Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

You must be TFG. Do you glout and
How about NOT bypassing the language filter through intentional misspellings? --Janthkin
all over them after you stomped them with your free vehicles battle company or duel-wraithknight army?

GG

Oh look, a metagaming TFG whining about players wanting to have fun. Surprise surprise.

To play games?

Tournaments started (and for many people remain) an event (i) to play outside their regular group of opponents, (ii) play several games in a single day, (iii) get some games in after a long time of not playing, (iv) see lots of different and cool armies, (v) meet new/different hobbyists.

Tournaments are a celebration of everything the hobby is about (unless they are spoiled by the WAAC/competitive 'tards)

GW isn't made for competitive gaming. If you try to square that circle, the only competition you're winning is the one for the lowest IQ in the room.

I can't see how this thread will end well, but my £0.02...

You can't ban uncompetitive players. They may have come for their enjoyment, to have a good time. And you want to stop that? Just don't be a dick during play, let them understand why they aren't winning. In time, they'll be well aware of the fact that they are outclassed. It's their loss, not yours. In the meantime, just be happy with the fact you got an easy win with your hypothetical cheese-of-the-week list.

DorianGray wrote:
You must be TFG. Do you glout and shiiit all over them after you stomped them with your free vehicles battle company or duel-wraithknight army?

GG

nope, that would be grounds to be bombed in sports. But I've seen people get bombed on painting and and get zeros across the board just because they tabled there opponent.

Dude this is a dice game...Any army can win. Any army can create miss matches. The problem is TO that make games that give you such a huge lead in points for obliterating your opponent. Victory conditions should be simple and be fair for any army to achieve.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I can't see how this thread will end well, but my £0.02...

You can't ban uncompetitive players. They may have come for their enjoyment, to have a good time. And you want to stop that? Just don't be a dick during play, let them understand why they aren't winning. In time, they'll be well aware of the fact that they are outclassed. It's their loss, not yours. In the meantime, just be happy with the fact you got an easy win with your hypothetical cheese-of-the-week list.

That's the issue, there are some that are nice guys and understand that there army didn't stack up, but then there's the guys that make it there goal that if they don't win then they will bomb you and pretty much kill your chance at overall. I've seen a lot of guys put on a smile the whole game a be really friendly and then turn there score sheet in and there's zeros everywhere.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Dude this is a dice game...Any army can win. Any army can create miss matches. The problem is TO that make games that give you such a huge lead in points for obliterating your opponent. Victory conditions should be simple and be fair for any army to achieve.

I agree on that point. But I feel like to many of your points are left in the hands of the other player and some people let emotions control them when there scoring

Dman, it's not exactly news that there is lots of codex imbalance in 40k. Either they are going to the wrong events, or you are.

If you're unhappy maybe take it up with a TO or organize your own events. Online whining to people who have absolutely no idea of the context is pointless.

Wonderwolf wrote:
To play games?

Tournaments started (and for many people remain) an event (i) to play outside their regular group of opponents, (ii) play several games in a single day, (iii) get some games in after a long time of not playing, (iv) see lots of different and cool armies, (v) meet new/different hobbyists.

Tournaments are a celebration of everything the hobby is about (unless they are spoiled by the WAAC/competitive 'tards)

GW isn't made for competitive gaming. If you try to square that circle, the only competition you're winning is the one for the lowest IQ in the room.

It's a competition lmao if they wanted it to be fun and make friends then why even have a winner.? Any time there's winners and losers it's a event, and competitive. Gts were made to have the best players face off. That's why we use to have GT and Golden daemon.

Dman137 wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:
To play games?

Tournaments started (and for many people remain) an event (i) to play outside their regular group of opponents, (ii) play several games in a single day, (iii) get some games in after a long time of not playing, (iv) see lots of different and cool armies, (v) meet new/different hobbyists.

Tournaments are a celebration of everything the hobby is about (unless they are spoiled by the WAAC/competitive 'tards)

GW isn't made for competitive gaming. If you try to square that circle, the only competition you're winning is the one for the lowest IQ in the room.

It's a competition lmao if they wanted it to be fun and make friends then why even have a winner.? Any time there's winners and losers it's a event, and competitive. Gts were made to have the best players face off. That's why we use to have GT and Golden daemon.

Being a competition does not mean there can be no fun. If there's no entertainment then the entire game is pointless.

Wonderwolf wrote:
To play games?

Tournaments started (and for many people remain) an event (i) to play outside their regular group of opponents, (ii) play several games in a single day, (iii) get some games in after a long time of not playing, (iv) see lots of different and cool armies, (v) meet new/different hobbyists.

Tournaments are a celebration of everything the hobby is about (unless they are spoiled by the WAAC/competitive 'tards)

GW isn't made for competitive gaming. If you try to square that circle, the only competition you're winning is the one for the lowest IQ in the room.

Yeah but what the OP is saying is that if you go to a tournament and get curb stomped why would you bomb his soft scores? Last event I went to it was rampant where people that had no chance or interest in winning were bombing scores after they lost.

Ive been in this hobby for nearly a lifetime and the scene is basically the same as its always been, 75% of tournament goers are goobs just playing with the sand on the side of the road whereas the other 15% are trying to win and the last 10% that actually have a shot at winning overall or general. IMO its only in last few years where people have really started to get overly opinionated and sour, the game is changing but people are adapting less, either that or the only people that are sticking around are the used abused and the bitter while the rest jumped off the sinking ship.

pm713 wrote:

Dman137 wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:
To play games?

Tournaments started (and for many people remain) an event (i) to play outside their regular group of opponents, (ii) play several games in a single day, (iii) get some games in after a long time of not playing, (iv) see lots of different and cool armies, (v) meet new/different hobbyists.

Tournaments are a celebration of everything the hobby is about (unless they are spoiled by the WAAC/competitive 'tards)

GW isn't made for competitive gaming. If you try to square that circle, the only competition you're winning is the one for the lowest IQ in the room.

It's a competition lmao if they wanted it to be fun and make friends then why even have a winner.? Any time there's winners and losers it's a event, and competitive. Gts were made to have the best players face off. That's why we use to have GT and Golden daemon.

Being a competition does not mean there can be no fun. If there's no entertainment then the entire game is pointless.

The event it's self can be fun, but those group of sore losers are what bring down the event. Would like to go to a event feel like your doing great and then find out someone bombed you on your scores and it cost you 1st.. I don't think that would sit well with anyone

Dman137 wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Dman137 wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:
To play games?

Tournaments started (and for many people remain) an event (i) to play outside their regular group of opponents, (ii) play several games in a single day, (iii) get some games in after a long time of not playing, (iv) see lots of different and cool armies, (v) meet new/different hobbyists.

Tournaments are a celebration of everything the hobby is about (unless they are spoiled by the WAAC/competitive 'tards)

GW isn't made for competitive gaming. If you try to square that circle, the only competition you're winning is the one for the lowest IQ in the room.

It's a competition lmao if they wanted it to be fun and make friends then why even have a winner.? Any time there's winners and losers it's a event, and competitive. Gts were made to have the best players face off. That's why we use to have GT and Golden daemon.

Being a competition does not mean there can be no fun. If there's no entertainment then the entire game is pointless.

The event it's self can be fun, but those group of sore losers are what bring down the event. Would like to go to a event feel like your doing great and then find out someone bombed you on your scores and it cost you 1st.. I don't think that would sit well with anyone

No but that's an issue with the specific person not with people going to events to have fun.

Dman137 wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:
To play games?

Tournaments started (and for many people remain) an event (i) to play outside their regular group of opponents, (ii) play several games in a single day, (iii) get some games in after a long time of not playing, (iv) see lots of different and cool armies, (v) meet new/different hobbyists.

Tournaments are a celebration of everything the hobby is about (unless they are spoiled by the WAAC/competitive 'tards)

GW isn't made for competitive gaming. If you try to square that circle, the only competition you're winning is the one for the lowest IQ in the room.

It's a competition lmao if they wanted it to be fun and make friends then why even have a winner.? Any time there's winners and losers it's a event, and competitive. Gts were made to have the best players face off. That's why we use to have GT and Golden daemon.

Uh, not really. Go back to the start of the GTs, run by GW, and typically the winner of the GT would be the 'best all around hobbyist'. The winners rarely won all of their games, but were great opponents, had converted and amazingly painted armies, and came to 'have fun'. And people played to that. The 'meta' was that soft scores mattered more than battle points, and it was that way for years.

A change did come when they started to give awards for 'best general', 'best sportsman', etc., but overall still often went to the person who didnt win every game, and had great soft scores. Those were the GTs I remember and enjoyed. The newer tournies and netlists are not my cup of tea, so I avoid them.

What it important is that the TO makes it clear the type of tournament, and players understand how scoring works. Don't like soft scores? Don't go to those tournies. Btw, I've also seen people from the same 'clubs' knock people's soft scores to help their friends score higher in the standings. So it isn't just fluff bunnies with hurt feelings that they got tabled that do that...

The deal for me is, if you're playing for fun, know that you are.

Don't pretend that you brought a fun/fluffy list while another guy brought a WAAC list, and he's somehow an donkey-cave for it.

The fact of the matter is, you went to the event for different reasons, and that's okay, but you can't expect to win the Tourney, and can't bitch when you don't.

If you don't wanna go up against a WAAC list then don't do it. I've seen loads of people leave my Eldar friend with 40K blue balls.
Nobody is making you battle that guy, you're just doing it to be miserable and make him miserable with you.

Some people are in it for the beer and 40K, and some people are in it for tactics and strategy.

EDIT: lol. donkey-cave. I didn't know this did that. Also you censor that but not bitch?

Tactics and strategy aren't actually tied to list-building.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Tactics and strategy aren't actually tied to list-building.

Tactics and strategy start before list building, building a list that mitigates bad luck and maximizes the removal of enemy models is 100% tactics and strategy.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Tactics and strategy aren't actually tied to list-building.

I disagree. I own at least 15 codexes, all of which I've read cover to cover at least once, but I only play one army.

There's a certain degree of pre-tourney research and consideration when it comes to list-building.

Who are the potential armies you'll be fighting? What will they be trying to accomplish?
What are their special rules and strengths and weaknesses?

All of this has to be considered when you're choosing your units, and setting your pre-strats.

Its to increase your battlefield flexibility, so that you don't gak yourself whenever your opponent brings out something you can't deal with.

Exactly, if you know eldar are going to be 25% of armies at an event you bring a list that handles eldar. If you know those eldar armies will likely be toting at least 20 jetbikes you bring what kills them.

You just go through all the power builds and adapt your army to deal with them, odds are you will do fine against sub par armies anyway.

This seems more of an issue with how the tournament is scored and decided and less of a "let's brushstrokes all these people"

Perhaps "less competitive" players should be more aware of what they are getting into and expected "ediquit" of "highly competitive" tournaments. But excluding people from events because they play the game different is bull. If you went on like this while playing me, you'd probably earn a low sportsmanship score too. But that wouldn't affect paint score ect.

The OP is the same poster who has created a 7+ page argument thread about his "unbeatable" Eldar army on the army list forum and is behind several threads created soley for the purpose of trolling and creating arguments. Please do not feed the trolls...

Let's rephrase, employing tactics and strategy *on the tabletop* isn't equivalent to min-maxing a list for advantage from your rulebook. Or gaming the meta of the tournament environment.

I know dakka is pedantic but come on, gents. Read between the lines.

GrafWattenburg, my thought exactly.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Let's rephrase, employing tactics and strategy *on the tabletop* isn't equivalent to min-maxing a list for advantage from your rulebook. Or gaming the meta of the tournament environment.

I know dakka is pedantic but come on, gents. Read between the lines.

Overall strategy is extremely directly tied to your list, even without min-maxing. I mean it's kind of obvious that your game strategy can't be "corner castle and shoot a bit before going to objectives" if your army is a bunch of assault units. You may personally dislike that list building is such an important part of the game, but it is.

As for the thread: People should be going to whatever event they want if they're having fun. I don't care if they're playing a horrible guard army and get matched to my top table army round 1. They have just as much right to be there as anyone else. Maybe if the OP would treat the players of those "underdog" lists with some courtesy, he wouldn't find his sport scores hurting so much.

Dman, I think next time you earn a level IRL you should get some charisma stat points or train some diplomacy. I sense the lack of those is causing you a lot of issues.

Remember the old saying: "if you met one TFG all day, it's them. If all you met was TFG's then it's you."

See my sig, but that doesn't mean I won't go to a tournament at some time in the future. It may give me a chance just to try out a new army or configuration against several players from several different areas with several different metas than my local GW shop.

It'd probably be fun! Plus, it's a game... and even if there is money involved for those who win, if you face someone who has an underpowered army or one that just isn't competitive, you get a win that will help you in the long run.

Where's the downside?

SG

I'll bomb your soft scores if you are just a rude person just the way it is, lucky we don't have scores on this site.

I already know I don't have a good chance at ending on the top of the pile at the end of they day, so I play for fun. To have fun you go where the games are, tournies are guaranteed games. You meet new people, shoot the gak with them, watch other games and talk about how those people could have done better, occasionally you get amazed at a new list idea. After its all finished you get to complain about how the top players take the OP gak. That's the price, you have a better chance of ending up at the top, but we get to point out how you did it by beating the players who didn't take it as seriously.

But that's just life.

what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

Never met any non comp players who bashed getting a beating at a tourney.
Sure they might be disappointed, a bit disillusioned and maybe even a but pee'd off but openly having a bash at someone. Nah, aint seen it.

Comp players go to win. Rest of us go to drink beers, meet some fun people and do our best.
I've been tabled/well beaten many times but theres always something to learn and discuss afterwards, unless the guy that beat you is TFG and laughs in your face.
And if that happens, well they arent worth getting to know anyways.....

I think competitive tournaments as they stand now should go away. The winner should be the best sportsman not the guy who brought the cheese list. If tournaments were run more along these lines I might actually take something that isn't scatter spam with wraithknights.

There are TFGS all over not just competitive.

There are TFG Fluff bunnies as much as crunchasoreassretkses

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

A fair statement, since the current ruleset supports and allows TFG and WAAC people to take full advantage of broken rules/codices.

Which, by the way is not the intent of GW. They have stated, it's supposed to be a non-compettive game played by friends. Friends is the key word, not competetive strangers. Jarvis has verbally bashed the competitive scene, several times.

Maybe you were a dick while playing against this person, and that's why they bombed your scores? I've found the majority of "competitive" players have a sliding scale of how much they're winning and how much of a pompous jerk they are to an enemy player.

If you start your premise with "why do people with an INFERIOR list that can't possibly stand up in any *snort* SERIOUS tournament setting always-" then odds are, these are not people "maliciously bombing" your soft scores. They're people scoring you.

Dman137 wrote:
Why did you come to the event.??

If soft scores and people wanting to have fun without "winning" being their one and only overriding motive is such a problem for you, why don't you go play in a chess tournament. Or professional rugby. Or whatever.

No soft scores. No people playing just to see nicely painted plastic toys. No stressed office-people simply wanting to unwind after a hard week with some dice-rolling. Hard-core competitive all the way.

Trying to be "competitive" in a game explicitly not designed to be competitive... what did you expect?

Why of all the millions of games and sports that are so much better at scrating that "competitive itch" would you pick 40K?

Go beat Kasparov. Than you can truly brag about your competitive skillz.

Dman137 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I can't see how this thread will end well, but my £0.02...

You can't ban uncompetitive players. They may have come for their enjoyment, to have a good time. And you want to stop that? Just don't be a dick during play, let them understand why they aren't winning. In time, they'll be well aware of the fact that they are outclassed. It's their loss, not yours. In the meantime, just be happy with the fact you got an easy win with your hypothetical cheese-of-the-week list.

That's the issue, there are some that are nice guys and understand that there army didn't stack up, but then there's the guys that make it there goal that if they don't win then they will bomb you and pretty much kill your chance at overall. I've seen a lot of guys put on a smile the whole game a be really friendly and then turn there score sheet in and there's zeros everywhere.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Dude this is a dice game...Any army can win. Any army can create miss matches. The problem is TO that make games that give you such a huge lead in points for obliterating your opponent. Victory conditions should be simple and be fair for any army to achieve.

I agree on that point. But I feel like to many of your points are left in the hands of the other player and some people let emotions control them when there scoring

Sounds like it's more of an issue with you. I'm polite to the worst power gamers at tournies (not worth the aggrevation) but you are darn right I will right will mark a TFG on a comp sheet.

Dman137 wrote:
Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.?

Ugh, preach it to me brother! What could these plebs possibly hope to achieve?! And how can I help but snort derisively and rub their face in it as I wipe unit after unit off their side of the board? So what if I laugh a little (ok, a lot) with every roll of a one that they really needed to be a six? When I openly mock them for their poor grasp of tactics and frankly gak application of strategy I feel great about myself. If tears start forming, I really feel like I accomplished something then. I make them realize. Realize that they don't belong across the table from me!

Why are they at such an event if they have a subpar list and no grasp of tactics?

Why do they even play 40K?

Hell, why are they even alive?!

I'm embarrassed for them.

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

A lot of the time, particularly at the local level, such events are some of the only opportunities for play at all for various reasons.

The ethos the game espouses also is plainly trying to downplay any sort of competitive atmosphere. "Competitive" really is trying to hamfist the game into being something it isn't, and something it clearly isn't intended, designed, or suited to be, and when people go off the deep end with that, they can face their own forms of backlash.

I'd like to point out that building a list to counter a meta game is not being TFG in any way.

Ugh, preach it to me brother! What could these plebs possibly hope to achieve?! And how can I help but snort derisively and rub their face in it as I wipe unit after unit off their side of the board? So what if I laugh a little (ok, a lot) with every roll of a one that they really needed to be a six? When I openly mock them for their poor grasp of tactics and frankly gak application of strategy I feel great about myself. If tears start forming, I really feel like I accomplished something then. I make them realize. Realize that they don't belong across the table from me!

Oh boy I giggled

Dman137 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Dude this is a dice game...Any army can win. Any army can create miss matches. The problem is TO that make games that give you such a huge lead in points for obliterating your opponent. Victory conditions should be simple and be fair for any army to achieve.

I agree on that point. But I feel like to many of your points are left in the hands of the other player and some people let emotions control them when there scoring

So, basically, you either want people to give you kudos for being TFG, or you want to not be penalized for being TFG, at events which are intended to expand the hobby, not be a showcase for a couple of TFGs.

Hey OP are you sure you weren't meaning to post in this thread? : http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/661406.page#8076070

Seeing as I got more time to elaborate on my previous statement:

Usually, the tournaments I enter have shared scoring; ie points for each game, painting, modelling, and friendliness to others. IMHO, that's how it should be done, giving less competitive players something to smile about. Hell, I never make it over the top half in my tourneys, but I've always won Most Sporting Player. I go for the fun and new opponents: I never got to fight Nids, Eldar, Dark Eldar or Daemons before then.

To be fair, a lot of what the OP is saying is less to do with uncompetetive people than it is with people being a-holes. Let's face it, do you reckon that every single competetive player would 100% turn down a chance to lower their better opponent's scores? Because, let's face it, they've already gone halfway by min-maxing their list.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Seeing as I got more time to elaborate on my previous statement:

Usually, the tournaments I enter have shared scoring; ie points for each game, painting, modelling, and friendliness to others. IMHO, that's how it should be done, giving less competitive players something to smile about. Hell, I never make it over the top half in my tourneys, but I've always won Most Sporting Player. I go for the fun and new opponents: I never got to fight Nids, Eldar, Dark Eldar or Daemons before then.

To be fair, a lot of what the OP is saying is less to do with uncompetetive people than it is with people being a-holes. Let's face it, do you reckon that every single competetive player would 100% turn down a chance to lower their better opponent's scores? Because, let's face it, they've already gone halfway by min-maxing their list.

My perspective is that purely competitive tournaments shouldn't include painting or sportsmanship scores, as it should be all about the competition of playing the game; leave the painting to the painting competition and let TOs handle sportsmanship.

However, pure competition isn't why most people go to tournaments. Most players, including myself, go for the fun of meeting new people with different armies and getting in lots of games. I feel that the last tournament I attended (March Madness at Mizewell Games) did things very well. The TO asked us to submit our army lists beforehand, and the tournament players were seeded against each other in such as way as to reflect the power of their lists. The players who were there for fun got some good matchups, and the players who were there to win all fought each other and couldn't claim they coasted to victory. I feel that painting and sportsmanship scores should be part of the scoring for events that aren't major GTs. Most of the major conventions also include a more fun-oriented tournament outside the GT they hold for this reason.

One note about the OP: this is the same person from this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/150/660633.page
Get your popcorn while it's hot!

So... what defines a "competitive" player?

I mean, do you have to play either Cheesedar, Invincicrons, or Brokehammer to be considered "competitive"?

I have a solution. No players should come to events.

Since there are no players at the event, every player at the event will then be equal, and there will be no arguments, no emotions that get out of control, and no problems.

It's perfect.

When I go to a tourney I plan to win. Generally that means lots of test games to optimize and get the synergy down. It also means I expect to see the best the other gamers can bring. That said - I can pretty easily ID who came "tournament ready" and who has the "fun" list. If I end up against that person I make a point of providing my list, making my rule books close and acsessable with (read what you want and when) and then say good luck - but I'm here to win. Expect no mercy. Or something simaler. If I get the win, wich is not always I try to be as nice about it as possible. Pack up and move on. I don't "analyze" the mistakes or "you should have" anything. - I do offer a "if you'd like my advise, or how I beat you let me know"
And I usually try to compliment the other guys models/painting.
If I lose its simaler. Good game, shake hands move on.

TFG at tourneys are the ones who imho show up with a OP-netlist, then brag about how awsome they are. Or the guys who buy painted models from someone else online and enter them into painting competition. And then get mad and hit my sportsmanship score when I zero them on painting. Sorry. You don't paint it? You don't get credit from me and should not be winning best painter.

Edit(hit send accidentally)

But I find in tournaments there are always a few who show up thinking its friendly casual and a few others coming in hardcore must win. Majority seem to be in the middile. I try to be mid scale with an edge towards if I'm paying to play a tournament I'm playing to win - but I also expect to have fun and it's not fun to table people 2nd turn and have them grumble about you all day.

Sorry let me try to explain my post a bit better. I'm not saying people that have fluff army's can't come to events or people with not so competitive army's. My argument is. There are people that go to events and will bomb players scores based on emotion, let it be they lost, got tabled just over all didn't like the army the other person was playing.
Events should have judging done like they did back in the day.
Your games are just battle points.
Painting is judged by the judges (T.Os)
Sportsmanship at the end of the day you write down who your fav opponent was.

Taking a WAAC army dosent mean you should get bombed on your soft scores, maybe that's what kind of army that person likes to play. I myself like playing with my scattbike army regardless of what people think of eldar, not one person that I no thinks I'm a bad person and I've been told I'm a great sport and have won best sports awards in more then 1 occasion, but when I see someone bomb me or someone else based on "he used a cheese army" and gives him a zero, I draw the line there, like are you that much of a sour b$&@ that you can't event accept that you lost.

I can't IMAGINE why people would mark your sportsmanship down with an attitude like that.

I don't think I understand? How could the other player bomb your scores? Do they seriously include a "Your favorite opponent" category to determine the winner? That seems like a very wonky system to base a tournament on.

Events I've been to usually have a score for having the entire army painted + based and then the battle score from the games you played. Seems like the most objective way to determine the winner. Sure a prize is given for "best painted army" but that has no bearing on the tournament ranking.

I go to tournaments fully knowing I'm not going to win the thing but I try to make the game fun. The only time I was being petty about it was when the opponents WERE TFG's. Nit-picking every action on our side while their actions were the ones that needed constant monitoring. It was obvious they were in it for the win and the rules were not going to stop them from having it. Denied them the "table victory" by having one squad alive in a building out of line of sight at the end of the game. It was a dick move and it cost them first place at the end of the tournament but if you're going to be an arse you're going to be treated as one.

Apparently, the Chaos daemon player, who supposedly had been playing the army for years, used Grimmoire on the model carrying it the entire time (while that obvious wasn't allowed). He didn't do it against us because my partner played CD (altough not in the tournament). When they rolled for rewards, I asked my partner what "that grimmoire thingy did" and he explained it fully so they darn well knew we wouldn't allow them to do it.

I, too, hate when not everyone showers praise and affection upon me. I beat you in a game, so I'm better than you. Full. Stop. I don't see why people get bent out of shape about the facts. They always seem to get emotional when I'm explaining how much better I am and why. Then, even after a detailed explanation not only do they not understand it but they won't even mark me down as a good sport!

fething infuriating!

DaPino wrote:
I don't think I understand? How could the other player bomb your scores? Do they seriously include a "Your favorite opponent" category to determine the winner? That seems like a very wonky system to base a tournament on.

Events I've been to usually have a score for having the entire army painted + based and then the battle score from the games you played. Seems like the most objective way to determine the winner. Sure a prize is given for "best painted army" but that has no bearing on the tournament ranking.

I go to tournaments fully knowing I'm not going to win the thing but I try to make the game fun. The only time I was a dick about it was when the opponents WERE TFG's by nit-picking every action on our side while their actions were the ones that needed constant monitoring. It was obvious they were in it for the win and they were being dicks about it. Denied them the "table victory" by having one squad alive in a building out of line of sight at the end of the game. It was a dick move and it cost them first place at the end of the tournament but if you're going to be an arse you're going to be treated as one.

I've literally witnessed two guys playing (had finished my game ahead of time) and they were laughing having a good time the game drew a small group of guys all watching enjoying every min of it. Game ends it was like a minor lose or something for one guy and then we find out he gave the other guy a zero for sports and painting.. People like that have no business being at a event

Honestly, take a very strong (some may say OVERPOWERED) list, and prepare for people to not enjoy it as much.

Think of it as a tradeoff: You guarantee a win, but people won't enjoy it as much OR take a tamer, more fun list, and perhaps people may enjoy it. At the end of the day, sportmanship scores are based on how much they enjoyed your company, after all.

Also, If you were such a good general, you could win with an neutered list anyways.

Niv, the point isn't "list building is bad", I like the variety of 40k. But look at chess, where the game is decided 100% on strategy and tactics executed within the game, and then something like constructed format in Magic, where in-game tactics are relatively simple but the deck building and meta are very complex.

I've got my preferences as you guessed, but the difference definitely exists.

The worst time I ever had at a tournament was some time pre-Nid update in 6th. It was because a guy came to a tournament very unprepared and I really don't think he wanted to have fun.

It was a relatively low point game. I was playing Tau with a HBC Riptide. Not really much else I can remember.
This guy was playing Nids.

When I showed up, he was already talking to a friend about how he hasn't played since 4th but how he was hesitant to show up because of those fething OP tau and the jerks that use them.

Right before I started unpacking my Tau. That I started playing mid 5th. He notices and him and his friend watch and mutter back and forth. Almost like it was scripted he'd mention something like Riptides or Crisis suits right before I pulled them out and set them up on my little tray.

During all this dead time we don't say anything to each other and eventually the game starts. I missed him Round 1, but got him as my second round game.
We started setting up, he didn't ask anything about my army and I asked lots of questions about his before we deployed. I never played Nids before and was unfamiliar.
He is set to go first but I stole initiative. I set my Buffcommander HBC Riptide up and unload into the tyrant and questions start flying.
How can you re-roll hits?
How can you re-roll wounds?
What do you mean I don't get the night fighting bonus?

His Tyrant dies and he just calls it and packs up. Saying how he shouldn't have even bothered and leaves the store. I felt like TFG because I had just made someone drop out of the game (never saw him after) because I used an OP unit. It ruined a big part of the game for me because I felt like I should have ham-stringed myself and still makes me intentionally tone down my lists because I'm concerned about the same thing happening again.

I don't mind at all that non-competitive players are there. I've had fun games playing them. I just wish people knew what they were walking into before the game.

^Honestly it sounds like it was entirely his issue.

 curran12 wrote:
I can't IMAGINE why people would mark your sportsmanship down with an attitude like that.

I can't fathom it either!

Although the OP might be a troll , it doesn't matter really; there is some truth in there.

There are people who are disconnected with reality when it comes to their 40k skills, army, the rules and the meta.

I had my personal share of old timers who haven't played for 2 years coming to tournaments. These are people who have no idea what they are going into and that's their fault. They bring out old armies without knowing any recent rule change or codex, while somewhat hoping to get some success in the table.

And if they fail at that they get bitter. They make the game unejoyable for their opponent and the players nearby.

I am not talking about noob players, or players who just paint and want to show off their army. But you can't deny there are people like i described, not knowing what they are getting into and blaming their opponents and rules and the TO or whatever they can find.

They are literally old men shouting at clouds, they don't bring anything positive into the game. They are so dillusionally entitled that the army which got 3rd at a store championship in 5th edition can win them games against a 7th edition power house. They can't even differantiate a 7th edition codex from 6th.

These people have no idea of the rules, they have no idea what they want and unless on the off chance they win some games they will bring only bitterness into tournaments, nothing else.

Sure, there's TFG competitive and casual players. But the existence of TFG casuals doesn't mean that no casuals should be allowed to try to compete, otherwise you might as well say because there's TFG competitive players, no competitive player should compete.

The problem is that the game has such a steep learning curve if people aren't really familiar with tactics forums and the like.
It might not be that someone just assumes the 5th ed list will win in 7th, so much as they don't know what to know.

Not everyone keeps up to date with armies, and really I can't expect them to with the price of books and the number and potentially short life spans.

Really I think one of the issues in my area is the TO's need to be more involved with the game. We tried limiting FOC's but that affects some armies more than others.

The last tournament I played, before they died off completely, was a simple 500 point game. Rules were posted a week before that stated a min FOC and randomized games.
But 5/8 players were at the store the night before with the TO and they decided that no FOC requirement and all kill points would be better.

I showed up with more kill points available than two other lists combined. Now it sucks, but I think it was something we should do in practice more often. A week before the game have people show up and turn in lists and swap them around after discussing and agreeing on the restrictions. Then the next week play. No excuse for not knowing what to expect.

 toasteroven wrote:
I have a solution. No players should come to events.

Since there are no players at the event, every player at the event will then be equal, and there will be no arguments, no emotions that get out of control, and no problems.

It's perfect.

...I see you have come over to GW's way of thinking about things

 Melissia wrote:
Sure, there's TFG competitive and casual players. But the existence of TFG casuals doesn't mean that no casuals should be allowed to try to compete, otherwise you might as well say because there's TFG competitive players, no competitive player should compete.

Head explodes!!

But, yes, you are absolutely right

Anyways, it's a PUBLIC event, which means that anyone who fits the criteria can participate, regardless of how they measure on the casualometer or Tee-eff-geemeter. If they are excessively rude, complain to the TO. If they are excessively casual, beat them and move on. If you never want to meet someone who is a jerk or doesn't like playing the same way as you.... don't go to events at all, and play with people you've pre-screened as being like-minded in gaming.

But for events... no matter how you cut it... they paid their twenty bucks and helped support the event And even if it was a free event... they probably bought food and other stuff and supported the venue. Rawr!

I would not want to go to a tournament any time soon for the simple fact that I can't stand overly seriously players, granted being friendly doesn't win you a trophy but the entire purpose of this game, for me, is to have fun and showcase your army with like minded people and if someone got in a piss with me over something as simple as going over by a few points, forgetting a rule every now and then or even just having fun, it would sour the game for me and I wouldn't want anything to do with that person because I don't really want my fun ruined by a smelly Eldar player who pops a blood vessel every time I take out one of his units

(ps, love eldar so don't get all flustered)

Next step: people with bad skillz at gaming should not go to stores as well. Imagine, playing with them in MY LFGS while I could have been playing with better players!

Non-competitive players should play only inside their garages, away from my prying eyes!

Dman you really make the worst topics. Baiting for the most hate

Pain4Pleasure wrote:
Dman you really make the worst topics. Baiting for the most hate

He has the Midas Touch: any thread he posts in turns to pure comedy gold!

Yeah I don't mind either.

Keep it up Dman!

Guess what, it is the competitive players giving you those 0's!
They where being tactical, by giving other players a score of 0's they increase the chance that their overall score will be higher then yours.
Non-competitive players are more likely to give you justified scores, as they are not competing for any sort of 'win.'

Or, given the quality of your posts in this thread, they are justified in giving you those scores!

May I ask what "soft scores" are?
I've never played a tournament, this saturday is my first, I've never heard that expression before. Reading this topic, I'm guessing it's a secondary vote like Fellowship in other gaming scenes?

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
May I ask what "soft scores" are?
I've never played a tournament, this saturday is my first, I've never heard that expression before. Reading this topic, I'm guessing it's a secondary vote like Fellowship in other gaming scenes?

Usually painting, army composition and sportsmanship.
The scores that don't take in to account what a hardcore badass you are and are therefore worthless.

Oh, that sounds like a really lovely idea.

...I'm beginning to wonder if I'm too hugbox for this hobby.

I would rate a player who gave out hugs at least an 8/10 on Sportsmanship!

 Vector Strike wrote:
Next step: people with bad skillz at gaming should not go to stores as well. Imagine, playing with them in MY LFGS while I could have been playing with better players!

Non-competitive players should play only inside their garages, away from my prying eyes!

Smooth...

OP: Stop being a coward, and hiding behind your eldar instant-win, easy mode army. All winning 40k tournaments say about you is that you're the most obnoxious. Its easy to create a WAAC list in 40k, and even easier to play. If you had any stones, you would be playing warmahordes or infinity. You don't dare, because you know you'll lose.

 KillMaimBurn96 wrote:
I would not want to go to a tournament any time soon for the simple fact that I can't stand overly seriously players, granted being friendly doesn't win you a trophy but the entire purpose of this game, for me, is to have fun and showcase your army with like minded people and if someone got in a piss with me over something as simple as going over by a few points, forgetting a rule every now and then or even just having fun, it would sour the game for me and I wouldn't want anything to do with that person because I don't really want my fun ruined by a smelly Eldar player who pops a blood vessel every time I take out one of his units

(ps, love eldar so don't get all flustered)

Um... I very rarely encounter that kind of player, and I tend to be near the top tables at events I go to. (In fact I'm up about $800 of prize support in the last 5 months. ) Most of the time I'm joking with my opponent about how such and such objective is a bottle of vintage Baal wine from 38576 AD (good year!) or some such, so I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that tournaments are all about SRS BSNESS. Maybe you've listened to the Internet too much?

I don't like the idea, way too open to abuse.

JinxDragon wrote:
I would rate a player who gave out hugs at least an 8/10 on Sportsmanship!

I usually settle for a handshake after the game (out of curiosity, short of sharing Oreos, what would make it a 10?).

Though weirdly some people get very confused by handshakes. We just spent an hour or more together and had fun, it's not that strange, surely? I'd do the same if we'd just spent two hours chatting on the train and parted ways.

Handshakes are fine, anything more and I'd probably try to clobber them on instinct.

kburn wrote:
OP: Stop being a coward, and hiding behind your eldar instant-win, easy mode army. All winning 40k tournaments say about you is that you're the most obnoxious. Its easy to create a WAAC list in 40k, and even easier to play. If you had any stones, you would be playing warmahordes or infinity. You don't dare, because you know you'll lose.

I play infinity, I used to play warmahordes but it got boring

JinxDragon 662514 8099790 wrote:
Non-competitive players are more likely to give you justified scores, as they are not competing for any sort of 'win.'
!

I find the idea that any human would do anything for free for another one very interesting. Can you tell me more about those not wining guy and good scores given by them. Instead of those mythical guys who knowing they won't win themselfs do everything that everyone else playing them doesn't win either?

If you had any stones, you would be playing warmahordes or infinity. You don't dare, because you know you'll lose.

Or there is no prize support for those tournaments in your area. Or no community for those games, failing that very small ones that don't warrent a s shop owner supporting a tournament with gaming space.

Dman137 wrote:

kburn wrote:
OP: Stop being a coward, and hiding behind your eldar instant-win, easy mode army. All winning 40k tournaments say about you is that you're the most obnoxious. Its easy to create a WAAC list in 40k, and even easier to play. If you had any stones, you would be playing warmahordes or infinity. You don't dare, because you know you'll lose.

I play infinity, I used to play warmahordes but it got boring

Do you win tournaments? Wait, let me answer that for you. The answer is no, seeing how you claim warmahordes is "boring"

Take of your kid gloves and play a real tournament.

Better to have tried and lost, than to lie to yourself for the rest of your life.

Well imo it is better not try to waste 700$ on an army only find out it can't win games. That is worse then losing the money.

Id go to a tournament and bring my Sisters. I have no expectation of winning, im just gonna tally up how many units i can incinerate by the end of it I got the idea from a guy who used to play Orks (the new codex made him shelve them) and he went to tournaments and just tallied up how many things his Deff Rolla flattened. It was a pretty funny list of things.

 niv-mizzet wrote:

 KillMaimBurn96 wrote:
I would not want to go to a tournament any time soon for the simple fact that I can't stand overly seriously players, granted being friendly doesn't win you a trophy but the entire purpose of this game, for me, is to have fun and showcase your army with like minded people and if someone got in a piss with me over something as simple as going over by a few points, forgetting a rule every now and then or even just having fun, it would sour the game for me and I wouldn't want anything to do with that person because I don't really want my fun ruined by a smelly Eldar player who pops a blood vessel every time I take out one of his units

(ps, love eldar so don't get all flustered)

Um... I very rarely encounter that kind of player, and I tend to be near the top tables at events I go to. (In fact I'm up about $800 of prize support in the last 5 months. ) Most of the time I'm joking with my opponent about how such and such objective is a bottle of vintage Baal wine from 38576 AD (good year!) or some such, so I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that tournaments are all about SRS BSNESS. Maybe you've listened to the Internet too much?

Same here. After years of going to events, the people you play, both at the top and bottom tables, are universally cool. You do rarely run into a dick, but that's no different from any time you play strangers. After a while, you get to where you show up at an event and keep running into people who're like "hey, you're that dude I played a few years back at X event, how's it going man?".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JinxDragon wrote:
Guess what, it is the competitive players giving you those 0's!
They where being tactical, by giving other players a score of 0's they increase the chance that their overall score will be higher then yours.
Non-competitive players are more likely to give you justified scores, as they are not competing for any sort of 'win.'

Or, given the quality of your posts in this thread, they are justified in giving you those scores!

Not really. Our local tournament scene includes soft scores, and we run basically an event per month. Over the several years of playing with them, you get pretty familiar with the consequences of soft scores.

Among competitive players, there's an unspoken rule to always give your opponent perfect sportsmanship unless you catch them cheating redhanded or they do something incredibly rude and really, really, really deserve a poor score. This is almost universal, and it's a major faux-pas to violate this rule. You will occasionally get someone who does violate it, but it's always one of the well-know TFG's (and they're pretty rare).

With casual players, though, you frequently get poor sports who dock you for crappy reasons. You can have three great games where you and your opponents were joking and laughing and generally having fun, then at the end of the day you find out that someone gave you a major hit on sportsmanship. It's amazing how frequently you get the "yeah, you were totally cool to play against, but I thought your army was cheesy so I docked you on sportsmanship". It's frequently undeserved, I've seen people get criticized for having "cheesy" well painted and converted Thousand Sons (who have terrible rules). Among casual players, there's no real consistent code of conduct to stick to, so whether or not you get docked on sportsmanship is a complete crapshoot.

Regardless, it does highlight the fact that sportsmanship scores do a terrible job of actually enforcing sportsmanship.

Buttery Commissar,
At least an 8/10, as in no lower.
They can easily get more points by being friendly too!

kburn wrote:

Dman137 wrote:

kburn wrote:
OP: Stop being a coward, and hiding behind your eldar instant-win, easy mode army. All winning 40k tournaments say about you is that you're the most obnoxious. Its easy to create a WAAC list in 40k, and even easier to play. If you had any stones, you would be playing warmahordes or infinity. You don't dare, because you know you'll lose.

I play infinity, I used to play warmahordes but it got boring

Do you win tournaments? Wait, let me answer that for you. The answer is no, seeing how you claim warmahordes is "boring"

Take of your kid gloves and play a real tournament.

Better to have tried and lost, than to lie to yourself for the rest of your life.

Because kill the caster is such fun. The game is boring to me some models are cool but for the most part they all suck. I'll stick to fun games like x-wing, flames of war and 40k and the occasional blood bowl game

Dman137 wrote:

kburn wrote:

Dman137 wrote:

kburn wrote:
OP: Stop being a coward, and hiding behind your eldar instant-win, easy mode army. All winning 40k tournaments say about you is that you're the most obnoxious. Its easy to create a WAAC list in 40k, and even easier to play. If you had any stones, you would be playing warmahordes or infinity. You don't dare, because you know you'll lose.

I play infinity, I used to play warmahordes but it got boring

Do you win tournaments? Wait, let me answer that for you. The answer is no, seeing how you claim warmahordes is "boring"

Take of your kid gloves and play a real tournament.

Better to have tried and lost, than to lie to yourself for the rest of your life.

Because kill the caster is such fun. The game is boring to me some models are cool but for the most part they all suck. I'll stick to fun games like x-wing, flames of war and 40k and the occasional blood bowl game

What point levels did you play? I'm no warmachine expert, but I've played it a fair amount and know a few hardcore warmachine tournament players and the consensus from them, which I agree with, is that at lower points games turn towards caster killing, but at higher points it's all about scenarios.

 DarkLink wrote:

Dman137 wrote:

kburn wrote:

Dman137 wrote:

kburn wrote:
OP: Stop being a coward, and hiding behind your eldar instant-win, easy mode army. All winning 40k tournaments say about you is that you're the most obnoxious. Its easy to create a WAAC list in 40k, and even easier to play. If you had any stones, you would be playing warmahordes or infinity. You don't dare, because you know you'll lose.

I play infinity, I used to play warmahordes but it got boring

Do you win tournaments? Wait, let me answer that for you. The answer is no, seeing how you claim warmahordes is "boring"

Take of your kid gloves and play a real tournament.

Better to have tried and lost, than to lie to yourself for the rest of your life.

Because kill the caster is such fun. The game is boring to me some models are cool but for the most part they all suck. I'll stick to fun games like x-wing, flames of war and 40k and the occasional blood bowl game

What point levels did you play? I'm no warmachine expert, but I've played it a fair amount and know a few hardcore warmachine tournament players and the consensus from them, which I agree with, is that at lower points games turn towards caster killing, but at higher points it's all about scenarios.

last I played was 35pt but I played some 15 here and there.

Yoyoyo wrote:
Yeah I don't mind either.

Keep it up Dman!

Please don't feed the trolls. They need to stay under their bridges.

Pain4Pleasure wrote:

Yoyoyo wrote:
Yeah I don't mind either.

Keep it up Dman!

Please don't feed the trolls. They need to stay under their bridges.

Anything we can do when he starts another one of these stupid "LOL l2p, Eldar are l33t" BS threads? Mods feel like doing something?

Despite OP tendency to stir up trouble with bad topics and replies, I'll speak to the issues with tournament gaming that others have brought up between casual players and hardcore gamers.
I go to tournaments (rarely, unfortunately) to play new armies and see some that aren't in my meta and to have fun. That's why I play 40k.
I've been playing for years and, right now, my Flesh Tearers and EC aren't too hot, and my DE are the epitome of a glass cannon. I don't seriously expect to win it all, but I look to improve and have fun with other gamers.
A way to improve said tournaments could be divisions. I play 40k casually, but I'm a serious rugby player. I'll speak to the tournament format for sevens rugby since it could help 40k. They're done in a weekend, anywhere from 1 to 3 day tournies (more so players can rest, 40k doesn't need those gaps between games). The tournaments I compete in have divisions starting at the bottom usually composed of teams of casual/newbies/oldboys there to either learn the game or just get drunk and divisions going up to the elite that is international caliber athletes (usually international squads' bench players, up and comers, or guys who are just a year or two too old to be on the international squad now). Playing in the top division, we watch game film, analyze every bit about the game and our opponents, and maximize what we can do with what we have, similar to WAAC players. I don't have a problem with that. Everybody in the elite division is at that tournament to win, sometimes to possibly qualify for bigger tournaments. I've also played in tournaments on the less-skilled teams, but I still had a blast because I was there more to have fun than I was to win the top trophy. If we won a game, it'd be great, but it's hard to expect to win the whole thing when the team I'm playing with has a "beer cutoff" time of 10 minutes before the game begins. To suggest not drinking between games on those teams will get you castrated.

So, maybe 40k tournaments (if they're big enough) should split into divisions between those who are incredibly serious and those who are just out to see the best and have some fun themselves without getting demolished. If I walk into a tournament with my FT, I don't expect to win, but I wouldn't mind going into the less-competitive division if it meant playing against a CC-themed Ork army that turns into an absolute slaughter and is fun for everybody.

Part of the problem is that competitive events are pretty much the onlyform of organised group events. If you prefer to "play for fun"* but all that's on offer is tournaments, then that's what you do.

I've heard of people trying to organise "campaign days" or similar, but the uptake is never very high - even among the very people who complain that no-one ever runs "story-driven" events.

* a daft term, since "those guys" are also playing for fun; winning is fun too.

{sorry, that was a mean-spirited comment}

Quantitative soft scores per player, decided by the opponent, seems a poor plan, to me. Too open to abuse.

We've tried favoured player voting, plus favoured / least favoured.

Anythig reliant on one person, especially the opponent - can easily be gamed.

Least favoured - you would say after the game they were in that camp, and why, to the TO. This allows them to determine if there are measures that can be put in place for the next game, and also acts as a deterrent from just "bombing" someone - if your reasons dont seem to stack up, and you arent balance of probabilities level of authoentic sounding, then your report would be placed in the "suspect" pile - your credibility is important here.

If 2 or more people slate the same person, then their chances of winning the event were seriously reduced

HOwever, in terms of "TFG" at various events, I can only think of maybe a handful out of probably 4 - 500 different opponents over the years.

Makumba -I do feel sorry for your local scene. Seems appalling. ALso I would rather HELP my oppponent in that situation - if I lose to the eventual winner that is better than losing to someone in mid table obscurity, surely?

Hell at the last (doubles) tournament hubby and I played - little shop tourney, 10 teams so nothing at all really - we got drawn against 2 kids who, with the best will in the world, are not the best at understanding the game. However we coached them into not just playing kill-that-guy, but showed how playing to the mission - which favoured their army - they would likely beat us. They were well up on points, we had to go for a wipeout, and it came down to as close to 50:50 as you can get in the end - a single Necron bike charging their last unit - 3 fire warriors with sarge, kills 1 FW, winning by 1, to make them test on Ld7. They pass, they win. They fail, we win. They passed. We all cheered, as the game itself was more important than the winners or losers.

Apparently the shop guy saw how we helped them, and the attitude, and we won best sports just from that. THat was way better than winning overall (which, somehow, we also managed)

 Vector Strike wrote:
Next step: people with bad skillz at gaming should not go to stores as well. Imagine, playing with them in MY LFGS while I could have been playing with better players!

Non-competitive players should play only inside their garages, away from my prying eyes!

Screw this, man. go the extra mile. Non-competitive players, those dirty peasants should not even be allowed to buy any models. They are ruining it for the glorious powergaming master race. Touching our divine warhammer modlels with their filthy hands.... And to think they are allowed to buy wraithknights! And they also paint them! Preposterous! Those ignorant poor people can't play the game to save their lives. It would be better for them if someone just banned them altogether. Jesus....

While we're on the subect, the official tournaments* run by GW in the mid 90s had not only sportsmanship and painting scores count (as much as the scores for winning games), but also the pub quiz in the bar afterwards! They were specifically billed as "hobby" competitions, not "gaming" competitions.

* I can't remember the actual name of the events right now.

The thing is most other games etc treat such a thing as a competitive event which draws that crowd in. 40k seems to flip flop on that point a lot, at times trying to be competitive but others going "WTH MAN THE BEER AND PRETZELS".

Really I think part of the issue is just people being dicks to each other.

I don't think you can blame that on "40k"; GW have been pretty consistent, at least in the last few years, that any events they run are about playing the games, not really about who comes first.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
I don't think you can blame that on "40k"; GW have been pretty consistent, at least in the last few years, that any events they run are about playing the games, not really about who comes first.

To be fair, part of the problem is that they basically just haven't run events in the last few years, at least any "large" events, outside of Warhammer World, since like...2010? They used to run "competitive" style events, and then dropped all events everywhere, be they GT's/Games Days/'Ard Boyz, etc.

Yeah there's always going to be a dick amongst the group in a tournament but I'd prefer if none of them were such butt hurt players.
Gaming at GWS or University is much more fun as the objective is to simply have fun and not to take things seriously,
And I have had a guy actually stop me picking up my hit d6's so he can count them himself to make sure

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Part of the problem is that competitive events are pretty much the onlyform of organised group events. If you prefer to "play for fun"* but all that's on offer is tournaments, then that's what you do.

I've heard of people trying to organise "campaign days" or similar, but the uptake is never very high - even among the very people who complain that no-one ever runs "story-driven" events.

This campaign looks awesome, but obviously it's a lot more work than the EW/Maelstrom missions.

http://www.gamermancy.com/rules.html

 Buttery Commissar wrote:

JinxDragon wrote:
I would rate a player who gave out hugs at least an 8/10 on Sportsmanship!

I usually settle for a handshake after the game (out of curiosity, short of sharing Oreos, what would make it a 10?).

Though weirdly some people get very confused by handshakes. We just spent an hour or more together and had fun, it's not that strange, surely? I'd do the same if we'd just spent two hours chatting on the train and parted ways.

I have encountered the hanshake adversion as well, its odd to be sure. I just chalk it up to some weird phobia they may have.

On the other side of the fence I winced once when shaking a guys hand who had 2 inch long finger nails, undercoated in filth, smelled, and shook hands like a girl. Its been years since that 'ard boyz tourney, but I remember that clearly. Needless to say I wash my hands before and after my bathroom break.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 KillMaimBurn96 wrote:
Yeah there's always going to be a dick amongst the group in a tournament but I'd prefer if none of them were such butt hurt players.
Gaming at GWS or University is much more fun as the objective is to simply have fun and not to take things seriously,
And I have had a guy actually stop me picking up my hit d6's so he can count them himself to make sure

Man I played a guy who had a magic dice calculator to predict results verses number of dice thrown, I chuckled. He asked what was funny, I simple stated 'magic phase does need to be so percise to win, I'd gladly stick to my gut over a computer program any day. His units also mimiced this min/max dice effect, he failed to take in account flanking, false charges, and a number of outer tactical issues. To his dismay he could not understand how my Vampire Counts stomped his Warriors of Choas. Trust me if your opponent counts one extra hit its not going to change poop.

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
Next step: people with bad skillz at gaming should not go to stores as well. Imagine, playing with them in MY LFGS while I could have been playing with better players!

Non-competitive players should play only inside their garages, away from my prying eyes!

Screw this, man. go the extra mile. Non-competitive players, those dirty peasants should not even be allowed to buy any models. They are ruining it for the glorious powergaming master race. Touching our divine warhammer modlels with their filthy hands.... And to think they are allowed to buy wraithknights! And they also paint them! Preposterous! Those ignorant poor people can't play the game to save their lives. It would be better for them if someone just banned them altogether. Jesus....

Your a bit to sensitive, and need to read the post because it has noting to do with banning anyone, it simply states that if your not a competitive player then you shouldn't go to competitive events.

I used to play tournaments until 6th came out. My local store cut out soft scores and I quit going along with quite a few other people. We didn't like the club of people who kept coming in from outside the local area just to play hard core 40k and either winning or dropping out midway through the tourney because they met up with someone who knocked them out of the running and didn't want it to mess up their club scoring.

A tournament to me is not just about how your army does in the field. I do ok, but I do not like one sided battles and do not build the most crushing list I can. If the other player isn't having fun, its usually obvious and I am not having fun. This other club didn't have that philosophy. A tournement should be about gaming yes, but painting and sportsmanship should play an equal role in determining the overall winner. Want to be a WAAC gamer? Fine, win best general, but if you paid for a paint scheme(painting is your painting skill not someone elses, literally buying a win is not acceptable) or were a douche nozzle(Maybe it isn't that way everywhere but my experience in dealing with them is most WAAC players are, sorry) you should not win overall.

Like I said a tournament is the overall experience, not just what netlist can stomp which netlist. Your painting skill and your sportsmanship are just as important as winning a game. A decent quasi-fluffy list painted to an excellent level by an awesome fun player should have as good or better chance at winning than a WAAC player with an ugly net list.

LOL- guy below me(didn't feel like a new post was in order)- in one of my tournaments I played a BA player with a relatively unremarkable army, barely more than three colors and a drybrush, was an absolutely douchebag, almost borderline cheating on dice rolling(which a lot of people observed) wiped me off the table. I nailed him on softscores, low paint score, I didn't give him a zero but he definitely wasn't more than a 3. Sportsmanship was a zero. He argued every rule, complained about my army DSing on him, and the above mentioned possible dice cheating. He won every battle easily. I found him quite randomly on a blog complaining that I chipmonked(never heard that term before) him on his soft scores and cost him the tournament because he thought I was mad about him tabling me. Nope, he had crappy models and a bad attitude. I had long ago accepted my army either won heavily or lost badly(it was an old IG drop army). I tried to avoid that guy from then on as did everyone else. In a team tourney(the TO apologized about pairing us against him beforehand) we actually beat him(he doesn't play well with others it seems) and he walked out of the tournament after the first game.

Dman137 wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
Next step: people with bad skillz at gaming should not go to stores as well. Imagine, playing with them in MY LFGS while I could have been playing with better players!

Non-competitive players should play only inside their garages, away from my prying eyes!

Screw this, man. go the extra mile. Non-competitive players, those dirty peasants should not even be allowed to buy any models. They are ruining it for the glorious powergaming master race. Touching our divine warhammer modlels with their filthy hands.... And to think they are allowed to buy wraithknights! And they also paint them! Preposterous! Those ignorant poor people can't play the game to save their lives. It would be better for them if someone just banned them altogether. Jesus....

Your a bit to sensitive, and need to read the post because it has noting to do with banning anyone, it simply states that if your not a competitive player then you shouldn't go to competitive events.

the majority of people who show up at events around here are there to just have fun. Unless you like playing the same 3 people all the time I suggest you change your attitude, You run one of the most broken lists and wonder why you get low scores

I'm sorry but this post is utter bs I play csm so I can hardly play a op list of the likes which have never been seen before but even if I could I'd sooner bring a list which reflects the fluff of my chaos chapter/Legion (the Blight Angels) and bring a list which I know like the bike of my hand that I have learnt the strengths and weaknesses of and have a good game. Imho playing a competitive list Dosent make you a d bag. Heck every now and then I play against competitive players and I know I'm going to lose but ya know what I tried to challenge myself and actually use tactics (what is this tactics you speak of).

Dman137 wrote:

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:
Next step: people with bad skillz at gaming should not go to stores as well. Imagine, playing with them in MY LFGS while I could have been playing with better players!

Non-competitive players should play only inside their garages, away from my prying eyes!

Screw this, man. go the extra mile. Non-competitive players, those dirty peasants should not even be allowed to buy any models. They are ruining it for the glorious powergaming master race. Touching our divine warhammer modlels with their filthy hands.... And to think they are allowed to buy wraithknights! And they also paint them! Preposterous! Those ignorant poor people can't play the game to save their lives. It would be better for them if someone just banned them altogether. Jesus....

Your a bit to sensitive, and need to read the post because it has noting to do with banning anyone, it simply states that if your not a competitive player then you shouldn't go to competitive events.

You are still missing the point. It isn't a competetive event where the object is to win, it's a gaming event where the object is to have fun.

Your post comes across as "if you're in this to have fun, stay in your garage...leave the events to people who just want to win". That may not be what you mean, but it's how you come across.

To the OP: For the love of God, please learn the difference between the following spellings.

Two, to, and too

Your and You're

There, Their, and They're


On Topic: If you want to bring fluffy lists to a tournament, that's cool. If you understand that you're just there to have fun, that's fine. If the other guy stomps you, don't get butt hurt about it and tank their scores.

HOWEVER, if you are stomping another player that's just there to play games and meet people, don't act like a tool bag the entire game. They might tank your scores.

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

Just because you roll in with a top tier powerhouse list dosen't mean you will win, second 40k is a game...games are designed to be..i know get ready for the mind blow...FUN. If you play to win and base your whole 40k existence on winning then you sir/mam need to take a second look at yourself. Also you do realise that alot of top tier lists are hatched by those players willing to try something new and just have fun? I use to play alot of wizkid games(heroclix,mechwarrior) and i would put fun lists together or just want something really fluffy( avengers, or a pure clan wolf army with no inher sphere trimmings) and guess what people like you would roll in with the biggest best things and mock what i brought to the table...and sometimes i'd lose and sometimes i'd win. We had this straight rod of a guy that had endless supplies of money and would have the best pieces to make the best lists, i saw him get his digestive tract rerouted by a pure fluff fun army..and he cried cheater. So there was a rematch...same result, he lost...week later he sold his stuff and quit. You can keep thinking that tournements are about blood, and i'm assuming by you starting this thread you seem to think you have some master level of mini war gaming or that your better then players that are in it for fun...but in the end your probably that guy that just copies and pastes top tier lists offline just to win.

While the OP is obsessing over winning with his little toy soldiers, computing a 83.45% chance of wounding another little toy soldier, and throwing a fit when his opponent doesn't bring a cookie cutter net list, I'll be kicking back and enjoying myself. Life is too short to be so emotional about little toy soldiers. Kittens playing with yarn or seeing starving people in Africa makes me emotional. Little toy soldiers? It's kinda hard.

I love going to a tournament with like minded adults who just want to push around little toy soldiers, play war, and drink some beer.

A real winner? Is humble when they win, graceful when they lose, and welcomes all opponents no matter what army they have.

 Tamwulf wrote:
While the OP is obsessing over winning with his little toy soldiers, computing a 83.45% chance of wounding another little toy soldier, and throwing a fit when his opponent doesn't bring a cookie cutter net list, I'll be kicking back and enjoying myself. Life is too short to be so emotional about little toy soldiers. Kittens playing with yarn or seeing starving people in Africa makes me emotional. Little toy soldiers? It's kinda hard.

I love going to a tournament with like minded adults who just want to push around little toy soldiers, play war, and drink some beer.

A real winner? Is humble when they win, graceful when they lose, and welcomes all opponents no matter what army they have.

well spoken..second the beer also

Thirded, although can mine be a good rum / scotch please?

Dman - a 40k event is barely "competitive" to begin with, but with player derived soft scoring it is even less so. Maybe the problem is you think yo uare entering a competitive event, when in fact its a hobby event, and yuo jsut dont understand the difference?

If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

Hey battle company is plenty fluffy! Just happens to be competitive at the same time!

Dman137 wrote:
If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

No one is arguing that fluffy armies will rock-out with their cocks out at tournaments.

What people are saying is that people that bring hard-as-nails lists to tournaments and act like they're some sort of reincarnation of Sun Tzu shouldn't be surprised when their scores get docked for being a jerk.

 kronk wrote:
they're

Their!

Dammit, Kronk!

 niv-mizzet wrote:
Hey battle company is plenty fluffy! Just happens to be competitive at the same time!

Oh. Well. Yeah. There is that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 kronk wrote:
they're

Their!

Dammit, Kronk!

I'm so ashamed. It's catchy, like watching someone yawn.

Hey in 2014 a legion of the damned army made the final 16..........not fluffy but in NO way deemed top tier

Dman137 wrote:
If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

Again, define fluffy and competitive such that they are meaningful for 40k.

Again, you are going to events with soft scores which are by definition not related to gaming ability, and claiming them as "competitive"

They arent. Theyre hobby events with a competitive element. Just that.

I'm sorry if this is a shock to you.

Dman137 wrote:
If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

You missed the point....again.

The events are about having fun. If GW was all about events where only the win mattered, that's how events would have been done. But it wasn't. It was about having fun collecting, painting, converting and playing with little resin models. The scoring specifically penalizes TFG, because TFG makes people who would otherwise give hundreds or thousands of dollars to GW for a hobby give that money to someone else for a different hobby.

GW would rather have 10 people who enjoy their hobby than 1 TFG.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

Again, define fluffy and competitive such that they are meaningful for 40k.

Again, you are going to events with soft scores which are by definition not related to gaming ability, and claiming them as "competitive"

They arent. Theyre hobby events with a competitive element. Just that.

I'm sorry if this is a shock to you.

It's a competitive event. Hobby event would be you go to your local Gw and they have a day were they teach you how to build paint and play.
If your going to a event that has best general as a award then you should be bringing the best list you can think of, if you bring a crap list then your not a very good general. List building is key to any good army. What really should be done is have to events, 1 for competitive players and the other for people that just want to hug each other.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

jwr wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

You missed the point....again.

The events are about having fun. If GW was all about events where only the win mattered, that's how events would have been done. But it wasn't. It was about having fun collecting, painting, converting and playing with little resin models. The scoring specifically penalizes TFG, because TFG makes people who would otherwise give hundreds or thousands of dollars to GW for a hobby give that money to someone else for a different hobby.

GW would rather have 10 people who enjoy their hobby than 1 TFG.
So you can't name one army, go figure

Dman137 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

Again, define fluffy and competitive such that they are meaningful for 40k.

Again, you are going to events with soft scores which are by definition not related to gaming ability, and claiming them as "competitive"

They arent. Theyre hobby events with a competitive element. Just that.

I'm sorry if this is a shock to you.

It's a competitive event. Hobby event would be you go to your local Gw and they have a day were they teach you how to build paint and play.
If your going to a event that has best general as a award then you should be bringing the best list you can think of, if you bring a crap list then your not a very good general. List building is key to any good army. What really should be done is have to events, 1 for competitive players and the other for people that just want to hug each other.

Whoosh

What is competitive about painting scores, as relates to the Wh40k game? Nothing in the game hinges upon how models are painted, it is not a win condition, so how is it a competitive event if your opponents subjective opinion on your painting can determine who wins?

What is competitive about sportsmanship scores? sportsmanship is not a win condition in the game.

No, if you are going toa hobby event with a competitive element, as the events you listed provably are, then you should bring the list you will enjoy the most, that you think is the best painted one you have, etc.

Its like you dont understand the difference between totality and fractions.

'Ard Boyz was the closest to a competitive event you could get. The events you describe are no such thing.

I have encountered the hanshake adversion as well, its odd to be sure. I just chalk it up to some weird phobia they may have.

On the other side of the fence I winced once when shaking a guys hand who had 2 inch long finger nails, undercoated in filth, smelled, and shook hands like a girl. Its been years since that 'ard boyz tourney, but I remember that clearly. Needless to say I wash my hands before and after my bathroom break.

I actually took to the simple fist bump after such experiences post game. Works a treat and is suitably manly too

Lots of players go to tournaments to have fun or test their un-netlisted armies to see how they do.
And thinking of 40k as a serious competitive game isn't going to help the OP. If he wants competitive, there are games that do it much better.

I can understand what OP means if he is referring to "big-time" competive events. It really seems like a waste to only go half way/ not bring your A game.
If OP is talking about casuals not going to local tourneys then no feth that.

Let me let you in on a secret of mine: I'm not actually "good" at this game. I can mathhammer to you all day and give you theoretical applications that will 'probably' work, but I actually suck when it comes to application.

So I don't go to big tourneys like NOVA or LVO. I am not 'hardcore enough' and I don't have the cash to plop out and get all the cheese that it takes to win. I'd rather play with what I have, and have fun.

I gladly play at my local tourneys and plop down 20$ to support the shop, but thats as far as I am going to take it.

Dman137 wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
If anyone can name a big GT event won by a fluff army if be happy to hear it. (With in the last let's say 4-5 years

Again, define fluffy and competitive such that they are meaningful for 40k.

Again, you are going to events with soft scores which are by definition not related to gaming ability, and claiming them as "competitive"

They arent. Theyre hobby events with a competitive element. Just that.

I'm sorry if this is a shock to you.

It's a competitive event. Hobby event would be you go to your local Gw and they have a day were they teach you how to build paint and play.
If your going to a event that has best general as a award then you should be bringing the best list you can think of, if you bring a crap list then your not a very good general. List building is key to any good army. What really should be done is have to events, 1 for competitive players and the other for people that just want to hug each other.

Or 1 event for people to have fun and 1 for competitive players to circle jerk about their net-lists?

Or, go to the event with whatever army you enjoy playing and play that. While playing said army, treat the person across from you with respect.

Honestly, as a non-competitive player, attitudes like this are a big reason I don't go to big fancy tournaments, largely because the OP is 100% correct.

I mean, I love orks, and I especially love ork walkers. But they're TERRIBLE. I've tried a couple local tournaments where I bring my just-for-lulz ork walker list, and it's kind of fun, except for the part where I pay $20 to get my face kicked in for 6+ hours.

I live in Denver, and I've been meaning to go to feast of blades for a couple years largely because I'm told they have their 'serious' tournament and a 'fun' tournament, and I think the fun tournament would be a lot of, well, fun. People who submit for the fun tournament, I'm told, have their lists reviewed to make sure no one's bringing a 5 IK list, and that things are low-key enough to keep it fun and interesting, which really sounds up my alley.

Unfortunately, I heard the people who ran it are out of business or something.

I almost want to try the LVO, but again, I don't want to pay major money for tickets, lodging, travel, meals, etc, just to show up and get curb-stomped because I'm there for 'fun'.

Painting is a skill and can very much be a competitive skill. Sportsmanship is a rating on how good a person you are to be around and having it as a score that you can get docked on keeps people somewhat civil. Again, a tournament is a reflection of skill for the whole hobby, not just how well you can stomp your opponent.

I agree it is a competitive skill - GD attests to that. However it is not part of the competition over the game of 40k, whcih is entirely what the OP is talking about.

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

By the same logic, competitive players should not be allowed to play in anything but a tournement

 Formosa wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

By the same logic, competitive players should not be allowed to play in anything but a tournement

Exalted for truth.

 Formosa wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

By the same logic, competitive players should not be allowed to play in anything but a tournement

Wins best comment in thread. Exalted. This guy goes back and forth. "Eldar haters are haters" "what would make eldar fair" "why I love eldar" "eldar and you" "eldar walk on the beach" "tournies for my eldar"

Tournies for the Laughing God
Skulls for Khaine's Throne.

 Formosa wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

By the same logic, competitive players should not be allowed to play in anything but a tournement

That's fair. You should play according to the event, if it's competitive then be competitive of its for find then play for the fun of it, bring things you find fun and what not. All I'm try to say is there should be a event for both hobbyists.

Dman137 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

By the same logic, competitive players should not be allowed to play in anything but a tournement

That's fair. You should play according to the event, if it's competitive then be competitive of its for find then play for the fun of it, bring things you find fun and what not. All I'm try to say is there should be a event for both hobbyists.

There are multiple events and a game for both. Warhammer 40k. How about instead of crying over little toys you just find the joy in the hobby in its entirity.

Dman137 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

Dman137 wrote:
Year after year you run into people that go to tournaments with non competitive army's and then bomb the players that beat them.. Why did you come to the event.?? What were you hoping to accomplish.? I'm sure many of you have seen this, what are your views on non competitive players going to events but then bash it about how OP players were and also bombing there soft scores.

By the same logic, competitive players should not be allowed to play in anything but a tournement

That's fair. You should play according to the event, if it's competitive then be competitive of its for find then play for the fun of it, bring things you find fun and what not. All I'm try to say is there should be a event for both hobbyists.

The events you are disliking opponents during ARE hobby events. THis is a fact.

So, the solution is you should not go to them. Then everyone is happy.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
Honestly, as a non-competitive player, attitudes like this are a big reason I don't go to big fancy tournaments, largely because the OP is 100% correct.

I mean, I love orks, and I especially love ork walkers. But they're TERRIBLE. I've tried a couple local tournaments where I bring my just-for-lulz ork walker list, and it's kind of fun, except for the part where I pay $20 to get my face kicked in for 6+ hours.

I live in Denver, and I've been meaning to go to feast of blades for a couple years largely because I'm told they have their 'serious' tournament and a 'fun' tournament, and I think the fun tournament would be a lot of, well, fun. People who submit for the fun tournament, I'm told, have their lists reviewed to make sure no one's bringing a 5 IK list, and that things are low-key enough to keep it fun and interesting, which really sounds up my alley.

Unfortunately, I heard the people who ran it are out of business or something.

I almost want to try the LVO, but again, I don't want to pay major money for tickets, lodging, travel, meals, etc, just to show up and get curb-stomped because I'm there for 'fun'.

OP is exactly 0% right.

If getting curbstomped all over the room for a weekend seems like a waste, then the really big tourneys are exactly where you want to be. The bottom half are usually people wit armies and attitudes like yours. They just want to have a good time and roll some dice while drinking to excess and soaking up the atmosphere. But that's just the championships. NOVA, for example, also has a narrative campaign and a friendly tournament, which are organized especially for people who want to bring their weird and wacky lists and still not be tabled on turn one every game.

And since you mentioned an Ork walker list, you might want to check out this guy's blog who is at NOVA right now with his, you guessed it, Ork walker list. And, of course, then there's this. Tournaments are about a lot more than winning or losing games. After all there's only one winner. They're mostly about the camaraderie, the drinking, the talking about the hobby, looking at amazingly painted armies, meeting new people, meeting old friends, and going on a lad's weekend.

 Kap'n Krump wrote:
I live in Denver, and I've been meaning to go to feast of blades for a couple years largely because I'm told they have their 'serious' tournament and a 'fun' tournament, and I think the fun tournament would be a lot of, well, fun. People who submit for the fun tournament, I'm told, have their lists reviewed to make sure no one's bringing a 5 IK list, and that things are low-key enough to keep it fun and interesting, which really sounds up my alley.

Adepticon had thier first "friendly" 40K tourney a couple years ago, about 5 guys came with compettive lists, the next year just about every one raised the bar. Now, it has since been dubbed the 'unfriendly'. Really the event states bring non-compettive lists and over half the guys are sporting the same death stars top players run in the championships...it was kinda sad. Why are some people that hard up to win? It's a non-compettive event.

I walked by the Friendly in 2014. Everyone seemed to be having fun, but I can't speak for 100 people. Lots of beer getting passed around. However, some people were past drunk and into "gak Faced" territory.

That is NOT fun at a tournament. Know your limits.

after The Big Lebowski and Dirty Dozen? (2nd yr) based events I refused to go back. Maybe they fixed it the force organizatin to avoid the compettive builds. I may give the Classic 40K event a try this year I heard great things about it.

I just played in HH events and a 400 pt kill team in 2015.

Mostly laid back folks similar in age and approach to the game in the HH events.

In 3 events I won 3 games (total), but had a blast.

Have we discussed the level of hardcore required to meet OP's standards?

Where's the line? How do we judge? Who's to judge? What standards? What if I think OP isn't hardcore enough for my super duper hardcore mega ultra competitive event?

I think the whole premise is absurd. With the state of 40k, I think the last thing anyone should be doing is limiting the number of players in their gaming pool. People at events pay money to be there to get in a weekend of solid gaming usually against good lookign armies on beautiful tables, and hopefully against pleasant and like-minded people.

Everyone is free to attend whatever they like, and they should be welcomed so long as their attitude remains a net positive to the atmosphere. Anything less is nonsense elitism that couldn't ever possibly be enforced or judged on.

Although I would agree that low balling anyone's soft scores is a sad way to conduct yourself. This behavior is in my experience more likely to happen with so called competitive gamers looking to better their odds then with the supposed fluff bunnies. Not a scientific study of course, but who cares. I certainly disagree with the notion that any gamer should refrain from attending an event just because the perceived opponents will be so much better or far less prepared.

It may surprise a lot of gamers of the so called competitive stripe that a many of us fluff bunnies might actually be better at this game than you think. Couldn't tell you how many times I have seen old hands take the first 1850 points out of the case and stomp some net lister simply because they stick to the scenario or are just plain better players.

Labeling yourself competitive doesn't make you into an instant tactical genius, nor does prefering to play in an environment where nobody is attempting to prove who's the king of 40k make you into a terrible player. Whoever shows up across the table you should be happy they showered and are a decent human being capable of actual human interaction who just so happens to be willing to spend their time in the same nerd filled hobby as you.

Assuming they aren't of the soft score mashing type or just blatant arsehats to be around, they are certainly worthy of respect. Have some for yourself as well and try to enrich the experience for everyone involved. Who knows, maybe that fluff bunny across the table really is the king of 40k and is about to school your Centstar on why GW always keeps nerfing Celestians. How you ask? Well it is good to be the king afterall...



Edit: What Blacksails said...

 dracpanzer wrote:
Although I would agree that low balling anyone's soft scores is a sad way to conduct yourself. This behavior is in my experience more likely to happen with so called competitive gamers looking to better their odds then with the supposed fluff bunnies. Not a scientific study of course, but who cares. I certainly disagree with the notion that any gamer should refrain from attending an event just because the perceived opponents will be so much better or far less prepared.

It may surprise a lot of gamers of the so called competitive stripe that a many of us fluff bunnies might actually be better at this game than you think. Couldn't tell you how many times I have seen old hands take the first 1850 points out of the case and stomp some net lister simply because they stick to the scenario or are just plain better players.

Labeling yourself competitive doesn't make you into an instant tactical genius, nor does prefering to play in an environment where nobody is attempting to prove who's the king of 40k make you into a terrible player. Whoever shows up across the table you should be happy they showered and are a decent human being capable of actual human interaction who just so happens to be willing to spend their time in the same nerd filled hobby as you.

Assuming they aren't of the soft score mashing type or just blatant arsehats to be around, they are certainly worthy of respect. Have some for yourself as well and try to enrich the experience for everyone involved. Who knows, maybe that fluff bunny across the table really is the king of 40k and is about to school your Centstar on why GW always keeps nerfing Celestians. How you ask? Well it is good to be the king afterall...

Exalt to the King!

And I should note, sometimes players complain about the soft score they got, without realizing that well... the way they acted, they DESERVED that soft score.

 dracpanzer wrote:
Although I would agree that low balling anyone's soft scores is a sad way to conduct yourself. This behavior is in my experience more likely to happen with so called competitive gamers looking to better their odds then with the supposed fluff bunnies. Not a scientific study of course, but who cares. I certainly disagree with the notion that any gamer should refrain from attending an event just because the perceived opponents will be so much better or far less prepared.

It may surprise a lot of gamers of the so called competitive stripe that a many of us fluff bunnies might actually be better at this game than you think. Couldn't tell you how many times I have seen old hands take the first 1850 points out of the case and stomp some net lister simply because they stick to the scenario or are just plain better players.

Labeling yourself competitive doesn't make you into an instant tactical genius, nor does prefering to play in an environment where nobody is attempting to prove who's the king of 40k make you into a terrible player. Whoever shows up across the table you should be happy they showered and are a decent human being capable of actual human interaction who just so happens to be willing to spend their time in the same nerd filled hobby as you.

Assuming they aren't of the soft score mashing type or just blatant arsehats to be around, they are certainly worthy of respect. Have some for yourself as well and try to enrich the experience for everyone involved. Who knows, maybe that fluff bunny across the table really is the king of 40k and is about to school your Centstar on why GW always keeps nerfing Celestians. How you ask? Well it is good to be the king afterall...



Edit: What Blacksails said...

Exactly
I remember back in 5th I face a GK army. From what I can remember it wasn't exactly the net list but even the soft GK lists were stupidly strong. Anyway I took it on at 1500 points with a all foot slogging Dark Eldar army the only non infantry unit being some revere jet bikes and I ended up tabling him he was in shock because he thought he would have a easy win lol

 Melissia wrote:
And I should note, sometimes players complain about the soft score they got, without realizing that well... the way they acted, they DESERVED that soft score.

Also worth noting some players know that if they give out low scores it mitigates their loss in the final standings. More so if they show up with a group that does it. Its an effective way to knock out good generals out of 1st place.

Show up with 10 people to a 50 person tournament and the guy who should be 1st plays 2 people from that group and instead comes in 12th.

Its why player awarded points should be removed at every opportunity.

 Ravenous D wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
And I should note, sometimes players complain about the soft score they got, without realizing that well... the way they acted, they DESERVED that soft score.

Also worth noting some players know that if they give out low scores it mitigates their loss in the final standings. More so if they show up with a group that does it. Its an effective way to knock out good generals out of 1st place.

Show up with 10 people to a 50 person tournament and the guy who should be 1st plays 2 people from that group and instead comes in 12th.

Its why player awarded points should be removed at every opportunity.

Or you do something intelligence like eliminating the bottom score and top score to alleviate cheating. Also maybe add a "Comments' section for those categories to allow the person rating you to state WHY you got that score. Ohh i see you got a 3 in sportsmanship because you apparently sneezed during the game....yeah were going to eliminate that players marks and average your.

Yeah, there's donkey-caves sometimes. But sometimes-- a lot of the times, even-- the donkey-caves are the ones doing the complaining.

Honestly I don't like the idea because it's just so abusable.
Certainly have a way to report people misbehaving, but player-given scores like that are just a really bad idea.

I'd never suggest banning a non-competitive player from a competitive event. That's ridiculous. If they're getting something out of it, they should have a right to compete!

That being said, if know that you can't win, and aren't going to try to win, I don't see what you're getting out of it. (That's personal, of course.)

However, if a casual player in a competitive setting complains about getting steam-rolled, my sympathy is somewhat less than high. When you put money down, with cash-value prizes on the line, you have to expect things to be a little rougher.

As far as sportsmanship goes, I'm ambivalent. I've rarely seen a tournament where the person who legitimately deserved to win it won it. It seems like the 'best sport' prize really winds up being the 'person we felt most guilty about beating' prize. I would honestly prefer that to be rolled into the others. Give a second place prize for points, or a second place for painting. Best sport never seems to shake out correctly.

 CrashGordon94 wrote:
Honestly I don't like the idea because it's just so abusable.
Certainly have a way to report people misbehaving, but player-given scores like that are just a really bad idea.

By the end the old Conflict tournaments were filled with people that knew they could rob a person of up to 14pts a round.

As far as this concerns the thread really people that enter a tournament need to understand that they should expect to see really hard and abusive lists and that they need to leave their boo boo stink face at home and just compete to the best of their ability. I cant stand playing against space wolves but I've never bombed anyone for taking them.

Here's the reality, eldar are extremely strong, and were already 25% of the armies at most tournaments before the new dex, if you go to a tournament now you can expect at least 25% eldar armies rocking at least 20 scat bikes. To go into that environment without knowing or preparing and getting butt hurt about it is your own fault, don't take it out on the other people. Just get over it. Its here to stay for the next year-ish. Adapt and overcome, or stay home.