so who won?

 

WHFB:

Robert Felix w/ sylvania 1st place

Matt Lewondaski w/ nurgle 2nd place

Eliot... w/ slaneesh demons best general


I have no idea the score on WH40K side.

I went by the Cashman Center for about an hour Sunday afternoon and looked at all the players and their armies. I was really surprised by the variety of armies out there. There was no overwhelming number of marine players although MEQ type armies are definitely the dominate force out there. I saw quite a few IG, Nids, Eldar, and Dark Eldar players. There were also quite a bit of Necrons and Tau. Most of the Nid players seem to be using Nidzilla lists and DE and Tau players were mostly mechanized.
I only saw two Ork players. One was a guy I knew who used to manage a GW store locally and moved recently to Baltimore to manage the GW store there. He ran a Deathskull list. The other Ork player seemed to be running a KOS list.

And in typical GW 'almost good enough for government work' quality standards, they managed to give the wrong person the overall trophy on the fantasy side.

So for those keeping score:

Atlanta 40k games day tournament: complete fiasco

Vegas Fantasy GT: wrong guy handed the overall trophy.

Remind me why they fired Jeff Hall again?

Whoa, everything else I read about it said it was a good event, really dumb that they gave the wrong guy the overall trophy; what was the story there - they announced the winner and gave the trophy to the wrong guy?

How'd things end up going for you and the other guys?

And any info on the 40k side?

Here's some thoughts of someone else who attened:

"This dude is at the Las Vegas GT, but went for LOTR, not WH. Here's what he noticed:

Quote kay day one of the GT is finished. We've seen a good collection of Sacramento, Bay Area, Stockton area and some Hollywood types come up to play. I don't know how the 40K or Fantasy players have faired, but I can tell you that I am very glad I am not playing in the GT in either of those tournaments. The lack of any composition system has brought out the worst in players.

The most memorable army I saw (amongst playing field with many a disgusting but LEGAL list) was a two Steam Tank, three Great Cannon, all cavalry force (which mounted repeating handgunners). There is also a really unpleasant Tzeench Flying circus and the list goes on. I don't feel so dirty about my last couple of tough WHFB armies as they are soft and fluffy compared to some of those monster lists.



And so this is what we have to look forward to from GW sponsored GTs in the future. Awesome. "

I have to say that I didn't see the Atlanta 40K GT to be anything CLOSE to a fiasco...if anything, Spengler and his crew did a much better job overall than the crew the year before did, and made the tournament fun for everyone that *I* spoke to.

Posted By mauleed on 06/04/2007 4:55 PM

And in typical GW 'almost good enough for government work' quality standards, they managed to give the wrong person the overall trophy on the fantasy side.

So for those keeping score:

Atlanta 40k games day tournament: complete fiasco

Vegas Fantasy GT: wrong guy handed the overall trophy.

Remind me why they fired Jeff Hall again?

There was a fiasco at Atlanta ??? Thats news to me. I didn't see any posts on here except some complaints that people didn't read the packets on the tournament and showed up clueless.

Didn't they cancel a whole GT season under the previous administration?

Obviously if (and I say 'if' because I don't know the validity of this claim) they gave out the trophy to the wrong guy in Fantasy it is a serious mistake, but it wouldn't be the first time and it won't be the last time something like that happens.

However, overall the tournament was run very smoothly from my perspective. Personally, I didn't think they had enough terrain pieces on the board and the inclusion of two 40K missions from the 'back of the book' (3rd edition mission converts) was a big mistake. Despite these gripes I still had a great time overall and will gladly attend next year. Being able to gamble at night is a great bonus!


As for the notion that removing comp has somehow unhinged the Grand Tournament I have to call Shenanigans. While the tournament had its fair share of power armies, the vast majority of armies on the tables weren't 'tuned' in any major way.


Oh, and I did horrible personally. I went 1-3-1 and this was, by far, my worst grand tournament performance to date (I've never had more losses than wins before).

Posted By carmachu on 06/04/2007 6:42 PM
 I can tell you that I am very glad I am not playing in the GT in either of those tournaments. The lack of any composition system has brought out the worst in players.

The most memorable army I saw (amongst playing field with many a disgusting but LEGAL list) was a two Steam Tank, three Great Cannon, all cavalry force (which mounted repeating handgunners). There is also a really unpleasant Tzeench Flying circus and the list goes on. I don't feel so dirty about my last couple of tough WHFB armies as they are soft and fluffy compared to some of those monster lists.

I think you are way off here. Every GT has it's share of WAAC armies with or without comp.

There were a very few 9 oblit Iron Warriors, and 3 Falcon armies (I think only one of each),  but they were the exception not the rule.

I ended up going 4-0-1 with an average eldar army so you can win at a GT without going overboard (And I would have won if my army was not half painted).

Not to get off topic, but could you post your list over in the Army List section? I am looking at various ways to do Eldar. I'd like to see your list.

Hey Yak,

What army did you bring?

I thought you were going to be there but with so many people I don't think I recognized you.

He's not as tall as you'd expect

Posted By General Hobbs on 06/04/2007 9:37 PM
Not to get off topic, but could you post your list over in the Army List section? I am looking at various ways to do Eldar. I'd like to see your list.

http://dakkadakka.com/Forums/tabid/56/forumid/14/postid/168219/view/topic/Default.aspx

Done.

And on the whole I thought it was a very well run event.

They took a lot of the best ideas that Adepticon had, and incorporated them into the GT.

A few examples are that they gave you a comprehensive rules packet that had all 5 missions in it as well as all of the special rules.  Another thing that was new was that they projected a huge countdown clock onto the wall so you always knew how much time you have. I also liked that they gave us 2 1/2 hours for a 1750 point game, so even the horde armies should be able to finish.

Even Phil Kelly was great.

The downside was that they did have 2 missions that were bad. Patrol and Hold at all Costs (shiver) made for a couple of rough games.

Oh, I did have one other problem…In game 5 my opponent and I had a major rules dispute. I ended up with a bad ruling from one of the Kommandos (they were some of the staff/judges), that acted like he was the final judge. If it were not for it playing on table #2 in the final game, I would have let it slide, but I had to get Dave Taylor, who in turn got Phil Kelly to make the correct ruling. So it was all good.

Posted By inquisitor_bob on 06/04/2007 11:06 PM
Hey Yak,

What army did you bring?

I thought you were going to be there but with so many people I don't think I recognized you.

Valhallan Imperial Guard.

 

This was my 6th GT and very well run from years past. I must have left before the mixup bit. There were a few problems but Dave Taylor was up to listening and willing to make changes. In chats with staff I heard they are considering going back to the smaller hotel based GT's, they way they were in the begining. I truely hope that they follow threw on it.

wynnstudio

Sounds like it was interesting to say the least

Does anyone know who/what placed for 40k?

Mike Mutscheller won first place for 40k. Mostly undivided chaos list, with a khorne biker lord (tricked out to 275 or so points), khorne biker lieutenant (180-ish or so), 2 squads of 6 furies, 3 havoc squads, and 3-4 troops, all min sized. Good guy to play against, terrible army to have to fight against. There was a definate division between 'normal' armies and WAAC armies, the whole no-comp thing was taken to ridiculous limits by some people.

I dont know anything about someone being given the wrong award, but overall I thought the logistics side of things was pretty well done, with a well put together rules packet complete with terrain summary and mission run down, t shirt, tape measure that actually works, and a fancy water bottle that works good for mixed drinks too (viva las vegas!).

Posted By yakface on 06/04/2007 11:32 PM

Posted By inquisitor_bob on 06/04/2007 11:06 PM
Hey Yak,

What army did you bring?

I thought you were going to be there but with so many people I don't think I recognized you.

Valhallan Imperial Guard.

 

CONGRATS TO Mike. He is proving himself to be one of the best 40k players in the world.

I ended up getting two draws, got massively beaten once, and massacred twice.  I think there were five or six players that scored lower than me, but I'll bet only five or six had more fun.

On the fantasy side of the room, my team got a late start because two of our opponents were late, but Dave and the crew got us playing just fine.  Other than that, I thought the event went very well.  I would have liked the event to be in one of the hotels or the convention center closer to the strip, but the location wasn't as bad to me as some peeple make it sound.

I had some of the best games ever against four great opponents.  I didn't mind getting beat so bad because the games were very intense (to me anyway, I hope my opponents feel the same). 

Las Vegas is a great place for the tournament.  We drove over 700 miles to get to it, and I don't think I would drive that far if it hadn't been Las Vegas.  Play games all day, gamble all evening... It doesn't get much better than that!

I even got Phil to autograph my Eldar codex!  I only talked to him for a few minutes, but it was pretty cool to get to do that.

All told, I had a great time and thought the event went very well.  I'm already saving up for next year.

Posted By yakface on 06/04/2007 7:54 PM

Oh, and I did horrible personally. I went 1-3-1 and this was, by far, my worst grand tournament performance to date (I've never had more losses than wins before).

Wow. What happened? No need for a battle report, just curious.

I think the problem was on the fantasy side.

The scores were:

1)* Matt Lewandowski.......171
2) Robert Felix...............170
3) Johan Thulin..............167
4) Elliot Vigil..................164
5) Timothy Walker.........158
6) Brandon Gallegos.......156
7) Jordan Braun.............155
8) Todd Wiatt.................152
9) Gregory Swensrud......151
10) Janner Holliday...........143
11) Eric McKee.................143
12) James McCasey..........143
13) Steve Masuta..............142
14) Mike Paganini..............140
15) Touradj Mansouri.........136
16) Brent Ballie.................136
17) Maurcio Zuniga............134
18) Robert Morris..............134
19) Michael Garner............133
20) Paul Zagaris................133
21) Andrew Harward..........133
22) Ricky Fisher................133
23) Kevin Oligschlaeger.....132
24) Nathan Ott..................132
25) Kevin Murphy..............132

 

Robert Felix was the winner, and got the trophy (Which was a great trophy).

 

As a side note, they gave out a lot of swag to the winners. I believe in past GTs they did not have any prize support.  

As a 40K rules Kommando, I'd like to chime in a bit here....

#1 We were told something that really helped us "Make the customers happy, they are very important". If we made a good impression this year, then we'll have another Vegas GT. If we made a bad impression, then there won't be another Vegas GT, or maybe even GT's ever again. That's the situation this years GT crew were in, and yet Dave Taylor still put his neck on the line and fought for continuing GT's.

#2 As rules judges our job was to make the best rulings that we possibly could. If it wasn't a "how far does my space marine move in the movement phase" kind of question, we were told to get 3 of us together and come to a consensus, and if that didn't work, to ask Phil Kelly. This worked REALLY well IMO, and I had people calling me by first name that I never met because they knew we were there to help them and do our very best. We also stove to make sure the decisions were spread through all the judges so that we had some consistancy. While this did break down for one situation for one player, I feel we did a good job of that. I think I answered well over 200 rules questions over the course of the weekend, and I think that on the whole we did a great job communicating between the players, the judges and the game designer that we had on-hand. That's no mean feat.

#2 The wrong trophy thing was an alphabetizing computer problem from what I understand. They made it good as soon as they possibly could, and having to juggle 3 tournaments with 9-10 prizes each in a short period of time is *really* hard. Nobody is perfect and given that the crowd was almost chanting to get the results, I can see why someone would make a mistake under those circumstances.

#3 They went out of their way to clarify terrain with pretty pictures, and even printed out the scenarios. This was a good thing. OTOH, the text next to the pictures was a problem. Hills are decidedly WYSIWYG, and they called them size 2 and size 3 hills, which made them area terrain. <sigh></sigh>Also, when they typed up scenarios they left out some of the special rules that were supposed to be there. This was in response to a customer out-cry because they didn't bring their rulebooks and scenarios. Bummer on both sides if you ask me. OTOH, we addressed these issues very quickly, and they should be addressed properly for Baltmore.

#4 The lava tables are pretty widely hated, and if you lost all your games, you had a good chance at playing on the lava tables the whole tournament long. This was brought up, and we made arrangements to move people to the empty WFB tables and even added some terrain once we knew we had some extra on the second day. In the future, the tables are going to be spread out (and let me tell you, that's going to be a MAJOR hassle and a lot of back-breaking work) to make things better. They are working on refurbishing some of the older tables so that more varied stuff can be brought back.

#5 On the 40K side there were some army lists that I know I wouldn't enjoy playing against, and many of them were on the top 10 tables. Given that this was a no-comp event, I think it's interesting that they didn't win over-all even if with tons of battle points. This says to me that people are still knocking sportsmanship scores in lieu of comp scores. I get the impression that a huge section of the feedback sheets (yes, we asked for feedback, how cool is that?) asked for the return of comp scores. I also get the impression that the organizers aren't really interested in bringing comp scores back because previous methods were horribly abused. So, if you want comp scores to return, a viable method that can't be easily abused needs to be proposed, and THEN make your voices heard, in that order. Personally I'd love to see comp scores

#6 I got a LOT of positive feedback from players on both sides saying that this was a very well run event. Those that had issues had a method for detailing their problems, and hopefully they will be addressed in further GT's. So, if you had problem with GT, I hope that you had the courage to write it up in your feedback form, and have the patience to see if it gets addressed. It could make the difference between having another Vegas GT, or not.

#7 {Edit : removed in-accurate and unkind remark} I've got nothing but good to say about Dave Taylor and the guys he picked for running Vegas GT this year. I may be a bit biased, but I've got other GT's to compare to, and I think overall, there was more fun had at this one than most years previous. Certainly, if you didn't attend, it's pretty absurd to bad-mouth it, don't you think?

There is no intent at all to modify the scoring system at this time. I pretty much have this from the 'horses' mouth and that's troubling but the subject of another rant.

I will say that after looking over the paint scores it seemed like the judges were being pretty stingy with the points and I think that's a relatively good thing. I believe there was one 40, a handful of 35s and a decent number of 25s and 30s. So of the 48% of subjective scores it seems that people lost points across the board in a 'fair' way.

Of course if you show up with an average painted army and one opponent decides to ding your sportsmanship (because you crammed his army in the box by turn 3) then there's no way you are going to win the tournament even if you win all your games.

Here are some solutions:

Make the tournament primarily about winning games. The 52% non subjective vs the 48% subjective scoring system is just no way to judge the outcome of a tournament.

Have the ability to register to be eligible to win only certain categories (like best general, best painted, best sport, best over all). Then you have people in brackets playing for the same goal and limit the amount of chipmunking going on.

I'm fine with bringing back comp when GW is done nerfing all the lists. Right now all 'troops' are in no way considered equal but that seems to be sort of slowly changing. It's changing for the worse, but at least it's changing and when everything sucks the stuff that doesn't suck as much will seem cool again.


*Edit* I do want to point out that everyone running the tournament was pleasant and the games ran on time and smooth.  That's a big step in the right direction.  Also, I do like how the battle points earned were verified (by the players) several times during the tournament.

The team tournament on Friday was pretty neat too and there weren't a ton of people there for it but it at least seemed like no one went too far out of the way to cheese out their list for it.

I would like to say that in the team tournament all kinds of cheese was possible, but I did not see any armies exploit the 2 force org charts.

But the be downside was the fact that all three missions was cleanse gamma.

Overall running a GT is a thankless task, and my hat goes off to all that were part of running the GT. Dave Taylor is doing a lot of the right things to make sure that these tournaments are truly grand. Remember that this was his first one, and mistakes will happen. I expect that they will get better in the future.

Oh, and I did forget to comment on one other thing; If you don't like the attitude of a Kommando (even if it was me... ) definitely let the GW staff know it. It's important that we get feedback and know when we're doing stuff right and when we're doing stuff wrong. Nobody is perfect, and we all have areas where we can improve. I'd personally like to keep the Kommandoz reputation free from some of the bad impressions that some of the Outriders sometimes gave.

Sportsmanship awards don't really have a place in tournaments to my mind.
But I'm mostly a casual gamer, I run tourneys but rarely get to play in them. When I do, I'd like to win or lose based on my performance, not some guys (probably cynically self interested) opinion of how sporting I am. When I had sportsmanship awards, I saw really good players get gimped by people trying to game the system to screw them out of points.

In my case, I'm gonna be nice to my opponent because making new friends is a big part of what wargaming is about for me. I wanna be able to have a pint with my opponents afterwards with no hard feelings and no stress. I don't need some sort of behaviour police making sure I'm not a jerk. Jerks pay for their jerkyness in other ways.

Warning...long post.

To show my age, I go back to the first USGT in 1997. And as an increasingly grizzled veteran, I'm happy to see the GTs back and in the hands of people (previously Jeff and now Dave) with genuine interest in making them better and seeing them thrive.

However, the GTs aren't only in GW's hands...they're in ours. If we want the GTs to thrive again, veterans need to attend and set a good example in all aspects of the hobby...generalship, sportsmanship and painting. No matter how "grand" GW tries to make them, the GTs only shine when we make our best efforts. Anyone can play a jerk with a black-primered army at their local store...what makes for a "grand" experience is facing an opponent who really tests your ability, has a great-looking army and is someone you wouldn't mind having a beer with afterward. And I have no doubt vets will answer the call on this one. I think we all realize that this might be the last chance for the USGTs.

Regarding sportsmanship, it's an important part of the hobby and the GTs (right or wrong) are a marketing tool set up to reward all aspects of the hobby. Not that sportsmanship points aren't abused or that people aren't jerks anyway. They are. But if sportsmanship grading helps take an edge off some of the jagoffs we all know exist, it can help players (especially first-timers) have a better experience. And a good GT experience makes for a more enthusiastic hobbyist. Sportsmanship points may be evil, but in my mind they may be a necessary evil for what the GTs are trying to do. For an independent tourney not run by GW (and probably a lot less expensive), the need for sportsmanship grading probably isn't as compelling. Just my $0.02.

A final point -- although I'm sure the GTs still face some internal resistance at GWUS HQ, there's no doubt in my mind they drive sales. How many times have we heard from fellow hobbyists at the end of a GT that "next year, I'm bringing (army X)!" While those sales are almost impossible to quantify, I can only hope the business folks grow to understand that.

Barontuman wrote:
#7 The previous GT crew (that got canned) set up the Cashman hall, and it was SUPER expensive, and had to be reached by shuttle. It was badly planned from the beginning, and GW spent a lot of money renting a shuttle and making it work.

That is totally not true. As the person who picked the Cashman center, it was the only affordable option in Las Vegas to have the event at. It had free parking, and we always discussed having a shuttle from any hotel we made arrangements with.
So please don't speak for things you know nothing about. There was never a problem with having the GT at the hall it was held in.
Jeff

Posted By JHall on 06/06/2007 9:23 AM
Barontuman wrote:
#7 {edited to remove inaccurate and unkind remarks}

That is totally not true. As the person who picked the Cashman center, it was the only affordable option in Las Vegas to have the event at. It had free parking, and we always discussed having a shuttle from any hotel we made arrangements with.
So please don't speak for things you know nothing about. There was never a problem with having the GT at the hall it was held in.
Jeff

{removed irrelevant sentence}  That same week, I attended a hobby manufacturers convention at the Hilton.  I don't have any idea how much it cost to hold that event there, but it might bear looking into, as I don't imagine the hobby industry as a whole has enough money to hold conventions in very extravagant places.

I did end up having to pay for parking on Sunday (Friday and Saturday there wasn't anyone at the pay booth).  The guy that took my money was really kind of a jerk.  When I mentioned that I didn't have to pay Fri and Sat, he commented that I must have got there really early (I didn't).  Then he complained when all I had was a $20 bill.  After him being a jerk to me, I happily made him count out 17 singles to me.

Well, I am not sure why Kommandos of all people were discussing pricing of venues.. It is something they would have no info on.

I looked at tons of options when I was still with GW to have the Vegas GT, and the Cashman center was the only thing even remotely close to affordable. Having it in hotels ran into two main snags - they either didn't have the space needed to hold a show of that size, or they wanted 10s of thousands of dollars a day.

I am not even sure why this came up, as I hadn't heard a single person complain about the venue.

I just don't like it when someone I have never even heard of comes on here and starts bad mouthing me about how poorly planned this event was. Sure, I am well removed from it at this point, but I did a lot of work setting it up before I left GW. So I still take offense to offhand comments like that. God knows why I should care, but I do still love the hobby and the hobby community around it!

Jeff

Take no prisoners Jeff!

Posted By JHall on 06/06/2007 10:27 AM
 God knows why I should care, but I do still love the hobby and the hobby community around it!

Jeff

Which is the reason youre missed, Jeff.

I've never read player comments be anything but good about you, Jeff when it came to events and how they went.  Just don't be a stranger in these parts, k?

Thanks, guys. I appreciate the comments. I have been reading the board, just not posting lately. I will definitely try and change that. I have been busy preparing for my new job - I am entering a new kind of battlefield: the classroom. I have decided to become a High School English teacher. I start training in a few weeks and teaching in August. Wish me luck! I am really looking forward to it though!

I am glad that Vegas went well. I believe that it is by far one of the best places to have a GT. I am debating whether or not to play in Baltimore in November. I am definitely considering it. It's been too long since I got a chance to play that many games in one stretch!

Jeff

Posted By JHall on 06/06/2007 10:54 AM
I am debating whether or not to play in Baltimore in November. I am definitely considering it. It's been too long since I got a chance to play that many games in one stretch!

Jeff

One word.

Adepticon.

Though I must admit that the combat patrol tourney is rather tempting.

I dearly hope that adepticon has a similar combat patrol tourney next year.

Playing several 1 hour games (or less if you know what youre doing) is a nice thought I would love to persue.

Yeah, Adepticon is very tempting. Finding the time and the extra cash for the Chicago trip may not happen next year, though. But I am keeping it in mind!

Combat Patrol does sound like fun. Hmmm... maybe I will get the guys to start that up on our Tuesday night gaming.

Jeff

I had a super cool teacher in high school that would use games as a teaching tool and encourage us to imagine and do reports on what games we thought would be played in future times. A most excellent and memorable class that easily stands out in my mind from the cookie cutter stuff that was the general run during early school years.

Good luck in your efforts, Jeff.

Posted By JHall on 06/06/2007 10:54 AM
Thanks, guys. I appreciate the comments. I have been reading the board, just not posting lately. I will definitely try and change that. I have been busy preparing for my new job - I am entering a new kind of battlefield: the classroom. I have decided to become a High School English teacher. I start training in a few weeks and teaching in August. Wish me luck! I am really looking forward to it though!



Jeff

Talking about jumping from the fire pan into the fire...baja condios.

Posted By Hellfury on 06/06/2007 10:56 AM

One word.

Adepticon.

Though I must admit that the combat patrol tourney is rather tempting.

I dearly hope that adepticon has a similar combat patrol tourney next year.

Playing several 1 hour games (or less if you know what youre doing) is a nice thought I would love to persue.

Combat patrol (or some other small points tournament) is already on the ideas list for Adepticon 08.  I'm really interested to see how this event goes at Baltimore.

Posted By inquisitor_bob on 06/04/2007 12:30 PM
WHFB:

Robert Felix w/ sylvania 1st place

Matt Lewondaski w/ nurgle 2nd place

Apparently the scoring program is a little quirky when it comes to factoring in Player's Choice votes.  The word is that it did not count those points towards your actual final ranking, but it DID add them into your total points.  Another funky factor that threw some folks is that the points you could earn from Player's Choice votes was capped at 5.  Some armies got a ton of votes, which made reading the scores a little tricky if you assumed every vote was worth a point.

Matt L had the max 5 points from PC votes, and Rob Felix had only 2.  Since the PC votes weren't counted for the win, that left Rob 2 points ahead of Matt L for the Overall. 

The judges apparently did spend some time wrestling with it and deciding whether they should or shouldn't count the PC votes towards the prizes, and eventually decided to go with the way the scoring program had it.   Matt L (who is by all accounts a great player and great sport with a gorgeous Nurgle DL) has posted online since with no complaints or grief about it. 

Here's Rob's battle report:

http://www.gameempire.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=193

Posted By RanTheCid on 06/06/2007 11:49 AM

Posted By Hellfury on 06/06/2007 10:56 AM

One word.

Adepticon.

Though I must admit that the combat patrol tourney is rather tempting.

I dearly hope that adepticon has a similar combat patrol tourney next year.

Playing several 1 hour games (or less if you know what youre doing) is a nice thought I would love to persue.

Combat patrol (or some other small points tournament) is already on the ideas list for Adepticon 08.  I'm really interested to see how this event goes at Baltimore.

If it would make combat patrol show up in adepticon, I would go to baltimore to encourage its play.

Combat patrol is so drastically underrated it really isnt funny.

Its inclusion at adepticon would allow me to get some games in and be able to attend various other events I would love to participate in, such as the BFG tourney, various modelling clases, BS with people I have known for years on the net, but never met, less stuff for me to have to travel with ( I can easily carry my army with me while browsing around the convention), etc.

I cant think of any downside to combat patrol being played at adepticon. Its fast and furious. It doesnt take up alot of space.The fun factor is exceedingly high.

LunchHammer for the win.

Posted By inquisitor_bob on 06/04/2007 12:30 PM
I saw quite a few IG, Nids, Eldar, and Dark Eldar players. There were also quite a bit of Necrons and Tau. Most of the Nid players seem to be using Nidzilla lists and DE and Tau players were mostly mechanized.
I only saw two Ork players. One was a guy I knew who used to manage a GW store locally and moved recently to Baltimore to manage the GW store there. He ran a Deathskull list. The other Ork player seemed to be running a KOS list.

I only counted 5 IG other than me, there were many many more Nid and Eldar armies.  I got the impression that the number of Eldar is about the same as marines.  There were 3 ork armies that I counted, the two you mentioned and the grot army that won player's choice.

Posted By JHall on 06/06/2007 9:23 AM
Barontuman wrote:
#7  {Removed in-acurate and unkind remarks}

That is totally not true. As the person who picked the Cashman center, it was the only affordable option in Las Vegas to have the event at. It had free parking, and we always discussed having a shuttle from any hotel we made arrangements with.
So please don't speak for things you know nothing about. There was never a problem with having the GT at the hall it was held in.
Jeff

My sincere apologies.  I'm sure that I must have mis-understood what I was told.  I'm sad that this was the only affordable location, as it certainly could have been better.   The complaints were numerous about the "food" supplied by the location, however I had time both both days to catch the shuttle back to the Golden Nugget, where the food was absolutely amazing.  The shuttle personel were very friendly and accomodating too BTW. 

Regardless, with the knowledge gained from this year, I'm positive that next year will be even better, and the overall opinion that I heard was that this year went very well (except for the lack of Comp scores, there was a LOT of grumbling over that).

Again, my honest apologies for speaking out of place on that item.

Have they posted the rules for the Combat Patrol Tournament? That sounds like a lot of fun.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

I appreciate your apology. I am sorry if I came across as a jerk about it. It just caught me off guard for someone to be making those claims that wasn't directly involved with the planning.

Food is always an issue with GT venues. Since lunches are not provided, finding a good, affordable venue with nearby food and other necessary accommodations is always difficult. There are so many factors to take into account when planning an event of this size, it seems like something always doesn't work out for some group or another!

Jeff

We had a 2 hour lunch break with a free shuttle to downtown Las Vegas (a 5 minute ride)...food should not have been an issue.

Posted By JHall on 06/07/2007 10:48 AM
I appreciate your apology. I am sorry if I came across as a jerk about it. It just caught me off guard for someone to be making those claims that wasn't directly involved with the planning.

Food is always an issue with GT venues. Since lunches are not provided, finding a good, affordable venue with nearby food and other necessary accommodations is always difficult. There are so many factors to take into account when planning an event of this size, it seems like something always doesn't work out for some group or another!

Jeff

No need for an apology on your side man!  Quite the contrary you were quite polite about it.  To that end, I'll be editing the offending posts....

Tony

I'm with Blackmoor. We had ample time to catch the shuttle and grab lunch on Fremont. I really liked the schedule. We got 2.5 hour games and plenty of time between games.

Really?  I thought I saw more than 6 IG army, but that could also be some armies running IG allies.

I missed the Grot army probably since I dropped by during lunch on Sunday and many did not have their army out.

Thanks for the clarification !

So I heard someone scored 3 zeros in sportsmanship the first day of the tournament and had to have several judges sit nearby him during the 2nd day. Can anyone confirm this? If someone is going to be that big of a jerk I think there should be a BAN for the rest of the GT season. Please information would be appreciated.

I normally do not post just read but this I feel Warranted my response since I had the Displease of playing Mr. Peter Elias the player in question.

 

I can not confirm that he in fact received three Zeros in sportsmanship as I am only aware of 2 one given by myself anther given by the person who played him before me.

 

In one of Peter’s (Who shall be referred to from this point forward as Ahole) games he suggested to his opponent that the terrain be reset since it had been moved for people to display their figures for players choice. His opponent agreed and they alternated placing terrain. Peter proceeded to place the hills on the board over the Craters which were static and built into the table thus denying his opponent cover. Ahole’s opponent asked a judge to rule on this and they ruled in Aholes favor since the two players had agreed to reset the terrain. Well this prompted one of his zeros.

 

Since I played peter after a similar situation and the terrain on our table occurred with the terrain needing to be reset, I went to the judges and explained that I did not want a similar situation to occur and I asked a Judge to reset the terrain. The Judges agreed and I told Ahole that this was the only “fair” way to handle the terrain reset. After the Terrain was reset The Judge asked if it was fair and Ahole to the judge yes but I am not comfortable with it. Well he was not getting anything above a zero from me at this point. I will not discuss the game its self but needless to say I would never like to play this Ahole again.

 

Ahole played a list that looked something like this

 

3 Falcons, Star, SC & PL fully decked out

 

5 Wave Serpents, Star and SC with 5 DA each and a Yurial I think, Star and SC

 

I have no problems with the list he played since it is allowed in the codex and I would play this are the same way. My problem is with the player.

 

My list was your basic IW list (So you can see I am a min maxer also)

 

1 Deamon Price

 

9 Obits

 

2 Las Plas Squads

 

1 Basilisk

 

3 Infiltrating Havoc Squads

 

After having later discussions with his Teammates From Toledo Ohio (Someone told me 2 Oblit 2 quit or something). They admitted to myself and others at there game that they only brought him to piss people off and eliminate people from the tournament so they had a better chance of winning. This Came Directly from what I considered one of the most respected 40k GT players, you know the guy that has won more of these events than anyone.

 

Unfortunately Ahole ended up winning Best General.

 

I agree Ahole should be banned. Furthermore something should be done about this practice of just bringing someone along to be an Ahole and Eliminate other player to make it easier for you.

Placing terrain to your advantage doesn't sound like something that should zero out someone's sports score for.

I have to agree. So he placed hills over craters, so what? How did that deny cover? Offer less cover, certainly, but not deny cover.

And to agree willingly to something, then score your opponent zero Sports just because (and solely because) he does exactly what you just agreed to, seems like a bit of aholery in itself. Maybe the first player should have been the one getting the zero score for being such a whining baby.

As for the second game, his comment was a bad one but to score him zero for it. In many games where I haven't set up the table/terrain I've commented (and heard people comment) that the terrain sucks. And all he said was it was fair but he didn't like it. What's wrong with that? And you gave him a zero Sports score for saying that? Wow, that seems a little excessive. Like taking an A-bomb to a paintball game excessive.

Of course, if you gave us more details on the games and his behaviour then maybe we could judge that this was deserved. But as you said, as soon as he opened his mouth you gave him a zero. Way to be a good sport yourself there.

Posted By Unseth on 06/07/2007 11:34 PM

 

Since I played peter after a similar situation and the terrain on our table occurred with the terrain needing to be reset, I went to the judges and explained that I did not want a similar situation to occur and I asked a Judge to reset the terrain. The Judges agreed and I told Ahole that this was the only “fair” way to handle the terrain reset. After the Terrain was reset The Judge asked if it was fair and Ahole to the judge yes but I am not comfortable with it. Well he was not getting anything above a zero from me at this point. I will not discuss the game its self but needless to say I would never like to play this Ahole again.

 

 

 

Is this correct?

*You asked for a judge to place terrain.

*Judge placed terrain.

*"Ahole" was ok with the placement BY THE JUDGE but you weren't. So you give the "AHOLE" a ZERO?

Impressive. you tanked him because HE AGREED WITH THE JUDGE?  Wow sounds like you're a Captain ZERO yourself there bub.

I put a hill over a water feature on one of the tables I played on, and my opponent didn't have any problems with it. In fact they turned around and did the same, saying that was a good idea. I've seen people put forests on hills as well, it's just part of the game. So far it dosen't sound like he did anything that justified him getting zeros.

Posted By Unseth on 06/07/2007 11:34 PM

After having later discussions with his Teammates From Toledo Ohio (Someone told me 2 Oblit 2 quit or something). They admitted to myself and others at there game that they only brought him to piss people off and eliminate people from the tournament so they had a better chance of winning. This Came Directly from what I considered one of the most respected 40k GT players, you know the guy that has won more of these events than anyone.

Ok, I have to chime in and set the record straight here.  I'm part of 2 Oblit 2 Quit, so this is coming from a direct source.  So here goes.

1.  Pete, Mike, Jeff and I attended the event with the ultimate goal of giving Mike the best chance to get as many points as possible for the tournament circuit.  At no point in time for this tournament or any tournament ever has Pete ever gone into a tournament to 'Piss' people off or to cause them to have a bad time.  I personally heard this from several members of other well known gaming groups (many who have never played him) and it is a completely false and an off base statement.  None of us out of Toledo would condone going to a tournament to "Piss" people off.  Too many people get pissed off themselves when they lose, don't have a rule(s) go their way, don't like the scenario, bad dice, bad terrain, etc.  Tough - get over it.  We all have to deal with this.   

2.  Pete is brought as an "enforcer".  The term is used lightly in jest because he is an exceptional player, but does not have a great chance at winning overall due to the fact that painting in his army is of a lower quality.  Pete plays a straight up game.  Nothing more, nothing less.  He's not there to give you a free back rub and yet at the same time, he's not there to punch you in the face.  He's there to play a game.  Pete is typically amiccable towards his opponents.  Admittingly, we all have our moments though and I cannot say that we are 100% perfect.  That said though - very few people are.  

3.  What Pete did with the cover on those boards was more than acceptable.  This in no way should impact his sportsmanship score.  It is bad player ediquette on your part and is also another reason why player based comp scoring should never be brought back.  You have given a great example as to why some players cannot handle scoring people appropriately.  Again, too many people get pissed off themselves when they lose, don't have a rule go their way, don't like the scenario, bad dice, bad terrain, etc.  Tough - get over it.  We all have to deal with this.   These items have nothing to do with sportsmanship.

Overall, Pete is a solid player.  He will bring a tough list and desires to play a straight-up game with no shennanigans.  He will question rules issues, which is acceptable especially since a lot of groups play things differently.  Pete is very good at a lot of different games and is a great challenge to play against.  He is someone that I will gladly play against any time.

I want to thank jfrazzel, skyth and Stu-rat for making their points about zeroing in sportsmanship.  I also want to thank the Wrecking Crew for stating the same things on their website when another person talked about purposely tanking a score.  "Chipmunking" is bad player ediquette and is something that quite a few people need to be trained on.  See link for the wrecking crew discussion:  http://40kwreckingcrew.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1112 

 

 

This is exactly why GW cancels tournaments and events.

 

What exactly is an "enforcer" doing at a tournament?

Are you saying then that you feel that your players in your team can't win without someone else going around and knocking off other good players?

You need someone else to "sweep the leg"?

GT's are for fun. Guys like you are making these events into less entertaining and less cerebral versions of the WWE. Until we see someone take a folded chair and a cheese grater to someone's head....

Im not trying to take sides here but this is how I see it.

Greg- He Brought 3 Falcon Eldar,,,,,,

3 Falcon Eldar is going to make you 0 friends, and get you and whoever you came with known as "those guys".  I have no probs with ya or Pete cause I know y'all, however from anyone elses view, well the previous post speaks for itself.

CJ (Offically from the Wrecking Crew?) chipmunked Paul Murphy on "sports" becuase he didnt like his "comp". I personally can't stand any player who is cool to someones face then stabs them in the back over comp ESPICALLY when the score is a sportsmenship one.  CJ pretty much got reigned in on the wrekcing crew forum, I had already been checking it out.

This is also the same CJ who posted on a local store forum that he did not want to go to a touney becuase that albino Rob and his friends would be there. CJ- From henceforth I prefer to be addressed as Man-Boy-Genius, thanks.

Everyone  may also want to note the discussion in that thread on wrecking crew about "crutch" armies its pretty epic.

..and um buy more bits..yeah!

Posted By jfrazell on 06/08/2007 4:30 AM

Posted By Unseth on 06/07/2007 11:34 PM

 

Since I played peter after a similar situation and the terrain on our table occurred with the terrain needing to be reset, I went to the judges and explained that I did not want a similar situation to occur and I asked a Judge to reset the terrain. The Judges agreed and I told Ahole that this was the only “fair” way to handle the terrain reset. After the Terrain was reset The Judge asked if it was fair and Ahole to the judge yes but I am not comfortable with it. Well he was not getting anything above a zero from me at this point. I will not discuss the game its self but needless to say I would never like to play this Ahole again.

 

 

 

Is this correct?

*You asked for a judge to place terrain.

*Judge placed terrain.

*"Ahole" was ok with the placement BY THE JUDGE but you weren't. So you give the "AHOLE" a ZERO?

Impressive. you tanked him because HE AGREED WITH THE JUDGE?  Wow sounds like you're a Captain ZERO yourself there bub.

I believe you're reading it wrong, the way I read it (and the way it actually makes sense in context with zero'ing the guy) was

"Ahole told the judge that the terrain was fair but he wasn't comfortable with it".  Meaning "fine leave it as is, but i don't like it".

Regardless, zeroing his sports score just for that is about the dumbest, most assinine thing I think you could do.

I'm a big proponent of terrain being placed only by the tournament organizers in order to build a fair scenario for play without favoring any army type over the other.  Still, zeroing the guys score because he wasn't happy about not alternating terrain placement is bs.

Just more expampled, partially justified or not, why a 48% completely subjective scoring system is junk.

Because my 6 man squads are cheesy while someone elses 6 man squads are fluffy and perect? Yeah right.

It is balls crazy to empower a guy you just beat to be able to affect your over all score and outcome. In the top ranks every point counts and dinging someone 4 to 6 or even 10 points basically keeps that guy from winning the over all. Dumb.. d you m b.

But where do you draw the line? When is it really time to ding someone? It should be a simple pass fail (1 point or no point) system. This prevents the bad sports (and often times the losers) from being able to completely screw the winners. This 10 points per game swing or 28% of your total points is garbage.

 

When the judges aren’t looking (and sometimes if they are if they aren’t giving the right calls-sort of a message as it were) they high stick the opponent or body check into the wall. Why do you think Inquisitor Bob was there? Certainly not for his looks…

See above.  That’s why Ed powerlifts. 40k IS a full contact sport you know…

Seriously-I think it’s a joking reference to the fact their guy probably paints as well as I do (sympathies dude) so he’s going there to play.

Now that would be a tournament worth seeing! Hulk “Maneus Calgar” Hogan vs. Jake “Snakes on a Plane” Roberts in a death cage match. Where’s my popcorn?

I'll stick with Clay...

Hobbs - Pete's always been an "enforcer". And again - take that term lightly. We have been traveling to tournaments since 1997 and he has always brought a strong list. The enforcer term was just added here recently as a fun in-group term. Until his painting is improved, his chances of winning overall are slim. Now as far as tournaments go - our records speak for themselves. We have all done well for years and yet this is the first time this is coming up. Interesting.

That being said though, we are a team. We will not deny this. Mike and I work together on painting to help keep each other motivated and to improve out techniques. We work to refine each other's lists. We all practice and play games together every week. We argue, we laugh, we debate. However, once it comes to the game day though - we are on our own. It's just like any normal club, except that we term it as a "Team" since Mike, Pete and I are the original founders of our AdeptiCon teams. We like "team" and we will not ever stop referring to us as a team. Heck, I wish we had a pit crew.

Kesher - as far as the three falcons is concerned, there are ways to deal with that. Most people play against it completely wrong. I'm not going to give you the tactics on how to deal with the army. That's for us to know and others to learn. As far as friends go, Pete took salamanders for years and players (even tournament organizers) would laugh at him because salamanders "suck". Yet, he would win 99% of his games (a lot in under 45 minutes) and players would mark him down on comp and sports. The discussion of a crutch only goes so far when talking about generlship.

As far as being "those guys", then so be it. We ran an experiment with three of us taking the same exact IG list to Chicago 2005. We received three very different comp and sportsmanship scores. Hell I got tanked by a drunk guy that was cheating like a mad man. After that final tournament test, we feel trying to appeal to everyone's tastes just isn't going to happen. Therefore, we just play what we want to play and of course what ever we have painted.

My favorite quote from the weekend was "We don't play like this" referring to my force and yet there was a drop pod force just as tough sitting across the table. My basic response was "You'r kidding, right?" Too many people hold themselves in too high regards as playing "fair" armies and I use the term "fair" loosely. At least you know from us that we will play what is considered to be tougher forces. And you won't get marked down in sportsmanship or comp because I really don't care what you bring.

Finally, fun is in the eye of the beholder - The players that are at the top 15 tables after round 2 typically have very strong lists. If a player has an army that would be in the top 5% of the toughest armies, then what is the difference between the top 1% and the top 5%. Really not much. The all gretchin force can be extremely lethal and I wish that Jason and I got to play with a different scenario. It would have been a great match up. I would rate it high as far as overall toughness. My most enjoyable game was against John Hermann with his 2 monoliths, almost all necron warriors and orb of resurrection army. It came down to the last dice roll of the game in the final round on table #3. It was a very tactical game with a lot of manuevering. We find the games like the one with John where we are pushing the limits to be the most fun.

Posted By jfrazell on 06/08/2007 7:05 AM

 

What exactly is an "enforcer" doing at a tournament?

When the judges aren’t looking (and sometimes if they are if they aren’t giving the right calls-sort of a message as it were) they high stick the opponent or body check into the wall. Why do you think Inquisitor Bob was there? Certainly not for his looks…

Are you saying then that you feel that your players in your team can't win without someone else going around and knocking off other good players?

See above.  That’s why Ed powerlifts. 40k IS a full contact sport you know…

Seriously-I think it’s a joking reference to the fact their guy probably paints as well as I do (sympathies dude) so he’s going there to play.

Guys like you are making these events into less entertaining and less cerebral versions of the WWE. Until we see someone take a folded chair and a cheese grater to someone's head....

Now that would be a tournament worth seeing! Hulk “Maneus Calgar” Hogan vs. Jake “Snakes on a Plane” Roberts in a death cage match. Where’s my popcorn?

ROTFLMAO - thank you very much.  That is exactly where the reference came from.  I'm buying Pete a big hockey stick tonight.  

Also, save me a seat - that would be a kewl match-up to watch. 

And really, you can't exactly blame anyone for bringing their A game and A list to a tournament. It is more the problem of the lists than the players.

I do not know if it is true but I heard someone was scored three zeroes in a row the first day for sportsmanship. If that is true GW should consider banning them from anymore GTs this year.

To say there is no problem with three Falcons is total bullsh*t.

- Greenie

First, let me apologize for calling someone a name that was childish of me.

 

Now, allow me to clarify since I sent my original post in late last night.

 

• Outside the game Pete was very cool and I have no problem with him on a personal level.

 

• I did not “only” tank Pete because of the comment he made to the Judge it just set the tone.

 

• I took nothing away because of his army comp in fact I was happy to see how this list played.

 

• I would have no problem with how the terrain was done in the game before mine if the craters could have been moved but they were static. Honestly it was a flaw in the bored and I should not think too much of this.

 

• I Tanked Pete for his overall Tone and attitude throughout the game. In addition to the way he carried himself and acted. Not a smile not a laugh not a funny comment came out of him it seemed he was only there to play and only to play.

 

• This event is supposed to be fun and I did not have fun at all during out game. You can be competitive and have your A game going and still have a great time with your opponent. Its all about people skills.

 

• 2 Oblit 2 quit guys you guys are legends in this game and it was great to watch some of your games and talk with you. You have some of the best players around and I picked up a ton of pointers.

 

• Pete Won Best General which means he kicked a lot of tail. Good for him however he did have the lowest sportsmanship score. To me that speaks volumes. That means there were 4 other people that did not have a fun game aginst him. Had he had higher scores he could have won the event regardless of his painting ability.

 

• Maybe your team could help him out with his in game people skills and he would finish stronger.

 

So uh, what exactly was in the 3 falcon army? What makes that force so deadly? ( I'd like to know the list so I can plan against it).

 

I don't know Pete, but he sounds like a good friend of mine that plays in the same style. It's not a personality flaw, he just gets super focused on what he's doing during a game and pretty much zones everything else out. On the other end of the spectrum, another bud of mine is quite animated during a match up and continually talks and laughs during its course.
What's funny is that in two back to back Seattle GT's they've been to, both have placed 2nd and 5th. The talker placed 2nd in the first and 5th in the second, then the focused guy took 5th in the first and 2nd in the next tourney. Both got good sportsmanship scores, so it seems to me it comes down to who you're playing as far as what you get on the soft scores. Some people just have thinner skins than others about certain things.
  What other factors were there besides the fact he was focused and discussed terrain issues??  Did he mock his opponents, haggle over every point of the game, or try to cheat?  It doesn't sound like he did.

Great now Pete got tanked because he's not a stand-up comic. To be honest I hate it when people talk to much during a game. I'm not interested in your family, your kids, or your new found paint technique. You can expect a lower score if you open your mouth to much during the game and I especially hate it when someone is condesending.

All of this back and forth proves one thing, subjective scoring has no place in competitive tournament play. My fun is not your fun and vice versa.

Unless he cheated, argued over every other rule question or called you names, I don't see why the hell you Z'd his comp score. I thought the game was supposed to be the entertainment, not the guy on the other end of the table. I hope karma catches up to you in a significant way.

While I wouldn't have zeroed anyones score just for placing other terrain over craters, I do consider that bad sportsmanship. The tables were designed with a certain amount of terrain and most of them were very light on terrain as is. 40k is more fun with a decent amount of terrain and reducing the terrain from little to minimal reduces the fun by making the game less tactical. I don't reduce sportsmanship scores for hard lists, but making the game less interesting in order to give yourself an advantage is WAAC and should get you dinged on sportsmanship.

But lets wait and see what the posted scores are. If he scored consistently low against five opponents than I would lean towards him needing to work on his Sportsmanship. If it's just two people marking him low that could be chipmunking. If 5 people rated him very low then I think he needs to have a little more fun in games. I wasn't doing well enough to play him so I couldn't say which it is.

Posted By Fatman on 06/08/2007 9:31 AM
While I wouldn't have zeroed anyones score just for placing other terrain over craters, I do consider that bad sportsmanship.

That's a stupid comment if you look at it from a realistic or wargaming POV. If you look at it from the dumbed-down GW POV, then I suppose it makes sense - after all, they see flat grassland as the absence of terrain, not as a variation of terrain.

But as it is, the entire table is terrain. So placing the hills anywhere on the table would get a zero? No, because that's not what you think of as terrain. I see that, I understand it, but it just seems really stupid to me.

Posted By Fatman on 06/08/2007 9:31 AM
40k is more fun with a decent amount of terrain and reducing the terrain from little to minimal reduces the fun by making the game less tactical. I don't reduce sportsmanship scores for hard lists, but making the game less interesting in order to give yourself an advantage is WAAC and should get you dinged on sportsmanship.

There's a contradiction here, can anyone spot it? Actually, there's several.

Which is why I'm beginning to agree with some of the people clamouring for no more subjective scoring.

Posted By Fatman on 06/08/2007 9:31 AM
But lets wait and see what the posted scores are. If he scored consistently low against five opponents than I would lean towards him needing to work on his Sportsmanship. If it's just two people marking him low that could be chipmunking. If 5 people rated him very low then I think he needs to have a little more fun in games. I wasn't doing well enough to play him so I couldn't say which it is.

There's a third alternative. He was a good sport and a nice guy but got dinged on all five Sportsmanship scores because he's quiet/tough player/concentrates on the game/shy/whatever.

It's possible to be slammed for something totally out of your control here. Personally, I don't like it when players yammer on all through the game. Say hello, shake hands, let's get down to business. You don't have to talk to me again unless it's about the game, and even then it should just be about this game and our armies, that's it.

Does that make me a bad sport? Should I mark their sportsmanship score down (or tank it) just because they're too noisy IMO? After all, they're deliberately making the game less tactical by diverting attention away from the game itself, right?

I have not discussed the game itself nor will I! That is a private matter. If you know me you already know all about it. If not when and if I run into you ask me I'll talk about it.

There are many factors the drove me to give him a zero. Those people that know me understand how much it pained me to do that to him because I do not believe in the soft scores. In fact this is the first it I have done this to someone. 

Also I was not the only one that did. He had the lowest Spots score in the tournament. What does that tell you?

Occam's Razor: If 5 people gave him a bad sportsmanship score simplest answer is that he's not fun to play against. I don't think it takes a genius to figure that out.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Stu-Rat you were not there so pls see your way out of this conversation. I am trying help you out here buddy.

- Greenie

Posted By Stu-Rat on 06/08/2007 10:10 AM

Posted By Fatman on 06/08/2007 9:31 AM
While I wouldn't have zeroed anyones score just for placing other terrain over craters, I do consider that bad sportsmanship.

That's a stupid comment if you look at it from a realistic or wargaming POV. If you look at it from the dumbed-down GW POV, then I suppose it makes sense - after all, they see flat grassland as the absence of terrain, not as a variation of terrain.

But as it is, the entire table is terrain. So placing the hills anywhere on the table would get a zero? No, because that's not what you think of as terrain. I see that, I understand it, but it just seems really stupid to me.

I have to completely disagree with you here.  And in particular with your choice to use the terms "stupid" and "dumbed-down" to describe an opposing POV. 

The game has an established standard for terrain- approximately 25% coverage.  If the tables are already light on terrain (as they have been reported to be) due to the organizers not having enough, anything a player does to take the game even further from the standard is not appropriate.  I wouldn't zero someone for that alone, but I've only ever experienced those sorts of terrain shennanigans from players who turned out to be unusually poor sports in the rest of the game.

Posted By Unseth on 06/08/2007 10:29 AM

I have not discussed the game itself nor will I! That is a private matter. If you know me you already know all about it. If not when and if I run into you ask me I'll talk about it.

Translation: I will not discuss this on a public forum but I will tell everyone I ever meet. And I will accuse someone of something, without telling the whole story (and changing events to suit my purposes).  

Posted By Unseth on 06/08/2007 10:29 AM

There are many factors the drove me to give him a zero. Those people that know me understand how much it pained me to do that to him because I do not believe in the soft scores. In fact this is the first it I have done this to someone. 

 That's fair enough. But that's not what you claimed originally. 

 

Posted By Unseth on 06/08/2007 10:29 AM

Also I was not the only one that did. He had the lowest Spots score in the tournament. What does that tell you?

That he no longer had acne?  Seriously though, it tells us that chances are he was a terrible sport. However, all we know (and not even for certain) so far, is that you have said:

1. You claim someone before you tanked his Sports for doing something legal, approved by a judge, and approved by that someone.

2. You adjusted your Sports for him based on a previous game.

3. You tanked his Sports on a single comment that had no bearing on the game whatsoever.

4. You later recant and state you tanked his Sports based on the whole game.

So what are we to believe? Your first story, which shows how bad a Sportsman you are, or your second, which shows that you might have behaved well during the game but have certainly behaved poorly since?

Posted By Ozymandias on 06/08/2007 10:35 AM
Occam's Razor: If 5 people gave him a bad sportsmanship score simplest answer is that he's not fun to play against. I don't think it takes a genius to figure that out.

Granted, the simplest answer is usually the right answer. But if we're actually using Occam's Razor here we have to use the whole principle, not just the pop-culture version. We don't know if all things were equal, do we? And that's the problem with subjective scoring.

 

We don't and neither do you. So please don't call someone stupid and bash them when you don't know what the whole story is. Unseth has stated he doesn't want to get into the game and that is fine. We have heard conflicting things, on the one hand from an opponent, and on the other from his teammates. I get the feeling I would not enjoy playing against him, but if you would, then that's great. But there is no need to call someone stupid.

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Yeah I agree that Stu-Rat should stop speculating. He is adding nothing of value here.

- Greenie

Well in Stu's defense, he's correct in that your either have to give the full story, or none of it. I'd suggest moderators delete the posts but keep the overall thread open as the overall Vegas GT topic is relevant.

GT related query. How was the mix of players? Tier One mostly marines/eldar what? (or did I miss that already). Any DA players and how did they do? And the Showgirls. Its Vegas tell us about the Showgirls!

Posted By Green Bloater on 06/08/2007 11:03 AM
Yeah I agree that Stu-Rat should stop speculating. He is adding nothing of value here.

- Greenie

Actually Stu-Rat is adding the exact points that need to be made.  The only reason why I'm not posting more is I need to actually get some work done today.  As a quick side note, it is quite easy to get the worst sportsman when two players tank someone to zeros.  More to come later. 

You say that because he supports what you are trying to sell. However he was not there and can only play the 'he said, she said' game. Really it adds nothing to the crux of the matter.

- Greenie

Its a valid opinion like anyone else on the thread (if polite and exempting Big O of course).

Holy crap guys. Over react much?

If you found Mr. 3 Falcons unfun to play against, or felt that he was abusing the terrain set up and gave him a zero on sportsmanship... THAT IS TOTALLY WITHIN YOUR PEROGATIVE - just as it is the other player's perogative to take as abusive a list as he or she pleases! They paid to play in the tournament the same as you. Demanding that they go out of their way to satisfy your definition of FUN is just assinine, and any calls for them to be booted from the GT circuit are clearly uncalled for!

On the other hand...

If you paid to attend a GT with a less than spectacularly painted army and have a tricked out army geared to do well in the Generalship category ONLY - I hate to say it - but is getting tanked on soft scores anything of a SURPRISE? Let's be honest here, but there's certain negative stigma attached to tight competitive builds and as seeing your opponent's army is usually part of the first impression, pulling additional terrain placement (or other pregame) shenanegins (while tactically a good move) is just going to increase the PERCEPTION that you're a cheese monkey.

Finally I'd like to add that the moniker of "Enforcer" is unfortunately inappropriate. Enforcers are there to make sure nobody lays out your star player or subjects members of your team to excessive roughing. They aren't supposed to INSTIGATE (as they get enough penalty minutes already without that) and are rarely iced if theres nothing going down... i.e. if all is going as it should... they aren't "Enforcing" squat.

You guys were all playing seperately, if your opponent was being unsporting or being a downright donkey orrifice, its not like he could watch your back and/or deliver them a crushing cross-check from across the hall.

Forgot to say How I did

Me IW 118 BP

Round 1: Slaughtered Ultras 20pts

Round 2: Slaughtered Sisters 20pts

Round 3: Got Slaughtered by Eldar opts

Round 4: Minor Victory 13pts

Round 5: Got Slaughtered by Nids

40 points in Sportsmanship

25 points for painting

Record 3-2-0.

For the most part had a good time and would go again.

Chipmunking is wrong period and I dont condone it at all.

TO exactly get a zero in sportsmanship from me you have to either have an illegal armylist or commit some blatant cheating to warrant a zero. Most of my games I score High to max on sportsmanship win or lose and like what Marc Parker says: its just a game of toy soldiers.

Now having an enforcer to bring to a tournament is nothing new and I dont see anything wrong with it. Its part of the game and we would all be intellectually dishonest with one another if we said we wouldnt try to support our friends.

I dont know what happened at the Vegas GT and I only asked questions on what happened there.
Finally my comment about banning comes from if someone is problematic and constantly making the games not fun plus is blatantly cheating throughout the tournament then there should be a consideration to ban and not just because he played the game fair and honest.

Posted By keezus on 06/08/2007 11:38 AM


You guys were all playing seperately, if your opponent was being unsporting or being a downright donkey orrifice, its not like he could watch your back and/or deliver them a crushing cross-check from across the hall.

You're just not thinking creatively Keezus.

Enforcer to his opponent.

"All right, I'm just going to move these three hundred grots"

pager buzzes (do they still have pagers?).  Star player buzzes. Opposing Player A is being annoying.

Enforcer

"sorry I need to catch a drink. Need anything while I'm at the bar?"

Enforcer dons appropriate hockey gear.

Enforcer goes to bar. As walks by Star player's table he nonchalantly checks the Opposing Player A into the stands. Continues on to the bar for a well deserved drink for himself and his opposing player (see, even the enforcer can always be the conscientious player). Brings drinks to table and his game contuinues. All is good.

See this is why Ed Maule never wins tournaments. He forgets to bring his table mate back a drink when he's off high sticking opponents.  Its just common courtesy Ed. A good rum and coke goes a long way to cover over short breaks...

Actually, Stu does have a very good point about subjective scoring.

I'm one of the shy guys in person with new people that is quiet and doesn't talk much. Just talk about the game. I also like playing by the rules and I tend to win alot.

Translation-I get tanked on sports and comp most of the time. It's almost to the point of me not wanting to play any more because of that.

And Stu does have a very good point about the OP changing his story after being called on it when badmouthing someone.

Posted By jfrazell on 06/08/2007 11:47 AM

See this is why Ed Maule never wins tournaments. He forgets to bring his table mate back a drink when he's off high sticking opponents.  Its just common courtesy Ed. A good rum and coke goes a long way to cover over short breaks...

Haha.  Best drinks are the alcoholic kind.  Too bad smaller tournaments usually frown on the "bring-in" coolers.  Off topic:  Anyone else not surprised about Ottawa getting PWNED by the Ducks?  Ottawa always gives up when the crap hits the fan.

Back on topic... I'm not really one to debate the "correctness" of comp scoring.  I personally like it, but I come from a small tournament / casual environement where comp scoring reduces the chance of a player "combo-pwning" some kid... but is a fact that as long as comp scoring exists, unscrupulous players will hand out undeservedly low soft scores.

So lemme just bash on your strawman there for a bit, Stu.

The whole board is terrain? By your logic, he should be able to place the hill anywhere, right? So would you be ok with someone putting a hill on top of a ruin, so its suspended in mid air like some floating mass? Or put a water feature suspended over some fences? Hey, lets just stack all the terrain in a big pile, sounds like fun doesn't it.

There's just some things one shouldn't do when placing terrain, or atleast should be discussed with your opponent before hand (which that act alone is the cornerstone of good sportsmanship).

Posted By Stu-Rat on 06/08/2007 10:52 AM

Posted By Unseth on 06/08/2007 10:29 AM

There are many factors the drove me to give him a zero. Those people that know me understand how much it pained me to do that to him because I do not believe in the soft scores. In fact this is the first it I have done this to someone. 

 That's fair enough. But that's not what you claimed originally. 

 

I can vouch for Unseth on this point.

I started to give people the scores that they deserved, and he and his friends gave me so much static over it, that I just was not worth it. I then started to give everyone a max score whether they deserved it or not.

In round 5 I ended up playing on table #2. I wish I had a shot at Pete, I wonder how I would have done. Since the only way I was going to win best general was to take him down.



I am the same way. I work nights, and at most RTTs I am a zombie, so my sports suffers.

Posted By jfrazell on 06/08/2007 11:12 AM
GT related query. How was the mix of players? Tier One mostly marines/eldar what? (or did I miss that already). Any DA players and how did they do? And the Showgirls. Its Vegas tell us about the Showgirls!

There were a lot of Marines/Eldar at the top tables. A few necrons, and a couple of rare armies.

In round 5 on table #2 I fought against Dark Eldar. There was also an Ellisian Drop troop army hanging round the top tables. But for the most part the Orks, IG and Demonhunters were at the bottom.

And as far as the showgirls,  what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.

Does anyone have the list of the 40K results yet? 

I found the Fantasy rankings on the Warhammer Forum, but no 40K rankings. 

There was some problems with the scores for 40k, so they are being corrected.

- Greenie

Unseath so let me get this straight, your opponent agrees to your request for terrian placement, kicks your ass and you zero him for sportsmanship?  Did I get it correct Unseth? 

I hope we are able to determine who you are so people can be warned about your past behaviour at future events.

Maybe you really shouldn't be playing at a GT.

Posted By Tau-Cent on 06/09/2007 8:12 AM

Unseath so let me get this straight, your opponent agrees to your request for terrian placement, kicks your ass and you zero him for sportsmanship?  Did I get it correct Unseth? 

I hope we are able to determine who you are so people can be warned about your past behaviour at future events.

Maybe you really shouldn't be playing at a GT.

Not correct and I have moved on from this.

Hmmm..  I'm glad I wasn't able to go to the Vegas GT.  From all the comments on this thread, it sounds like there was plenty of non-fun to be had.  My sympathies for anyone who paid good money to get there and then had to play against "unfortunate" lists brought for all the wrong reasons and players with "unfortunate" attitudes.

Everyone from my gaming groups that went had a blast, and said nothing but good things about it.

And what do you mean by "unfortunate" lists being brought for all the wrong reasons? Do mean good lists brought to a tournament to win (as that is the purpose of a tournament)? Or some of the wackier lists like my buddies all grot army?

I wasn't there Reecius, so I won't make specific comments about anyone.  In fact I don't even know if you guys are the ones everyone seems to have a problem with although from your post it seems like you are a bit defensive about it.  But like I said, based on the comments in this thread it sounded like there was plenty of non-fun to go around.  If you and your buddies had fun, that is great but others obviously didn't.  I sympathize with those who paid a lot of money to get there and then had a bad time because of a few people from a certain area.

I'm sure you are a fairly intelligent person and can figure out what an unfortunate list probably means.  And as for all the wrong reasons...  well Tournies mean different things to different people.   Winning is the point of competition, but in a social game with toy soldiers, there are also additional aspects desired by all.  If I have to explain the idea to you further than that, then I am not going to waste my time...

As for an all Grot army- I would love to play against that!  Sounds so funny!

Maybe you're new to GTs, but there's almost always some drama afterwards.  It doesn't me there was no fun to be had or whatever it is you're saying. 

Now IMO, a possible disturbing trend is players calling out opponents on message boards by name after the fact.  If you have a problem with an opponent, you resolve it during the game and then leave it at the tournament.  In this case, the guy may have richly deserved a zero...I don't know and I wasn't there.  But I dunno what calling him out here will do except make you look like a girl. 

This kind of B.S. oughta get you retroactively zeroed in sportsmanship.

Posted By gorgon on 06/11/2007 10:38 AM

  But I dunno what calling him out here will do except make you look like a girl. 

 

damn i spent a lot of money on trip to thailand to look like a girl and i had to do is say sparky is a dirty cheater.

Every event/GT will have one or 2 players that are not going to be fun to play, or bring a list that is way over the top, with or without comp.

Everyone had a lot of fun at the LVGT. There were a lot of people playing, and one or 2 people were not going to ruin it for everyone else.

Just because a couple of people had problems in no way means that it was not a great event.

Hey Beast,
I wasnt calling you out at all, i was just curious. I have two groups of gamer buddies, those who play to win and those who play for fun, i was just trying to figure out what you meant. I didnt go to the GT either so i dont know how it was. But my friends who went from both camps said they had a blast and cant wait to go back.

I understand both mentalities, but i have to say that at a GT, I at least would go expecting to play the toughest lists and to win. But i know some people go to just meet new gamers and have fun in Vegas which is fine too. I just dont think its fair to say that one or the other mentality is unfair or motivated by the wrong reasons.

And my buddies all Grot army is actually pretty good, surprisingly. A maxed out army will beat it the majority of the time, but against your average army it actually isnt that bad. From what i understand he got stuck on the lava tables every game which have a large amount of difficult terrain and so he spent the whole game stuck in it and not moving anywhere.

Those lava tables look abysmally thin on terrain.  The phrase parking lot comes to mind. An assault army would have been doomed on them.

Blackmoor ...Seconded.

I think to many people expect their opponent to provide them with entertainment. While there are a number of opponents that are certainly entertaining ..not everyone is.The only person that can make you have a bad time at an event that involves moving toy soliders .. is youself.

The fact is you WILL eventually play someone you would rather not play ( if not at this GT then at some other event  The question is how do you react  ... 1. let it ruin the weekend and blame him for your aweful time. or 2. Remember your playing and moving toy soliders instead of .. oh I don't know working, doing honey dos, fighting traffic or one of the other countless horrible work like things you could be doing. Control what you can control ..take responsiblity for your actions and play .. and suddenly what other people bring or how other people act becomes almost irrelevant.   I'm going to have a good time regardless. 

Hats off to Dave and company .. While the GT events are still a ways away from perfect .. ( and believe me they know it) ... the LVGT was a huge step forward towards making these events ... Grand again... They are certainly aware of the issues and are committed to listening to the feedback and resolving the problems. Things like the lava tables, other terrain issues, scenarios, software glitches will be addressed and change .. it just won't change overnight .. as these things take budgets and time.

The amount of staff and the prize support was a huge step in the right direction and well watching people win the framed artwork ..was making me want to sign up for the next one.

The amount of staff and the prize support was a huge step in the right direction and well watching people win the framed artwork ..was making me want to sign up for the next one.

Yeah - but you won't sign up knowing that we are coming to town.  I can sense the shakin' in your boots. 

It was a good event overall. That someone possibly scored three zeroes in a row is more of an oddity rather than a downer on the event. It is sad to know people will encourage another to play a list that intentionally is so stigmatized for their own gain. My opponents were fun to play and the event was well run overall.

- G

I got nothing left to prove ...you and Mike are lucky you dodged Darrian and Blackmoor.... at the LVGT.

*smack talk on*
<smack talk="" on=""></smack>
Besides I got a standing offer for you and the rest of your crew .. bring that crap chaos list that mike and you have managed to squeeze two years worth of playing out of, tell Pete to bring that mech eldar 3 falcon list everyone is crying about and that has been overplayed for the past 3 years .. .. You can even determine the order of slaughter... I'll smoke all three of you or buy steak dinners... heck I might even get Chua and Chris to come down for some scrub games .. I normally let them handle my light work anyways. Could even have the makings of a 3 on 3 challenge!! That would give you boys a chance at least..and if you bring along a fourth like Chester .. I'm sure I can find someone .
<smack talk="" off=""></smack>

*smack talk off*

Yeah, i guess the lava tables were all difficult terrain with not LOS blocking. The poor grots dies like....grots.

muwhe, that was some genius smack talk!

And i can second that Darrian takes no prisoners, nor blackmoor. Those guys are both really good players.

@Muwhe,
I am not sure who was lucky in the dodging. I was hoping to play Greg or Peter but I had a rather unfortunate loss to a Blood Angel player derail any possible meeting for me at the Vegas GT. I played one of Gregs group at the Gladiator and it was my only loss of Adepticon (Gladiator or Championships), he was playing a Chaos army very similiar to Greg's and had an amazingly hot dice rolling game, so I really wanted to try my luck again against that list. Peter's list was brutal but I think my army could have taken it. Unfortunately, my loss to a random Blood Angel army prevented me from finding out.
I finished one of my games early and watched Greg play, I can see why so many people think he is the best 40K player around. He simply plays flawlessly. What impressed me the most is how he does so well with an army that is in no way over the top. After my loss at Adepticon, I experimented with his list back home and was not impressed with it. So, it is probably the player more than the list.

@Greenbloater,
You were at the LVGT? You should have introduced yourself. What army were you playing? One of the things I hate about the internet is that no one uses their real name, so at events you never know who is who.

Hopefully, I will get to meet up with you guys at the Baltimore GT.

Darrian

Darrian

Please note that I claim nothing about being the best player and to do so in seriousness or jest couldn't be further from the truth.  There are too many great players across the US and the UK/Europe to even begin to name them.  For all you Canadians - I'm counting Canada as part of the US since it's basically the 51st state. 

Chester having hot dice?!!  What? -  We always have to hear whining about how bad his dice are.

I would smack talk with Muwhe, but I have a better chance at successfully coming out on top in a marathon that winning a war of words.   

Finally, there is definitely a split between people that "play for fun" and people that work to max out their list.  Our group leans towards the camp of maxing out the list (some more than others) and we have no qualms about it.  I personally enjoy playing against a lot of the top tier players and tough lists that are typically in the running for overall from round 3 and on.  Things can be a little tense at times on both sides of the table, but I would not trade that competitive spirit for anything.  It is terribly fun, tactically challenging and very enjoyable to match wits with any of the great players.

Yeah I was at LVGT. My Space Marines got rolled twice by other Space Marines. At least one of those games was very close. All my games were fun. It was a great event and I would do it again even if I knew I would fare the same. I will be at Baltimore this November. It was nice to Jason's purple Space Marines again!

- G

I love playing against the best players. You never know how good you are until play them.

I would have like to have played Greg, but in game #4 he was just above me, and in game #5 he was right below me. I would have loved to get the measure of him since Centurian99 has a wager in the Adepticon TT, I want to know how we are looking.

I am glad that a lot of you will be making the trip out to Baltimore. I was thinking about going, and now I think I will do it.

Posted By muwhe on 06/11/2007 3:06 PM

*smack talk on*
<smack on="" talk=""></smack>
Besides I got a standing offer for you and the rest of your crew .. bring that crap chaos list that mike and you have managed to squeeze two years worth of playing out of, tell Pete to bring that mech eldar 3 falcon list everyone is crying about and that has been overplayed for the past 3 years .. .. You can even determine the order of slaughter... I'll smoke all three of you or buy steak dinners... heck I might even get Chua and Chris to come down for some scrub games .. I normally let them handle my light work anyways. Could even have the makings of a 3 on 3 challenge!! That would give you boys a chance at least..and if you bring along a fourth like Chester .. I'm sure I can find someone .
<smack talk="" off=""></smack>

*smack talk off*

Hot damn Hank - you haven't even paid up on the last steak dinner that you owe me.  Your credit worthiness is not looking that good.

Tsk .. Tsk .. Sparky .... Lies ..

I've offered you that steak but you won't accept it do to some honor code about us being derailed ...and now you throw it back in my face?  The Gauntlet has been thrown down.... it's up to you and the rest of your boys to pick it up.   Are you guys holding out for a handicap? I'm a sporting man but I doubt Chua has played a game since 3rd edition, Chris having serious codex reactions has sold the majority of his army selection and well .. my last game of 40k was back at Adepticon .. shortly after whipping you and mike the last time. Time to take this offline and setup the details .. and we will need to find an impartial judge for the 4-way challenge.   Not to mention a date, time and venue.

Course this will be all for fun ...

 

 

I'll bring the lawn chairs...lol.

Capt K

Chester, Pete, Mike and I are in.  Grab Chua, Chris and your 4th, pack your bags and jump in the car.  It's your turn to travel.  I have enough accommodations for everyone at my place (3 beds and a couch).  None of this sleeping on the floor and no kids running around (excluding all of us of course).  Plus I have four tables at my place.

Clash of the Midwest Titans

Buy your tickets now. 

Greg,

Im betting on one of the teams from Georgia getting more battle points than either of you..... Oh, and we wont even fill in our own sportsmanship scores either......




Clay

Georgiwhat?  What country are you talking about?  Didn't us yanks beat you guys into submission over 125 years ago.  Don't tell me the south is trying to rise up again. 

@DaveTaylor - so when are the results gonna be updated on the GW website.    Let the chanting begin.  "We want Results!  We want Results!"

"I'll bring the lawn chairs...lol."

Now I see where he gets it from.

- G

Posted By Inquisitor_Malice on 06/12/2007 11:13 AM
@DaveTaylor - so when are the results gonna be updated on the GW website.    Let the chanting begin.  "We want Results!  We want Results!"

He said that they would have them up by the end of the week.

I really want to know where I landed.

We faced a team from Georgia at Adepticon. No FN Mournival. They were quite good. My team only got a win and a draw against them.

Yes, there are usually 8 of us, so 2 teams, you played the Nid team. My team played Sparks and the gang in round 4 again, that makes 2 years in a row we have faced Sparks and the boys in round 4 of Adepticon.

Its getting to be some sort of scheduling habit of the organizers.


Clay

The teams that have won the last two years don't know how easy they had it not having to play either one of our teams.

Posted By Mannahnin on 06/12/2007 12:54 PM
We faced a team from Georgia at Adepticon. No FN Mournival. They were quite good. My team only got a win and a draw against them.

Thanks for the compliment. We also found that you and your team were not only great players but also superb sports as well - not to mention the great pink CSM's!

Shawn

Here they be:
http://gt.us.games-workshop.com/2007/vegas_coverage/default.htm

So sportsmanship is the deciding factor for who wins the overall in the singles GT but not the doubles event?

Posted By blood angel on 06/14/2007 10:25 PM
So sportsmanship is the deciding factor for who wins the overall in the singles GT but not the doubles event?

 Battle should be the tie breaker and especially for Overall. Sportsmanship tie breaker should be on favorite opponent votes and not on Painting. 

Posted By blood angel on 06/14/2007 10:25 PM
So sportsmanship is the deciding factor for who wins the overall in the singles GT but not the doubles event?

   Weird scoring with the GTs and I am still kinda fresh from Atlanta too.

Posted By Darkness on 06/14/2007 11:49 PM

Posted By blood angel on 06/14/2007 10:25 PM
So sportsmanship is the deciding factor for who wins the overall in the singles GT but not the doubles event?

 Battle should be the tie breaker and especially for Overall. Sportsmanship tie breaker should be on favorite opponent votes and not on Painting. 

I completely agree.  It just amazes me how this scoring system is even considered reasonable. It's not even consistent between events apparently  Need to change the name of the events from the Grand Tournaments to the Grand Pageants.

Posted By blood angel on 06/14/2007 10:25 PM
So sportsmanship is the deciding factor for who wins the overall in the singles GT but not the doubles event?

Sportsmanship has always been the deciding factor of who wins a GT.


And now on to the number crunching...

Well, it looks like if you want to do well at a GT, you need to come with a well painted army. There are the paint score break downs (more or less)

There were:
10 Scores of 10
29 Scores of 15
45 Scores of 20
31 Scores of 25
18 Scores of 30
11 Scores of 35
2  Scores of 40

Now look at the grouping of scores. Of the top 9, only one person got below a 30 in painting (go me!).

Now look at the armies that scored 35. Of those 11, only 5 were outside the top 20, and the top 4 slots all scored 35.

In fact, of the top 20, they averaged a painting score of 30.

Why is this? It might have to do with the fact that the most hard core tournament players have excellently painted armies because they know what it takes to win.

Killing your opponents nicely with a well painted army.

Simply saying 'this is how it's always been done' doesn't really cut the mustard. The over all outcome should be determined by winning games not being lucky enough to avoid a douche who will ding your sports because you beat him. And the real point of the post was to point out the inconsistency between the two events. There has to be a way to break ties and really I suppose any way is as good as another. IMHO it should be battle points.

And you are right, show up with a pro-painted army and you have a better chance of winning the overall because you are essentially getting a two free (not counting what you spent on the army) Massacres before the tournament even starts.

48% subjective scores.

Posted By blood angel on 06/15/2007 1:08 AM
Simply saying 'this is how it's always been done' doesn't really cut the mustard. The over all outcome should be determined by winning games not being lucky enough to avoid a douche who will ding your sports because you beat him. And the real point of the post was to point out the inconsistency between the two events. There has to be a way to break ties and really I suppose any way is as good as another. IMHO it should be battle points.

That is your opinion, and a lot of people share it. I don’t.

 
Well, if you don’t like the tradition argument, then here is why they have the tradition…

It has to do with what GW wants to reward, and what their priorities are. They believe that it is better to be a nice guy, and a fun opponent, than the one who can crush his opponents the best.

That is why they always reward sportsmanship over battle points (as a tie breaker).

And I agree with them. I rather see the nice guy who was a lot of fun to play get overall before the guy with 9 oblits, or the 3 falcons. 

And they are consistent in their GT scoring. Since there have been only one GT so far, it was very consistent with all of the other GTs. You can't compare it to the Friday Team Tournament, that was just a bit of throw away fun, or a Gamesday 1500 point,  3 game RTT.

I'm not sure you are reading my posts. I clearly stated that battle points being the deciding factor was my opinion. I didn't need for you to restate to me what I already said. I also said that using sportsmanship was a good as choice as any but there is no reason it shouldn't be consistent with ALL GW sponsored events. I know exactly what GW wants to enforce and reward at their events.

For a system to be taken seriously for the long term it needs to have integrity. High amounts of subjective scores and inconsistency is no way to build that integrity.

 

 

 

You mean like ballroom dancing and many olympic events? You mean tournaments where dice-pure blinding random chance, is the great determiner of play and you're worried about subjective scores?

I would posit if you don't like it, don't go.

Grand Pageants! That was a good one! I would sig it, but I don't sigs expect my own of course.

- G

actualy Greg is probaly glad sportsmanship decided the tournament. he would have been upset if he ruined Mike's chance to get 2007 circiut win. it was a shame they got hosed in the uk this year

The season is not even half way over. Don't count yer chickens too early.

- G

Congratulations Mike!!

I wondered how long it'd take somebody to knock me out of the lead.  I'm not planning any GT's this year so I don't suppose I'll be catching back up.  Necronomicon will be my lat event this year most likely.  Although if you let me know which events you will be attending I'll try to adjust my schedule...

I'm not sure Hank can back up HIS talk, but I'll be happy to let you buy me steak after I whip you.

Don’t worry <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Troy</st1:place></st1:city> .. I got plenty to go around … after I get done with this light work vs the <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Ohio</st1:place></st1:state> boys… I think I can find time to see who is the real Adepticon Gladiator Champion…

I killed a falcon with a lascannon on the first try...  I win it all!

Hank, you have to leave the chicks in hot pants and wet t-shirts out odf the room until after the gaming next time.  Are you capable of winning without the distractions?

 

Didn't you lose that game Kesher?

Ozymandias, King of Kings

I think my problem with the Tournament Circut is that instead of using 4 different half painited armies, I should use just one well painted army.

Went 3/1/1 with my Sisters
Drew vs Eldar
Minor Win vs Eldar
Minor Loss vs Dark Eldar
Massacre vs Night Lords
Massacre vs Dark Eldar
70 Battle Points

Had a lot of fun, felt weird giving out 48 Sports points, yet receiving 34 in return. Got 20 painting... puts me square in 47th!
S'Okay for my first GT evar. Will be back with a better painted army next time. Guess I have to work on my people skills in telling a person that what they're doing is from 3rd Ed or the Trial Assault/Vehicle Rules as well.

Still, will definitely be back.

So you were the Sisters player!

That is kind of odd though, Sisters seem to be popular in the So. Cal area, and only you showed up with them. Maybe they thought that they could not compete at the top levels.

You fought a lot of Eldar.

Sportsmanship is an odd thing. I see everyone giving out 10s left and right. IMO, for a 10, it should be the BEST GAME EVER! When the average game is a 6, I thought I would see a lot of 6s and some 8s, but everyone scored real high. Maybe it was the GT atmosphere...and they were getting a bunch of good games. In hindsight, I did score my opponents a lot higher than I normally do.

Yeah sportsmanship is weird and I agree a ten should only be given out for the best games. All it takes is one zero to skew your overall score quite a bit.

At StJohns - 3-1-1 is very good... especially against all those eldar.

- G

Posted By ledfoot on 06/13/2007 12:43 PM

Posted By Mannahnin on 06/12/2007 12:54 PM
We faced a team from Georgia at Adepticon. No FN Mournival. They were quite good. My team only got a win and a draw against them.

Thanks for the compliment. We also found that you and your team were not only great players but also superb sports as well - not to mention the great pink CSM's!

Shawn

Hey, way to be super-nice and not call me on my arrogance.

You guys were super to play.  I was the other guy (Fallen Angels) on the table with the Strawberry Shortcake marines.  That was a great game, and a well-played Draw.    I did hear how close the Win vs Draw was on the other table too.  Less than an inch decided it, as I hear.  Can't get much closer than that!

Are you guys headed to any other big tournaments this year?  I'm probably going to Baltimore, though I may play on the square-based side. 

CJ isn't part of the Wrecking Crew.

The 'man-boy-genius' is cool with me, now that the 'cron stuff has hit the store.

Is there an official standardized scoring all GT/GDs go by?  If so, I handn't seen it around, but it would be nice to know.

A friend of mine noticed one of the paint judges scoring more swiftly as they approached the lower tables.  Although it is true that the top players will bring solid brushwork to the table, often times the best painters are not the best generals.