Implausible Nature
  • Home
    • Links and Contact Page
    • Site Index
    • Site Primer >
      • Casual vs Competitive Players -- Healing the Divide
      • Laeroth's Take On Building Fluffy Armies
  • Laeroth's Blog
  • The Njesta Crusade
    • Black Templars Army Lists
    • Njesta Crusade Fluff >
      • Black Templars Background Literature
  • Black Templars 101
    • BT 101: Where to Start >
      • BT 101: Unit Analysis
      • BT 101: Building Low-Point BT Armies
      • BT 101: Commonly Used Abbreviations
    • BT 101: Building an 9th Edition List >
      • BT 101: Building A Competitive 9th Edition List
      • BT 101: Building Another Competitive 9th Edition List
    • BT 101: Assembling Your Crusade
    • BT 101: Playing With Your New Army >
      • BT 101: Tactics
      • BT 101: Duality
    • BT 101: The Conclusion
  • Painting and Modeling
    • Black Templars Gallery
    • How To Paint Black Templars

Re-blog: Competitive vs Optimized

9/16/2011

6 Comments

 
Here is an excellent and thought-provoking article written by fellow BT blogger Devjon.  Definitely makes you think.  While I also commented over on his blog (which I recommend checking out), I'll post in the comment section here as well.  Enjoy!  :D

Devjon:


If a list is good, should we suggest fundamental changes to it even if those changes would improve the list? Now, this is something I’ve struggled with from time to time, especially with Gunlines. I know that the best Gunline begins with three Typhoons and three Autolas Predators, has two CML Terminator Squads or three shooty Dreadnoughts, and has at least four Crusader Squads with either Lascannons or Multi-Meltas, and a Marshal if points allow. But how should I give advice on a forum? In the past I’ve made some long posts and advised changes that would drastically alter the list but make it virtually the Gunline I just described, mostly because I thought (and to a great extent still think) that the standard Gunline, if the correct choices are made, is the best list (excluding Drop Pod lists for the most part since they are very different and hard to compare) and why would I ever give advise other than the best?

If someone puts up a Black Tide list, you shouldn’t specify changes until it’s a Gunline, but at what point is it not too far to suggest changes? This depends on what the list writer wants. Does he want ways to improve his list or does he simply want opinions? Did he write the list attempting to make something (such as a particular unit) work or did he have a starting point and is trying to optimize the list?

And that’s the key word. Optimize. At a certain point, you are no longer improving the list, you are optimizing it. There is nothing wrong with optimization, but it does away with excess, it overrules certain basic builds, units and upgrades because they are simply bad. But you have to be careful and show discretion when you give advice as to whether the list writer wants an ‘optimized’ list, or just a good list.

A good example is a list I’m going to be writing soon, a Foot-Gunline. The idea is simple; maximize shooting output without taking any vehicles. Now, what if some random stranger comes on and says to drop a few things and put my guys in transports, maybe even buy a few Predators? Even though that is good advice, it changes the list. Rather than being almost unique, I will end up with a regular Gunline. Improved? Yes. Best advice? Not in this case.

So what is the point where a list starts to turn from simply ‘Competitive’ to ‘Optimized’? More importantly, in which cases do you need to give advice towards which one? Hypothetically (though probably not realistically) you could make a Competitive Black Tide list. When should you give ‘Optimizing’ advice and when should you just congratulate the author on making Black Tide almost work? That is subjective and I don’t have the answer, but I can at least help to keep it in the minds of anyone who reads this.

Now, remember that this is meant to be an exercise for myself (see first large paragraph) and is not directed at anybody except maybe the hypothetical stranger from the last paragraph.

6 Comments
Marshal Laeroth (Admin) link
9/16/2011 04:36:07 pm

I agree with pretty much everything you said here and is definitely thought provoking. It is the reason I don't comment on a lot of the Army List requests on B&C. Not only would it take vast amounts of time, I cannot know exactly what the writer wants done with their list unless they explicitly say (not common). When someone emails me, I already know that chances are they want a competitive list. They are also giving me the information needed to give them the proper advice. So at that point, I can do both: improve on their list and optimize it. Even if it means putting their infantry in Rhinos.

As you mentioned, its not quite the same for everyone else. For example, some people don't like Typhoons. How can I give advice on how to fully optimize a list if I'm not allowed to use the most underrated unit in the codex? I might be able to improve on the existing units, but I won't be able to get the maximum potential.

Which is where I think my definition fits: You are giving improvement advice when you're taking a player's list and creating a marked upgrade in competitiveness while maintaining their restrictions on the list itself. You optimize a list when you ignore those restrictions and squeeze the very highest potential out of a list archetype. That could be via point reductions, using units you don't want to, or even maximizing a "theme" (i.e. shooting, MSU, mobility, etc) within the list. :)

Reply
Lucion
9/17/2011 11:09:17 am



I see key words like optimize, lists, competitive, some army list principles, but what are you asking.


Reply
Devjon link
9/29/2011 10:07:44 am

First off, I apologize for not replying. I've been stressed out by school, coupled with only half-understanding what you were asking and unsure of how to go about answering it and I had actually forgotten about it until you brought it up. Once again, my apologies.

I'm still not completely sure I understand what you're asking. It seems that it isn't clear to you, but between the post and Marshal Learoth's comment (which hit the nail on the head and actually goes farther than I did) it seems clear (except for a few errors that I didn't catch with editing). Do you want me to state it in a clear, simple statement, or...? I'm kind of lost here.

Reply
Lucion
9/29/2011 11:16:14 am

Dont be stressed out. I hear this all the time, infact, I made a video about it here because someone was depressed because of their exams.

I am aka on GR as MachineSpirit

http://www.gamereplays.org/community/index.php?showtopic=825255&pid=8756461&st=0&#entry8756461

Yes if you could rephrase it. Say it in other words.

Reply
Devjon link
9/29/2011 12:09:57 pm

Okay, let's try this.

Alright, there are Competitive lists. They are those which have certain requirements. They are good lists that can handle just about anything that comes at them. They may have their problems, but overall they should do well in a tournament setting.

And then there are Optimized lists. These cannot be further improved. There is no unit or equipment change that will make any real improvement. They are the best of the best and if they don't do well at a tournament it is not because a fault of the list, it is because of the dice or the user or occasionally because you simply can't make a good list in that way.

When giving list advice, you need to accommodate what the owner wants. If they want the best list they can possibly make, then you should give Optimising advice. But if they want to make a particular unit work or something, it is usually better to give advice accommodating their preference/wants.

Does this help? I'm having trouble explaining things without just repeating what I've already said in nearly the same way I said it before.

Reply
Lucion
10/1/2011 01:10:50 am

Much better explained.

Thankyou

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Laeroth's Blog

    This blog is devoted to the Black Templars chapter and the tactics, list building, and general musing associated with them.  Readers will see occasional posts from Marshal Laeroth.

    Check out the Implausible Nature YouTube Channel!

    Follow me on Twitter!

    Like what you see and want to help support Implausible Nature?  Click the link below and donate!

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    December 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    May 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    March 2016
    November 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    September 2014
    May 2014
    December 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009