own and help the other units in most of the armies they are built around. The lower the grade i believe the lower the tactical use goes ,the higher the amount of times the unit might need to rely on some kind of situation to be fully utilized and less units it benefits or benefits it.