It’s been two weeks since I last posted my “weekly” ITC Standings article for Frontline Gaming. I try to make it every week, and I normally do make it in on time, but sometimes IRL gets in the way. Sometimes you have other projects to work on, other more impending deadlines, work for something else, you know. Stuff comes up and as long as you make it generally on time it counts right? Well. Not if you’re GW and what we’re talking about is the September FAQ and the internet exists. Man. If you don’t follow any of the 40k news online, which isn’t possible if you’re reading this, then maybe you don’t know what I am referring to. If you are on the internet and use it for 40k news then you definitely have seen the community, particularly the competitive community, chomping at the bit (and chomping at the Warhammer Community Facebook page) for the September FAQ to drop. The flame baiting, meme baiting, and general malcontent is palpable through our collective computer screens. If you haven’t seen any of the memes I am happy to provide a few of the best for your viewing pleasure. Of course.
Ok. Some of those are pure gold. Some, not so much. Part of me understands the general impatience for the FAQ to come out, but part of me doesn’t as well. I get that most people weren’t expecting the FAQ on September 1st, many of those same people probably weren’t expecting it to come out on September 30th at 11:59 pm either (I have no information on when it is coming out, by the way, being an LVO head judge does not make me privy to that type of information)! If GW had put out the FAQ real early in September than we’d have a lot of people, who play the nerfed factions, complaining it was rushed and mistakes were made. So I can understand wanting to be sure the changes were properly playtested and vetted. I appreciate that more than an FAQ in my hands right now.
That said, the ITC/competitive community has been in a bit of a holding pattern post-NOVA. Yes, there have been events run and tournaments won, but the overall standings have changed little and the community as a whole has been dragging online. Much of the discussion(s) have centered around wish-listing for the FAQ or attempting to guess what will be in it accurately, or just flaming each other for thinking they know what will be in it with any certainty; or worst of all, people who do know what’s in it lording it over the heads of those who don’t. The competitive/ITC community is so focused on the meta and building for the meta that knowing a major change to it is coming soon really does create stagnation in the community overall. It makes sense, so the production of such savage posts on the Community page and dank memes is understandable if a bit annoying. I am not going to go on a wish-list rant for the FAQ, but with little change in the ITC standings overall, there is a point I would like to discuss. The team rankings.
First, is there anyone who can catch Beast Coast? Second, is the scoring for Team Tournaments unfairly accounted for in the ITC? Beast Coast is 370 points ahead of CanHammer and the season only has a few major events left. With the stacked nature of Beast Coast is there anyone out there with anywhere near as many prolific players who could potentially get points at events that Beast Coast won’t also potentially improve their scores at? I am not sure there is. While it may be premature to state, I think Beast Coast will be running away with the top team title by the time LVO comes around, and I can’t imagine many of the names on the list below missing the LVO. Can you?
It is almost inconceivable that a team as stacked as this one won’t continue to produce at events down the pipe at a similar rate to what they’ve done all season. They are easily the strongest team in terms of sheer talent on the roster, hands down. There’s nothing wrong with that by the way, I am not attempting to say anything about how stacked teams are or should be, it’s just an observation about how they are so successful. I do have a slight criticism of how team tournaments are scored in the ITC having looked this data over for the last few months writing all these articles for Frontline Gaming. Having team events give ITC points to the players of a team equally, as if they had won a Major or GT of that size individually has a major impact on the team score overall. In a 5 man event like the ATC 5 man Team Championships, having the winning team accrue 143.47 points for each participant is a lot, yielding 717.35 points for the team total. I think there has to be a way to count team events for the team overall in a way that is both impactful but more balanced. Perhaps a win at a team event can count for double what the score would be for winning the same size event as a single person but have each individual be able to score the full points as individuals for their individual and faction rankings. The point of the team rankings are to see how good each team is, and performing well at a team tournament should factor into that, but I am not sold on it needs to be 700+ points for the team impactful. I don’t make decisions about this, I think it is important to note, nor do I help with the ITC format outside of the missions and format. So don’t freak out and think I am changing how the ITC is scored, I am not, this is simply my personal opinion which I can tell you Reece and Frankie ignore regularly! Just some food for thought while we all wait, holding our knees to our chest, rocking back and forth, awaiting the FAQ that seems to be taking forever to come.
As always let me know what you thought! Check back in next week, when we hopefully have an FAQ to talk about!
And remember, Frontline Gaming sells gaming products at a discount, every day in their webcart!