|
Competitive Armies Discussion Discuss, critique, and build ideas for tournament-caliber armies. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
Greetings, everyone.
I've thought about how I, a self-proclaimed competitive player, view units. Perhaps this tool will help non-competitive players better understand the mindset of competitive players such as myself. I believe the units can be placed into three general categories (which form a new Axis of categorization that can be considered along with Spider Poison's power rankings) that I will discuss below. Of course, I don't expect that every competitive player will agree, but, perhaps, many will. Competitive units: These are the units that you would draft to take to a standard (Non-Marvel, 500-point, 24-hex. starting zone, ROTV maps) trournament if your life depended on you finishing in the top four. I realize it's too hypothetical, and a bit silly, to say "if your life depended on it", but I just wanted to emphasize how extremely competitive you would want your army to be. This by no means excludes non-elite (A-, B+, B, etc.) units. However, it means that, if you use non-elite units, you will almost certainly want to combine them with some elite units (Raelin, Stingers, etc.). The key point is that "competitive" does not mean only A+ and A units. Obsolete units: These are units that, as things currently stand, cannot form (a worthwhile) part of a competitive army. In other words, rather than choose a squad of Samurai Archers, you'd draft a squad of Marro Stingers: you get far better value. New units (and sometimes even previous ones!) have made these unplayable. Obsolete units may become competitive in the future (read Gladiators), but they are not at this time. It is here where most players may disagree as to which units should be included. This is definitely a gray area and not "carved in stone". Dead-in-the-water units: These are units that are just not competitive (remember, we're discussing with regard to average tournament maps). A good example are the Obsidian Guards. Even if they were given a hero to bond with, how often would they get to use their lava throw (which is in-and-of-itself a very short-ranged attack)? They would just not be better than other units available no matter what. Now, different competitive players would place different units under these categories. However, there would be far more similarities than differences. Currently, these categories can be stacked to form a pyramid graph. The Dead-in-the-water units are the majority followed by the obsolete units with the competitive units on top. Last edited by Sarpedon; February 14th, 2010 at 06:26 AM. |
#50
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
Quote:
As for obsolescence, I'm just not sure who I would consider obsolete. You mention the TSA, but I can envision armies and scenarios where I prefer them to the Stingers, who cannot make their counterstrike obsolete even though they are the better ranged threat. In short, I don't really think of either Dead-in-the-Water or Obsolete as categories when I'm crafting an army for a tournament. I'm far more likely to think in terms of the concepts that gamjuven mentions in his initial post, particularly the metagame and what I'm likely to face. ~Aldin, respectfully disagreeing He either fears his fate too much or his desserts are small That dares not put it to the touch to gain or lose it all ~James Graham |
#51
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
Quote:
“Heroscapers is too old for that crap.” ~IamBatman "Hahahah! You losers! I told you so!!" ~Clancampbell |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
As I said, not all competitive players would agree. If Grungebob and Aldin are competitive players, then you can see that I was right about that. There is no doubt that examples can be cited where armies composed of C units did very well. Heck, even Hatamoto Taro might do well in a game. However, is he any less of an F-rated unit because he shone once?
The purpose of my post was to illustrate how some competitive Heroscapers (might) see units. If you don't, that's fine. However, if nothing else, it gives those who don't (see it that way) a better understanding of the mindset of those of us who do (see it that way). |
#53
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
(post deleted)
|
#54
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
I would have to agree with Aldin, as the majority of the units are neither obsulete or dead in the water. one dead, and very few (Khosumet & Anubian wolves, and Wolves of Badru (my opinion) obsolete. so yeah, it's more of an inverted pyramid.
"The way of War is A Way of Deception" ~Sun Tzu's Art of War The guidebook to life... |
#55
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
Is This a Good Army
Finn Thorgrim Knights x1 Ae Crixus |
#56
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
If this is a serious post I shall have to ask you to read the first post and then see for yourself. I'll say you are near the right track with this army, but it needs work.
|
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
Hey thanks alot. This is alot of help for me now i can put heros together in a good formation. And i got my answer for order markers i thank you for this.
|
#58
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
This is great. I found it very helpful
Fish and custard |
#59
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
this is very helpful
Call me the Punisher |
#60
|
||||
|
||||
Re: The Idiot's Guide to Making a Competitive Army
This is a very good guide. I must admit, I am a heroscape idiot. I will sometimes draft figures who look cooler as opposed to ones that can help me win. I am learning though. Thanks for this guide.
|
|
|