Hey everyone. I just wanted to check in with you guys and see who might be playing in the Vegas GT. I will be there with some friends, and I am always looking to meet Dakka members in my travels.

I'll be there.

I believe I will be there. Very excited to feel good about bringing a Tau army to a tournament again!

While the ToS format fails at finding a 'true champion', one thing it does is allows players to feel good about bringing every army, as basically you're just competing against the other players in the tournament using the same codex.

In fact, if they just took out the overall champion award and left it as just equal awards for every race I think the tournament would be much better received overall (despite not being the hardcore 'finals' event many people want).

I'll be there for the 40k events with my daemons.

My disappointment is pulling out at the last minute for personal reasons. The thing I was most looking forward to was meeting some of the online people to put faces to names... and maybe to see if some personalities match with their online personas.

Hopefuly I'll still get that chance in Virginia in August!

I'll be there, should be a fun time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just a thought, would anyone be interested in a Dakka meet-up at ToS? This seems like as good a thread as any to set it up.

What date is it?

I won't be there. I've got a couple other events I'm flying to this year and the format just didn't appeal to me. However I agree w/Yak that if they'd just take out the "Best Overall" and equally reward ever codex winner it would have gone over better. There were a lot of issues with the format.

I still have hotel rooms reserved and am planning on attending, but work is forcing me to hold on plane ticket (While prices spiral) until closer to the last minute. Intending to go.

MVBrandt wrote:I still have hotel rooms reserved and am planning on attending, but work is forcing me to hold on plane ticket (While prices spiral) until closer to the last minute. Intending to go.

Fly Southwest, dude. Your cancellation turns back into a one-year credit, rather than being lost in the aether forever more.

Wow, plane tickets are dropping like a brick. I might be able to make it out to the Bay Area Open afterall...

Janthkin wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:I still have hotel rooms reserved and am planning on attending, but work is forcing me to hold on plane ticket (While prices spiral) until closer to the last minute. Intending to go.

Fly Southwest, dude. Your cancellation turns back into a one-year credit, rather than being lost in the aether forever more.

Good advice. I'm in the same spot as MVB. Like to go, but work has me strapped down pretty hard, and if we sign the lease soon on the new store, it's going to be a month of 16 hour days to get it open on schedule. If it all gets delayed, I might just hop a flight to Vegas at the last minute. Hotel room reserved all ready. My chance of going is pretty damn small though.

Hulksmash wrote:Wow, plane tickets are dropping like a brick. I might be able to make it out to the Bay Area Open afterall...

My flight out on SW just jumped up $40 between yesterday and today. :(

Crappy Mann But I wasn't looking at flights to Vegas. Sorry I was actually looking at flights to DC and San Fran. Both of which have dropped. The San Fran one is actually down almost $200 from what it was 2 months ago.

Nice!

Hulk, you probably know this but for flights to DC you could look at Dulles (the farthest out), Reagan (right in the middle of DC, on the metro line), and BWI (between DC and Baltimore). Lots of options means cheaper prices

@RiTides

I do know it but thank you for the info just in case I'm actually looking at Regan so we don't have to rent a car until Sunday to drive and see family after the Nova Open ends It's got a direct shuttle to the hotel the event is at.

Hopefully you can make the BAO, Brad! You can always crash at my pad to save a few bucks.

I'll be at the throne of skulls! Looking forward to it. Not taking the event too seriously, but two for one drinks and Vegas sound like a lot of fun!

You need to have an invitation to play in ToS right? I was reading on GW's site that next year they are gonna change it so that all the golden ticket winners don't have to pay to get in but they are gonna let non GT winners pay to play. Just want to confirm that this year it is only GT winners.

You need an invitation to play at this one (Vegas 2011).

Hulksmash wrote:@RiTides

I do know it but thank you for the info just in case I'm actually looking at Regan so we don't have to rent a car until Sunday to drive and see family after the Nova Open ends It's got a direct shuttle to the hotel the event is at.

We usually end up flying out of Reagan, too, it has some pretty sweet deals! A pain to get to for us, but sometimes worth it... and definitely handy if you don't have / want to rent a car for a few days

I'll be there for 40k. I'm a local (at least until mid-July when I move to Cali) and the wifey and I are making a "staycation" of it. We are staying across the street at the Excalibur on Saturday night so we can do the obligatory Tournament of Kings drunken feasting. Going to have a good time, my wife has agreed to provide table side drink service for me and my opponents during the tourney. Looking forward to seeing some guys from Cali that I met at Ironman and meeting more of you all.

Is there a secret Dakka handshake or bird call I should know?

yakface wrote:
I believe I will be there. Very excited to feel good about bringing a Tau army to a tournament again!

While the ToS format fails at finding a 'true champion', one thing it does is allows players to feel good about bringing every army, as basically you're just competing against the other players in the tournament using the same codex.

In fact, if they just took out the overall champion award and left it as just equal awards for every race I think the tournament would be much better received overall (despite not being the hardcore 'finals' event many people want).

When we ran the format in Vegas for both 40k and Fantasy events the overall winner was also the only person to win all of their games.

The ToS pattern tournaments are held at the 1500 pts level, right?
Same as in Germany. The missions are boring and the pt level favors some armies over others.
Good luck, guys!

I'll be dropping by, I only live 20 minutes away.

I will be there... Just not sure if I will be able to leave the Gambling gaming tables to go to the 40K Gaming tables!

Anglacon wrote:I will be there... Just not sure if I will be able to leave the Gambling gaming tables to go to the 40K Gaming tables!

Gaming vs. gambling. Lol.

I will also be there, playing some 40k, just look for the fat guy with a receding hairline...or is that all of us?

I don't have a receeding hariline.....

But I will be playing fantasy. Look for the fat guy with the bleeched hair playing in a black bowling shirt with a pink flamingo on the back.

I will be there, with a pink army of some description, either Chaos or Necrons. I'll either be in my Cold Steel Merc shirt or ETC England shirt, and I am neither fat nor balding

I live in Vegas so I plan on playing in the 40K tournament.

I wonder how many total will be there? Seems like quite a few ticket holders are not going unless they live close by.

I'll be the guy in the KC Chiefs jersey on Saturday, say howdy if your a Dakkanaut.

Well, work sucks. I'll be in TX for work instead of Vegas for fun times.


Have fun ya'll.

I know what ya mean MVB. I'm going to be in Joplin instead of Wargamescon

Stupid work.....

You better not work out of the NOVA

You're one of my favorite "I see you every once in a while on the tourney circuit" buddies.


Let's make it real questionable with a big ole <3

Awwwwww, you says the sweetest things!

Not skipping on that one buddy. It was something that was brought up when I was hired that I was already committed () to being out of the state at the end of August. Plane tickets, hotel, rental car, and grandparents have already been lined up. My granny would kill me if I bailed on my trip out that way

Well pewp, there's two guys I wanted to meet that aren't coming.

Sounds like you also should bring your KC jersey to the NOVA.


I actually was really excited to go to this; lots of good people indubitably there, good competition by default, and whether you love or hate the system it's still nice that GW is putting something on. Plus, it seems or at least feels like Ed's put a lot of work into running it.

We're all missing the important question of the event. What club are we all hitting Saturday night

I was going to stay on the Strip for some extra partying but decided to stay at home since Sunday morning my boys want to do something for Father's Day before I head back to the tourney.

@MVBrandt: NOVA 2012 is already on my calendar, this year is a no go as I will already need to be 3 places at once at the end of August.

Is anyone from washington state going to be there?

Mayeb if i was 21 I'd consider going. But flying to Vegas just to play in a dumb 40k and then sit in the hotel all night doesn't sound fun to me.

yermom wrote:Mayeb if i was 21 I'd consider going. But flying to Vegas just to play in a dumb 40k and then sit in the hotel all night doesn't sound fun to me.

When you hit 21, I want to be involved in your vegas experience.

Only 2 more years right?

skrewpa wrote:You need to have an invitation to play in ToS right? I was reading on GW's site that next year they are gonna change it so that all the golden ticket winners don't have to pay to get in but they are gonna let non GT winners pay to play. Just want to confirm that this year it is only GT winners.

This year they are allowing anyone in who knows a ticket winner.

doc dragon wrote:

skrewpa wrote:You need to have an invitation to play in ToS right? I was reading on GW's site that next year they are gonna change it so that all the golden ticket winners don't have to pay to get in but they are gonna let non GT winners pay to play. Just want to confirm that this year it is only GT winners.

This year they are allowing anyone in who knows a ticket winner.

May as well change that to that they are letting in anyone really, seeing as you were kind enough to post a certain email address on public message boards.

@Yermon
Two of the guys going with us are 19, you could have hung out with them. And honestly, you don't need to be 21 to have a good time in Vegas. It is more fun that way, but I used to go every year starting at 18 and still had a blast. If you are with fun people, just walking the strip and having a laugh is a good time. That on top of playing 40K is a good trip to me!

Maybe next year.

Anyone who wants to say hi, I look like the silly guy pointing at his trophy, here:



If you see a few guys wearing t-shirts which read Cold Steel Mercs, I'm the one who's got a ponytail, and is MUCH shorter than the others, only being six feet tall.

sharkticon wrote:

doc dragon wrote:

skrewpa wrote:You need to have an invitation to play in ToS right? I was reading on GW's site that next year they are gonna change it so that all the golden ticket winners don't have to pay to get in but they are gonna let non GT winners pay to play. Just want to confirm that this year it is only GT winners.

This year they are allowing anyone in who knows a ticket winner.

May as well change that to that they are letting in anyone really, seeing as you were kind enough to post a certain email address on public message boards.

Seriously?

I invited Yakface, but someone actually posted the address publicly?

If you see a few guys wearing t-shirts which read Cold Steel Mercs, I'm the one who's got a ponytail, and is MUCH shorter than the others, only being six feet tall.

Yeah, every club needs a short person and we decided it would be Mannahnin.

I'm going for some excellent games of 40K and socialising with some very good 40k players. Losing money at cards might feature as well...

I think you mean small person. Jamie's around the same height, maybe a little shorter, but he's built like a Vermont lumberjack. I'm the skinny elf of the party.

We need coverage pics!

I have too much going on to have been able to make it this time, but will be putting next year's on my calendar for sure.

Have fun!

Tironum wrote:We need coverage pics!

Same can be said regarding Mechanicon 2010.

First day is over, all in all it was a pretty damn good day. The food that is being served is great, and the atmosphere is fantastic.

It's all over! George Mason won Best Overall with Blood Angels. Other people will have to update who won LoTR and Fantasy, I saw them but don't remember names. I won Best Daemons in 40k, my new buddy Mannahnin got Best CSM, a good friend of mine John went 5-0 with GK to get that award but didn't get the best overall after the favorite army votes came in. All in all it was great, beautiful armies, awesome opponents, and a long list of new friends and memories.

I've got a ton of pics, I'll put them up tomorrow. Thanks to all my opponents and everyone who came out for it.

They opened up the field up? I wish I knew about that so I could have driven up.

It was a good event, they had what was called a fire side chat at the end, where you could ask them some questions, Not very informative ,half of them they flat out replied I cant answer that, and the other half were that they had big things in the pipe line and to just wait. I asked why it too 3 years for a FAQ to come out to fix and bring up to date all the old codex armies that have not been redone ie dark angels and Templars, reply, well it takes it takes time to translate the rules into all the different languages. He also said that my question sounded like a complaint, and he didn't want to get into it.

All in all the event was fun, lots of good players, and food. Bad side the terrain though pretty, was not very well set up and sparse.

7/10

Yea, the tables pissed me off, crap tables but good event. I went 2-2-1, struggled on giant hills all weekend.

I played in the 40k tournament this weekend with tyranids, so I know very little about the fantasy/lotr scene but this is my perspective on the tournament.

The use of all citadel terrain I thought was a good idea. The use of the Citadel boards was good as well in my opinion, (both the terrain and boards were painted very well) however, placeable terrain was sparse in comparison to what I would think would be the norm for most of the games we as players like to play. The reasoning was that the hill was supposed to be technically cover (6+) as described by the rules packet that was handed out. Thus, it counted as terrain and then I guess the tables would have been at the 25% coverage mark.

As I was playing nids, I had a very difficult time with shooty armies, with no place to really hide a monstrous creature from complete line of sight, if anything.

The competition was really very good. Even though GW may have allowed ticket winners to invite certain individuals, the level of play was right there.

Most of the invitees were locals, but they were the top tier of the locals, all very good players.

Awesome time in Vegas! The tournament was so much better than I and a lot of people thought it would be. I'll write a longer review later but I'm still in Vegas now sleeping off my hangover. I will say though that I was pleasantly surprised at how fun the format was and with some minor tweaking would be really great.

Well met Reecius! I may have talked "she who must be obeyed" into going to the Bay Open. When is my cutoff to decide?

I played this weekend and had an awesome time! I'd sign up for any GT in Vegas! I'd play this format again in a heartbeat, it was a really exciting change of pace. A few tweaks/upgrades here and there would be appreciated, but this was a really great event and surprisingly competitive.

This weekend really felt like a gift from GW and probably the coolest thing they've done 'for the players'.

NotMatthew wrote:
This weekend really felt like a gift from GW and probably the coolest thing they've done 'for the players'.

I must agree. GW really went all out this weekend to give us a great experience. The breakfast, lunch, dinner and dessert buffets were amazing, considering they were free. Food is expensive in Vegas, and the free food made this one of the least expensive Vegas trip I've ever taken.

The tables were sparse, but that was expected based on the ToS information packet they made available before the tournament. At least the tables were evenly distributed so there was no advantage to gain or lose based purely on which table you were at.

All in all I had 5 great games, saw some familiar faces, met some really cool people and had an all around good time.

Good job GW.

I agree it was a great gift from gw.

Great to meet you too, bladewalker! I hope we see you at the bao!

I had a great time as well, the format made you really focus on how your army was doing in general vs other people with the similar army. I was just surprised to see how many Eldar players showed up, and how many Canadians there were, hehe, 3 of my 5 games were with Canadians which is probably why I had such a fun time (they are great sports)!

Ditto on the comments about this being a great gift from GW. I don't think I've ever eaten as healthily in Vegas before!

It was very nice to meet folks off of Dakka, and for those of you who I didn't chat with I had the pink chaos marines with butterflies. I ended up with 3 wins and 2 ties but got edged out of best Chaos Marine by Mannahnin on sportsmanship scores. Maybe that was because I gave Reecius such a bad game that we didn't see him on Sunday

Ah, sorry about not showing up Sunday! I ended up hanging out with some girls I met at a pool party. It was a pleasure to meet you. Had a great game, even though not much happened! Sometimes you have to play smart, even if it means tying.

I was amazed by the level of competition, and loved every second of it.
Round 1 I played Ragnar who won best CSM
Round 2 was Randy Musgrave who missed best Necron by 1 point
Round 3 was Chris Shriner who went 4-1 with a crazy rifleman list, and only lost Best GK because I beat him then failed to also beat John. My bad man...
Round 4 was Tony Kapoch, who took home best Space Wolves
Round 5, got my butt kicked by John, who went 5-0 and took best Grey Knights.

3 games vs people who won Best player for their army, and 2 more against guys who just missed the mark. I could not have asked for a better play experience.

I'm not trying to be a downer, but you guys seriously thought a tournament that allowed people to play each other more than once was actually "good"? That is unforgivable in my mind.

Unless I missed it, it didn't seem like there was even prize support for the main winners. While I know it's a free GT and they provided food (that part was great of course), they also get the product at something like 20% of the retail cost. I just doesn't make logical sense to me, given the low internal cost.

Was it OK for a "free tournament?" Yes, of course. But they really should just call it a casual gaming get together. I could be more specific, but many of the points on scoring have been made. I just personally can't get behind anything that cannot get past the most basic of steps...and that is not playing the same person twice.


I guess my question would be "what did they do better than any indy GT?" Nothing other than being free. I, and I'm sure many others, will always enjoy getting together with a group of gamers and playing 5 games over a weekend in Vegas. However, that does not make a good event. Free food is pretty much the only redeeming quality of the weekend other than getting the chance to play some new people.

I guess you just had to be there, the atmosphere is what made it fun. After every game another meal was being served and everyone just sat down together and bullshitted about the last match, there was no mad scramble to get to your next match or rush to fit in the end of a game considering every match was 2 and a half hours long at 1500 points.

I went 3 and 2, my lucky stompa helped me out the first day, but broke down on the second but such is life when your playing orks.

Leenus wrote:I'm not trying to be a downer, but you guys seriously thought a tournament that allowed people to play each other more than once was actually "good"? That is unforgivable in my mind.

That was a tragic mistake which they thankfully fixed on day 2. I would have flat out refused to play someone twice.

It was not isolated to this event...Brother's Grim had the same thing at their ultra competitive event.

I played on the Fantasy side, though I checked the 40k side periodically.

The Good:
Catered Food- This was nice and it made up for the two nights of $300 dinners that my wife and I had haha.
Tight Schedule- There was ample time to get games done and they were very strict on the round times. Everything went according to schedule.
Solid Competition- The people who got the buddy invites were just as good (if not better) than those who got a golden ticket. No one was a slouch there.
Great Location- The room was large. The hotel was nice and affordable. That end of the strip puts you in walking distance of the Excalibur and MGM, but out of the chaotic middle part of the strip.
Tables- While they were all the modular tables, the GW terrain was all painted to a consistant standard and there was ample setup space. This was one of the best terrain and table setups of any GT I have attended in the past couple years.
Staff- Ed ran a tight ship and some of the best GW employees were on hand handling things all weekend. Things ran well and all the GW staff were extremely friendly and accessable. In particular, Matt and Chris were walking around getting feedback and chatting it up, keeping everything smooth.
Bartender- The inclusion of a bartender in the room was the best part of the whole thing!

The Bad:
Terrain- While the predetermined terrain types cut down on confusion, the choices of what terrain pieces to use was off. There also seemed to be a lack of sufficient terrain on the 40k side of the room.
Scenarios- They avoided the watchtower scenario, which was wise. They started with Battle Lines, which is also good. The banner scenario, as written, really is an auto loss for several armies, but its servicable. The other two scenarios, with the random deployment and the 12" random reserving just frustrate people. The narrative scenario for round five was just unforgivable, though. I completely crushed my last opponent because of that scenario and I know I am not alone in that. Having a weird scenario is ok, if it is carefully balanced (ie not here are my two doomwheels compulsary charging on turn one), but it needs to be done on round three. First and last round should always be Battle Lines or something very close.
Pairings- Until they corrected it, people were playing the same person, often twice in a row. This was especially true for anyone who had a draw, as draws are fairly rare in fantasy and they did not value a two draws as being equal to one win. When someone was going to play the same person a third time in a row, they finally caved in and fixed it.
Points- I know they wanted to save time, but 2k points (1500 for 40k) really cut armies to the bone, leaving nothing but the most brutal essentials in the lists.

The Ugly-
Format- Nevermind the fact that a dwarf guy with a worse record than a WE guy randomly won because the other two dwarf players sucked so much more than the average WE people there. I am talking about the lack of any restraints on army selection. This combined with limited points and a lack of soft scores led to some seriously ridiculous army builds by people. Of particular note, there were seven or so High Elf armies there, all but one having Teclis in them; the last one had a Fortress with 100 archers and 6 characters in it and two eagles. The few gunline armies there would have done well in the 40k side of the room, as well. I know they don't like admitting anything is ever wrong with their army books, but GW really should consider line item banning the problem characters and items that everyone else pretty much is, or this will just be another Hard Boyz event next year.

All said, I had a great time, despite getting some bad luck in there (went 2-1-2 with Bretts) and playing mostly power armies all weekend. The venue was very wife friendly, with side activites going on all weekend and lots of stuff to do at night. I am sad to see it move to Memphis next year, but thats better than not having it at all, if GW is cutting costs.

Leenus wrote:I'm not trying to be a downer, but you guys seriously thought a tournament that allowed people to play each other more than once was actually "good"? That is unforgivable in my mind.

Unless I missed it, it didn't seem like there was even prize support for the main winners. While I know it's a free GT and they provided food (that part was great of course), they also get the product at something like 20% of the retail cost. I just doesn't make logical sense to me, given the low internal cost.

Yes, the initial decision to make people play twice was wrong, they fixed it on day two, and I'm sure they'll never do that again.

And yes, you missed the prize support. Winners get online credit for the GW store. They mentioned it a couple times, but it was pretty loud in there so I can see why it might have been overlooked.

On an unrelated note to most of these posts. If anyone has pictures or anything from the tournament (Flikr, blog, etc) please let me know. Thanks

Faction winners get the framed award and a invite to Throne of Skulls 2012 (if I won something else please tell me lol). The conversion, painting, skulltaker, overall, all got vouchers as well.

@Sub: I put up a Battle Report thread of my games http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/377528.page and I'm editting the pics I took of the armies, but they are just on my little Canon nothing fancy. I'll put up a link to them after I get them uploaded today or tomorrow.

EDIT: I did not have to play the same person twice but I had to play 2 out of 5 local players and friends of mine, I think the addition of a friends list would help for the next one so you don't travel 2000 miles to play the guy you flew in with.

Seems like a fun event but it is very disappointing they used their totally flawed scoring system to determine winners once again.

Kirasu wrote:Seems like a fun event but it is very disappointing they used their totally flawed scoring system to determine winners once again.

Flawed is a very poor word choice. Try 'different' or 'unique' to describe their scoring system as there are many who found the rules system they used to be not so flawed.

It's flawed from a competitive standpoint. However it is a fine system for a fun weekend which GW provided. Wish I still lived in Cali so I could have made the drive out.

NotMatthew wrote:

Kirasu wrote:Seems like a fun event but it is very disappointing they used their totally flawed scoring system to determine winners once again.

Flawed is a very poor word choice. Try 'different' or 'unique' to describe their scoring system as there are many who found the rules system they used to be not so flawed.

I think it fairly accurately describes a system in which someones standings isnt 100% dependent on their own scores. Sorry Pittsburgh but you cant win the superbowl because Philadelphia did poorly! (For the non-football people.. Those two teams are in the same state)

Everyone knew the rules going in and everyone had the chance to select the best lists for the metagame. I still don't see it as 'flawed'. Being able to comprehend the rules and their effect on the metagame might be a challenge, but that certainly doesn't make the system 'flawed'.

Were the players within each codex 'competing' against each other? Certainly they were. Were the players also 'competing' with the field as a whole? Certainly. Were scores randomly generated? No....players had to fight for their scores. This tournament simply created a few transparent and easy to understand rules that provided a different tournament experience. To say that this tournament is less worthy than another is what is 'flawed'.

Saying you don't like the ToS system is A-OK...it seems a bit closed minded and silly to call something flawed just because you don't like it. I don't like the rules changes associated with the NOVA this year but I certainly see that it's a valid tournament system that many people will enjoy.

I think it's a little harder for those who didn't qualify or attend to make judgements about the validity of this tournament.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And btw...a ToS player's standings ARE 100% dependent on their own scores as much as they are in any other tournament. I would suggest playing in a 1 player tournament if you would like your standing to be truly 100% dependent on your own scores without interaction/relation with other people's scores. Unfortunately you wouldn't get the social aspect of the game, but you would certainly see how you would do if other players, their results, and their list choices didn't interfere with your performance.

@NotMatthew

I think some people's problem is that you can go 5-0 and lose out on overall to someone who goes 3-2 if everyone else that ran their codex went 1-4. See how much less impact you have over your scores? The only one you have an impact on is in your bracket but that doesn't matter for overall. It's not that difficult to grasp why this can be seen as an issue.

It is a flawed system from a purely competitive standpoint. That doesn't make it a non-competitive event but it does make the format non-competitive as a whole as it does a poor job of determining who did the best over the course of the weekend.

I happily quallified last April for this event and like I've stated I would have attended if I still lived in Cali. However the format was not worth me flying to Vegas for from where I live. I'd rather attend Nova or maybe (still working on it Reece) the Bay Area Open. I don't think you can dismiss people's opinion if they don't go or qualify and saying so smacks to me of elitism which I dislike in our hobby.

No one is saying people didn't have a good time or that the event went poorly. Quite the opposite. But they are advancing that it could have been a better format for a season capping event.

Hulksmash wrote:@NotMatthew

I think some people's problem is that you can go 5-0 and lose out on overall to someone who goes 3-2 if everyone else that ran their codex went 1-4. See how much less impact you have over your scores? The only one you have an impact on is in your bracket but that doesn't matter for overall. It's not that difficult to grasp why this can be seen as an issue.

It is a flawed system from a purely competitive standpoint. That doesn't make it a non-competitive event but it does make the format non-competitive as a whole as it does a poor job of determining who did the best over the course of the weekend.

I happily quallified last April for this event and like I've stated I would have attended if I still lived in Cali. However the format was not worth me flying to Vegas for from where I live. I'd rather attend Nova or maybe (still working on it Reece) the Bay Area Open. I don't think you can dismiss people's opinion if they don't go or qualify and saying so smacks to me of elitism which I dislike in our hobby.

No one is saying people didn't have a good time or that the event went poorly. Quite the opposite. But they are advancing that it could have been a better format for a season capping event.

Agreed, it wasn't the format that, in my opinion, should have capped the season. I respectfully expressed my opinion to Ed via email and declined my invites (which I ended up winning two of). I applaud GW for the attempt, I just wish they would have put more effort into making it a bit better as the season ending, competitive event that it was billed as. If I was close I would have attended, but the cost of flight + hotel for a format I didn't agree with (going 5-0 and losing is just a poor feeling) wasn't worth it for me. Past that, once I found out most other ticket holders that I knew weren't going, and then they started inviting friends, it wasn't even the "tourney of champions" anymore, it was just another GT. And if it's a very expensive GT to attend that isn't a format I like, I won't go to it, no hard feelings intended.

Glad everyone had a great time though, and maybe I'll see you in future years or at others events.

Why did the NOVA get pulled into this, and what rules did we change?

Forreals bro!

Also, it seems like the people that went generally had fun; everyone was aware the format made it difficult to stick to the basic principles behind perceivable consequences, and so I doubt many were all upset when it played out as predicted.

Besides, winning out still generally netted you best -X CODEX- which was a pretty decent thing to be proud of. I was quite happy local regular gamers I play and hang often eough with Mike S and Tony K won Best Guard and Best Space Wolf, was happy another local buddy went 4-1 with his GK, and was happy that the local Fantasy guys from Balmer won Fantasy Overall and Best Orc/Goblin.

I think it doesn't make sense to attach too much pro or con to the format, since it was so sparkly clear what to expect, and I sure as heck wanted to go until work threw me on down to Fort Worth during the same time period instead.

Sounds like everything surrounding the format was mostly good, as well - Ed's job running the show, free food, schedule, etc.

How is a tournament which allows people to stack best player votes in order to help their friend get ahead not flawed? I'm not saying it happened, but it can EASILY happen and will greatly influence the scores. This tournament is certainly less worthy than other events without such vote stacking potential.

Let's not get hung up on debating the meaning of flawed. It's certainly not a good way to run a tournament, especially at the benefit of being "unique" or "different." Being "unique" or "different" just because you want to be special is silly.

Just because people had fun and just because the event is different than the norm does in NO WAY make it preferable to a more logically run event.


The thing that I find funny is that people sound like they enjoyed the "best army" awards. However, when there are only 3-10ish people playing your army on average and those are the people you're competing against, you're essentially at a local RTT. Traveling all that way to play in a glorified RTT is pretty silly in my book.


EDIT: My only point in any criticisms of Vegas GT and any other GTs is that I get fed up with the fact that people are generally OK with the status quo and few events work to improve things (or actually effectively improve things after implementing their new plans). There's not a single reason that after this many years of large events that people have the chance to play someone twice. That is such a basic tournament no, no that it should be automatic at this point. There's not a single reason to allow best player votes to affect overall standings to such a degree, given the ability to favor friends. There's not really a sound argument that would show the benefit is greater than the cost.

Also, to be clear... I DID attend, so I'm not going on hearsay...

Yeah, an props again to Ed for putting this on. And taking the time to respond when I told him why I wouldn't be attending. Ed's a stand-up dude and deserves the props for what was obviously an enjoyable event.

The ToS tournament (like any tournament) is not a way to determine the best player...or the most 'competitive' player. Sure, it determines who sits on the throne of skulls here in North America, but when you boil it down any tournament only has one function, and that is to find which player is best able to play by the rules of the tournament and score high enough to win the tournament. Period...doesn't matter what the rules of the tournament are beyond that. The NOVA style tournaments do NOT determine who the best 40k player is and neither do they determine who is the most competitive. They simply determine who was the best at playing the NOVA metagame for the weekend.

I do see how a player can go 5-0 and not win. You know as well as I do that many tournaments allow that situation to happen...that does not in any way make them less competitive.

Would you call a poker game where everyone had to play with their cards up more competitive than a game where poker players are forced to play the poker metagames of bluffing/reading/calculated risk? I would call them both competitive, certainly in different ways though.

Would you consider a tournament that made a choice to not include kill points as a win condition more competitive than one that did include them? Of course not, that would be silly. They are equally competitive and you are competing in separate tournament metagames.

If you are playing foot orks on table 1 in the last round of the NOVA you are depending on some horde guard army to not also go undefeated and end up playing you. Their win record is out of your control. You can end up losing an otherwise perfect tournament just because you had a very bad matchup on the final table (please note that whatever you may have heard, foot orks do not beat a proper horde guard list). Does that make the tournament flawed? Does that make it less competitive? In any tournament you are comparing your results to those of the other players and the standings of other players (and the fact that they and you have had a certain amount of good or bad luck to be where you are in the standings) has a lot to do with the placings at the end. I don't mind being defeated with logic at all and I'll acknowledge good points when I see them.

I do see how some people don't understand that any tournament is just as competitive as any other tournament. I do not see any merit in those thoughts though as there is not enough valid logic to back said thoughts up.

I will agree that this format was not my first choice for a season capper. However, after having played in the tournament I can see that it is every bit as challenging and competitive as any other format, though part of the challenge certainly comes from the metagame (like any other tournament from RTs to ardboyz to NOVA to Adepticon Team events).

Who won? Some random guy? The guy who won the most games? The guy with the best painted army? The nicest guy? No...it was won by the person who either wittingly or unwittingly made the correct metagame decisions before the tournament and backed those choices up with tight gameplay and a decent table demeanor.

Leenus wrote:How is a tournament which allows people to stack best player votes in order to help their friend get ahead not flawed? I'm not saying it happened, but it can EASILY happen and will greatly influence the scores. This tournament is certainly less worthy than other events without such vote stacking potential.

If it didn't happen, do we have to talk about what COULD have happened? Why compare a hypothetical worst-case scenario against any other format, when the ACTUAL results are available, and don't exhibit the problem?

Let's not get hung up on debating the meaning of flawed. It's certainly not a good way to run a tournament, especially at the benefit of being "unique" or "different." Being "unique" or "different" just because you want to be special is silly.

Just because people had fun and just because the event is different than the norm does in NO WAY make it preferable to a more logically run event.

Let's avoid absolutist language, please. While the format is certainly open for discussion, exclusionary and/or conclusive statements like those above don't invite debate; instead, it's instantly dismissive of any contrary opinion.

You're correct on getting hung up on the word flawed or competitive. This was a different style event and many will be glad to see it repeated.

Thanks for the dialogue guys! None of this is meant with any disrespect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MVBrandt wrote:Why did the NOVA get pulled into this, and what rules did we change?

Forreals bro!

I think a lot of players see the NOVA as the most 'competitive' event so I used it as an example and as a point of comparison. I should not have said rules change, 'ruling' would have been much more appropriate.

I honestly do not see how ANYONE could not be thankful for this event. IT WAS FREE! IT WAS CATERED! IT WAS IN VEGAS! TWO FOR ONE DRINKS!

Anyone who walked away from this with a bad attitude, IMO, needs to reevaluate their value system. This was a gift to us gamers by GW. The guys who put it on worked their asses off to show us a good time. Show some gratitude! Was the system perfect? No, but we all knew what to expect coming in, even the possibility of playing the same people twice. Even that they changed right away.

This was a GREAT event. I had a blast, and everyone I talked to had fun. The atmosphere was very relaxed, everyone was just about having a good time with very few exceptions.

Was this an uber competitive event? Yes and no. The caliber of player was very, very high. The system itself sort of curbed things a bit, but I have to say I like it. With a bit of tweaking, it could make a great tournament format. There were 4 sisters, 4 crons, 3 tau, 8 Eldar, and only like 4 or 5 Space Wolves. I like that. I brought my Footdar just to have a laugh as it was not a "serious" tournament. Those are good for a change of pace.

So seriously, anyone who is saying this was anything other than a really incredibly generous gift to us really needs to take a step back and rethink their position.

IT WAS FREE!

I had a great time and would certainly go back if it were in Vegas. Memphis....well, we'll have to see about that.

Janthkin,

To be clear, vote stacking could very well happen. It may have. I think it's very hard to prove one way or another. However, I'm willing to be clubmates / friends were more likely to vote for other clubmates / friends. You might not be able to get people to admit it to your face, but I'm sure if someone played their buddy who is in contention to win overall and 4 randos, they are most likely voting for their buddy. Do you honestly think otherwise?

You cannot definitively prove if that is the case, but if that flaw exists, why allow it? My challenge to everyone is what benefit do you GAIN at the cost of having this voting flaw. I don't see what you gain and that's what I'm trying to understand. Additionally, not only the worst case effects the outcome of the tournament. Simply 1 person voting being swayed to vote for his buddy, just because it's his buddy affects EVERYONE.



Secondly, I would pose the question about matching up people against the same people twice. Look at it from a cost/benefit situation. What's the net benefit? If it's a net negative why implement it? I agree with NotMat that it's different. I disagree that it brings any net benefit to the tournament. My frustration is that tournament organizers do not seem to be going through that cost/benefit thought process when they make a seemingly obvious misstep.

@NotMatt

I had a long rebuttal but then I realized it's not really worth it. We're coming from different viewpoints. Though I agree that any event you are competing at is competitive however I do think that that doesn't make the format competitive. Two different things.

Either way, great event from the sound of it.

Any tournament can be competitive, regardless of format. People often mix up the notions of evaluative and competitive. I.E. a tournament's competitive SIDE should in a vacuum fairly evaluate the best player in THAT tournament for THAT weekend, and the path to achieve best player should be appropriately predictable ... perceivable consequences is a phrase often bandied about.

Long story short, for the competitive side, a player should be able to say "If X, then Y." If I Massacre every game, I win, for instance.

The reply was given to this initial objection that it's the same as any other event where the actions of others invariably influence your result, and that's not entirely true.

In a NOVA, AdeptiCon, Bay Area, etc., type event - you're going into it knowing flatly that if you win every one of your games, you'll win the event's competitive track, period.

In a Battle Points and Margin of Victory type event, you're going into it knowing that the more you win BY, the better your chances of winning, unless someone beats people even MORE than you ... this is in the VACUUM sense of tournament theory LESS ideal than the first set, but still - you only will lose because someone else flat out did BETTER; that's to say, your final placement is not impacted by those who performed worse than you, only by those who performed better.

In the Throne of Skulls format, the water gets muddied even more because your final placement is not necessarily at all related to who does BETTER than you, but to how well your peers BELOW you did. Hence, you're getting quite far away from the simple notions of perceivable consequences, self-determination, and the ability to win by ... winning.

As I said earlier, I think Throne of Skulls sounds like a resounding success for those who attended, but it is not very accurate or appropriate to throw up the hands and lump ALL tournaments in together as equally evaluative or "fair" in giving players control over their own destinies.

Such control is not necessarily valuable - to the originator of the Throne of Skulls format, it was not valuable at all; generally, it was irrelevant whether players had much control over their own fates. That's OK, because it's openly stated that's the case - the format blatantly makes clear that your final placement in the overall competitive track will be in many ways divorced from your own personal success .... winning all your games helps you, but guarantees you nothing. Too bad so sad, yatta yatta.

Competitiveness is determined by the closeness of the field; if Michael Jordan in his prime were to compete against me in the most FAIR field possible at Basketball, he'd murder me so horribly it wouldn't even be funny - the fact that the format in which we played was fair and even and balanced and evaluative is irrelevant to COMPETITIVENESS ... such a match would not be competitive at all, despite the fairness of the format.

Similarly, if everyone playing in Throne of Skulls was a highly competitive player with a strong list and a lot of skills, the event was like to be EXTREMELY competitive, whether or not the final placement of the winner was his fault or the fault of his peers.

It's important, I think, that when these types of discussions start to heat up, we all take a step back and realize that there's a) a big difference between competitive and evaluative, and b) TOs are the ones with the rights to choose what is and isn't a valued function of their format, and as long as they are very clear well ahead of time about how things will pan out ... well, more power to them and try not to jump their case so much; it's not as if they've deceived or harmed you in any way.

This is most especially the case when evaluating Throne of Skulls ... the field was certainly competitive, and the event was extremely well advertised and clear in how it would play out. Beyond that, Ed and co threw an amazing time by the feedback of all who participated, and mostly great players won awards. I think it's a good point for all of us to call it a success, shake hands on differences, and look ahead to the next big events

Well said, Mike. I agree with all of your points.

There is room for all types of events, and all types of events can be fun.

cheers!

I am a big proponent of any format that encourages army diversity (which is why I have always been in the Battle Point camp), so in principle, I liked what the format created. But it has some issues, for sure.

The high value of favorites votes allow for a lot of shenanigans and tilt things in ways I am not fond of. Its also a huge boost to play someone who is also playing your army, as you lower the "team" average by pounding them. I am not sure how you go about fixing those issues, while preserving the positives of the base system they used.

The other issue is that the system all but encourages you to take the most nakedly abusive army your codex allows (or guess right and be the only person to show up with the army, like Scott Hokum did with beasts) with no thought to making something that looks like an army or a theme. This is not really an issue in 40k (balance is better there, at least among the more rescent books), but in Fantasy letting Teclis or the Power Scroll into the game massively alters things.

It will be interesting to see the actual points and how much the friend votes altered things, when they post the scoresheets later this month. I am reserving my final verdict on the system until then.

I found that generally, the people that won each category did the best with that army overall unless it came down to tie-breakers which were sports/army roster. It seemed like "soft scores" were only needed for determining tie breakers and that doesn't seem too far fetched from how many other tournaments do things. Regardless, I definitely did have a great time and all of my wins were very fulfilling so I feel that I actually earned the award I got =).

Like many people have mentioned, it was a competitive event, hands down, as the level of play represented was very high. Evaluative? Well, for each army it certainly did seem that way; for overall winner, though? No, I do not think that was evaluative at all.

And Reece, I think there were at LEAST 10 Eldar players or more, lol, I was surprised how many I saw!

Was there that many? Wow, I thought only 8. That's great! Eldar are great.!!!

On the GW website, it has info for the next GT, to be held in glorious Memphis!

At least they will allow people to buy tickets. I can go down and see my ex co-workers!

Any full results or spreadsheets or anything of the ilk up anywhere? Trying to see how someone I know did.

Hi All,

I agree with Reece. I'm very thankful!
I’m thankful that GW had this event. I’m thankful I was able to have the chance to go to this Event; I know some out there had life stuff come up and were not able to make it. I hope to see you guys at next year’s ToS or at another Tournament soon. I am very thankful I was able to meet SO many new gamers as well as meet up with some of the usual suspects. Everyone was great and I’m happy to say I had 5 really fun games with really friendly gamers that I hope I will get the chance to play with again.

This Event reminded me of the reasons I started this game and I want to thank GW for that. It’s a great game that I love to play and when it’s played with great people it just makes it all the better.

Even Brittani said this was a really cool Event and in my book that means something. ;-)

Cheers!!!

As I won the whole thing (and did not go 5-0 to do it), i can not comment on the ToS as anything I could say would be seen as self-serving...

That being said, I have never had a tougher group of players beating each other to death, never seen a tournament with the army diversity we had, nor had such an amazing atmosphere for such a competitive tournament.

Whatever you think about how the winner should be decided and the tournament scored, without a question GW put together a great event with amazing players... and not one fist fight despite mass amounts of alcohol.

A success in my book. Now I just need to scrape up cash for Memphis.

Brandt, that was one of the most well-written and -thought out posts on the nature of competetive wargaming and differences in tournament format... ever.

Kudos, good sir.

Has anyone got any response for the spreadsheet with the overall final standings?

My email to Ed since the event has gone unanswered. He said at the event everyone would get their respective results on Tuesday but so far nothing.

@Dugg
Yes, and Britanni was hot as hell! Thanks for bringing some femininity to what was largely a weeny roast!

Also, I wrote a review of the event for BoK if anyone is interested:

http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2011/06/22/indy-gt-circuit-throne-of-skulls-by-reece-robbins/

@Reece
Yeah, she also wanted me to tell you goodbye and it was nice meeting you.

Her fav. Army was the Pink Chaos. Go figure. I think it was the SnM butterflies more than the Pink. What's Alexs NN on here? I'll have to tell him his Army is a Chic magnet.

I'll check out your BoK post now.

I think Team TableWar will have a "Team Manager" at all the big GTs from now on. They are just so helpful. The time issues that come with most GTs wasn't that bad but having an extra person to help us out was priceless.

I didn't get enough photos but will post some tonight. Anyone else posting any?

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a26/Sneekygit/TOS%202011/

KeithGatchalian wrote:On the GW website, it has info for the next GT, to be held in glorious Memphis!

Don't lie...there is nothing glorious about Memphis...

Themason wrote:As I won the whole thing (and did not go 5-0 to do it), i can not comment on the ToS as anything I could say would be seen as self-serving...

And chest thumping isn't self-serving George? I have to listen to this for the next year and a half!

In all seriousness though, congratulations to you for winning George. I also want to congratulate Mike Paganini who won Best High Elves. I found the tournament to be both exciting and exceptionally competitive. Some games were definitely harder then others, but every single one of them was enjoyable. My only real complaint was trying to balance the problem with guys playing the same opponent twice by giving them a free "favorite opponent" vote. I wasn't too keen on that, but everything else was fantastic for the most part.

I would just like to say that I personally had a fantastic, dare I say, nearly magically fun time at this event. I give massive, massive kudos to GW's event team for running this and the only thing that saddens me is that they will be pulling it from Vegas next year and putting it in Memphis. No offense to Memphis (I'm sure there are plenty of wonderful things to enjoy there), but its no Vegas.

I also feel a bit sorry for anyone who won a ticket and didn't go specifically because of the format of the tournament. Obviously if the only reason you attend events is to have that true evaluative (thanks Mike for much more correct terminology than 'competitive') experience, I can certainly understand why this event wouldn't have appealed to you on paper. But honestly when the whole package was put together this was just SO MUCH FREAKING FUN that any and all niggling complaints about format were frankly irrelevant IMHO.

When it comes to format, Ed Spettigue actually made an announcement before the tournament addressing this point. He thanked everyone for coming and admitted that he knew that the format was not everyone's cup of tea, but that the Throne of Skulls was their (GW's) tournament...meaning that it highlights the aspect of the game & hobby that they feel are important. Obviously many people wanted a 'finals' style of event that would crown a nationwide 'champion' of the game, but I don't think GW ever made any claims that the Throne of Skulls would be a 'finals' of any sort. After seeing the amount of cash they dropped to give out a free event, as others have said this was much more of a 'thank you' to the players than anything else. I think the independent tournament circuit is who will have to organize some sort of finals/masters event because that sort of tournament mindset is not what GW wants to represent (and it is their right to run their event any way they see fit).

I hope that everyone can recognize that it is okay (or in my opinion, a great thing) to have many events all with different formats, thereby allowing you to have a different style of experience depending on which tournament you're playing in...and of course if you don't like a certain format, then you skip that tournament.


While the Throne of Skulls format is rather poor at being evaluative of player skill, that isn't its stated goal! Instead it provided a few interesting twists on the normal tournament experience that were frankly a breath of fresh air for me personally. Would I want every tournament run this way? Absolutely not. But would I play in this tournament format again? Absolutely without hesitation!


The format made me feel like it was 'okay' to bring out my Tau army again and not feel like I was completely wasting my time. My only 'goal' for the tournament was to be the best Tau player out of the 4 who attended (at which I still failed, but that's another story). But I knew going in that I could take my Tau and have just as good a chance walking away the victor as anyone else, something that isn't true with any other tournament format I've played in.

The format also created a built in brotherhood and rivalry between me and my fellow Tau players, and it was fun to talk to them in between games to see how everyone was doing...again, something that doesn't usually occur in more 'standard' formats.

Beyond that, I can only comment on my own personal path of games I played. I don't know if it was due to the fact that my lowly (2-2-1) Tau record kept me playing 'nice' players all tournament, but the fact is, I played five different army types (Blood Angels, Tau, Eldar, Space Marines & IG) and I played five incredibly nice opponents, any of whom I would gladly play again and twice on Sunday.

And not only that, but besides my very first game (against the Deep Striking Blood Angels), all of my games were incredibly close and hard fought...and even my first randomly paired game against the Blood Angel army it was mainly my lack of recent practice with Tau that kept it from being much more of a tightly contested battle. In other words, there weren't really any blow-outs (despite me playing Tau) and I didn't have *any* d-bag type opponents.

So from the point of view of what the Throne of Skulls is trying to emphasize (fun, tough games against great people) all I can say is that from my perspective is that they hit the nail on the head.

In addition, playing 1,500 points with 2 1/2 hour rounds meant that FINALLY I had a tournament where things were relaxed. What an amazing feeling! To be able to take a moment to sit back and ponder your next move without worrying about whether or not you were destroying any chance for you and your opponent to finish your game on time. And when I did finish early? I was able to check out other games, go grab a quick nap, etc. In short, the actual experience of playing tournament games was much, much more pleasurable than usual because the typical RUSH, RUSH, RUSH attitude that is normally necessary to finish tournament games was not present.

Added on top of that was really, really good catered food, a spacious gaming hall, (compared to most tournaments) great gaming tables, and of course the amazing post-game fun to be had in Vegas, oh and of course that the whole thing was FREE! Put it all together and you had a truly amazing, amazing event.

I was soooo glad to have gone and I had just an amazingly fun time. I cannot emphasize it enough.

Dugg wrote:@Reece
Yeah, she also wanted me to tell you goodbye and it was nice meeting you.

Dude, bring her to another event! Haha! She was hot and nice.

@Yak
You nailed it. I had a blast and would totally go to another tournament with this format so long as it had a few more tweaks to it.

@yakface
Your comments perfectly describe the tournament, I definitely have not had as much fun playing in a tournament as I did at tos. Although the fact that it was on the strip and there was a grand total of 9 of us from calgary there may have helped a bit

Thanks for the games to anyone I played.(razorspam fleshtearers) As well as any my buddy played(orange mechdar) And was also nice to meet a few of the people from the american tournie scene.

Definitive results up for this anywhere?

@Dugg.
Glad to hear that Brittani liked my army

@Twalks
I think we played in game 4. Thanks again for the game, I'm positive my obliterators won't be so accurate the next time we play!

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=300002§ion=community&pIndex=2&aId=15000018a&start=3&multiPageMode=true

I'm the sexy guy in the Star Wars shirt.

Best CSM doesn't get a pic?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I also think that the format really helped spread out the army types. Multiples of SoB, Tau, Eldar, etc is really nice to see at any event. Not having 80% GK/SW/BA/IG is unusual.

Every time I hear Tony Kopach's name, I keep forgetting hes like 5 years younger than me :(

Mannahnin must have been too handsome to accurately photograph (yes I'm sucking up to the mods).

Great they posted the results everyone knew already...has anyone got a response on getting the spreadsheet with the overall results yet??

I would like to see where all the people who didnt get an award landed with the ToS scoring system.

I still don't see why you can't have a more competitive scoring system (e.g. not playing the same player twice, no stackable best player votes being worth a significant amount, battle points to differentiate wins), while maintaining the fun of competing against other places in your race for a "best in race" award. You can still have all the "pros" of the ToS system, and eliminate many of the cons.

Hobby players can still have their fun in a competitively structured system, but competitive players cannot have their fun in a hobby structured system. Why alienate one of those groups when you can please both?

Before you go "Oh I'm a top player and *I* had fun, so nothing's wrong," think about this: If the system had better scoring, but kept the in-race prizes, would you have had LESS fun? Doubtful. People can still have fun with their Tau armies, but people can also feel good about winning overall rather than feel like they won some sort of lottery. However, there's definitely a large group of people that did not attend, BECAUSE of the poor scoring system (as evidenced by the need to open up tickets to friends of attendees).

There's nothing lost by having a sound scoring system. So while we can thank Ed for putting this on and working hard, while we can thank GW for a free tournament with free food, it will never make sense to me why they would implement a scoring system which would alienate so many players, when there are systems that can achieve their goals WITHOUT alienating so many players.

I just can't understand why you guys seem so accepting about that. Or maybe it's learned helplessness. GW is just so stupid and they will never learn that we've trained ourselves to have low expectations and know it's not worth fighting for change.

Leenus wrote: However, there's definitely a large group of people that did not attend, BECAUSE of the poor scoring system (as evidenced by the need to open up tickets to friends of attendees).

I dont think the lack of better attendance had to with the scoring system as much as the: 1.) no holds barred/no comp scored/all SCs allowed composition system AND the fact it was held on Father's Day weekend.

Aside, the event was spectacular. More than enough solid players for me. Every game was tough, there was no one I played where I felt like was "clubbing a baby seal" meaning the level of challenge far exceeded that of other large Indy GT formats, at least in my experience.

I have no complaints whatsoever other than the fact the players dont have the final overall results(and werent able to view it at the end of the event on Sunday). That is strange, Ed and company were very responsive pre-event and now after the event the emails for the spreadsheet go unanswered...worrisome.

Wow. I like how most of the criticism for this event is from people who didn't go. Why not just let folks reminisce about the event and talk about it without being downers? Or start a new thread to talk about scoring.

pretre wrote:Wow. I like how most of the criticism for this event is from people who didn't go. Why not just let folks reminisce about the event and talk about it without being downers? Or start a new thread to talk about scoring.

Because not everyone wants to discuss the same thing as you in the thread on the event. The discussion on the scoring of this event, in the thread of the event, is perfectly acceptable in my mind.

Californiagamer wrote:

Leenus wrote: However, there's definitely a large group of people that did not attend, BECAUSE of the poor scoring system (as evidenced by the need to open up tickets to friends of attendees).

I dont think the lack of better attendance had to with the scoring system as much as the: 1.) no holds barred/no comp scored/all SCs allowed composition system AND the fact it was held on Father's Day weekend.

I'd disagree. I got two invites and passed on both due to the scoring system, and I have three friends that I know of that passed for the same reason. Was this the ONLY reason I didnt go? No. Was it the deciding one? Yes.

It was expensive and a long trip, so that meant to me that unless it was a format I wanted to participate in, I wasn't going to scrape together funds to go.

That isn't meant to trash TOS. I think it could have been better, but as in all cases with these sorts of things, it's personal preference. I didn't like the format, so I didn't attend. There aren't any hard feelings, though I of course do wish it would have been a different format so I could have used my invites. I still applaud GW for putting on the event, it wasn't something they had to do and they seem to have put some serious effort into it.

Like most indy gt's, scoring and format may be a big factor in deciding who goes, but once there, everyone has a good time. I just don't think that the fact that people had a good time should preclude improvements to the scoring system. People had a good time from a fun weekend in vegas with fellow hobbyists/etc it seems, GW could still improve the format to be more inclusive to the entire community.

And although TOS gets a lot of unnecessary hate, I think people shouldn't be so quick to characterize any disagreement with the format as "just hating on it" or "who cares about your opinion, you didn't go". I earned both of my invites BEFORE they released any information on the format. I specifically attended more GT's this year because I wanted to participate in a Vegas finals tournament. I had already in a way spent money to go, and then the format was a let down. It's not as simple as a "no sweat, if you don't like it, don't go".

The scoring system then is more an artifact of 40k pop spread (perhaps due to the massive overepresentation of armies like Guard?) not the ToS.

I didnt see it as that big of a problem in Fantasy. Of course every knew there would be ton of Daemons as they rock with SCs in a Fantasy format but I really reserve judgement until I see the complete results...

The Dwarf guy winning Fantasy was a bit random but need to see the breakdown to comment. How can we comment on scoring when nobody has seen the scores?

I dont see the ToS as any less "evaluative" of player skill than host of Indy GTs which have upwards of 50% soft scores. Best player vote stacking is present at every event with sports scores. Painting is often completely subjective even with a checklist. Comp scoring at least in Fantasy is also subjective and can be easily gamed.

I would say if you were looking for a good games and didnt attend due to the scoring methodology you REALLY missed out.

Californiagamer wrote:The scoring system then is more an artifact of 40k pop spread (perhaps due to the massive overepresentation of armies like Guard?) not the ToS.

I didnt see it as that big of a problem in Fantasy. Of course every knew there would be ton of Daemons as they rock with SCs in a Fantasy format but I really reserve judgement until I see the complete results...

The Dwarf guy winning Fantasy was a bit random but need to see the breakdown to comment. How can we comment on scoring when nobody has seen the scores?

I dont see the ToS as any less "evaluative" of player skill than host of Indy GTs which have upwards of 50% soft scores. Best player vote stacking is present at every event with sports scores. Painting is often completely subjective even with a checklist. Comp scoring at least in Fantasy is also subjective and can be easily gamed.

I would say if you were looking for a good games and didnt attend due to the scoring methodology you REALLY missed out.

My issue was that I could beat every person there, win every game, and 100% not be in the running to win the overall event if the other people that also brought my book did well. That was my major issue with the event, all may not agree, but that was mine.

My point was more to address your "I don't think people actually stayed home because of the format" comment. I think a fair number did stay home due to the format.

1. I did attend, but you don't need to have attended to make any sort of intelligent statement about the tournament.

2. A significant number of people stayed home because of the format. I know ~10 east coast guys (probably more) that regularly attend and WIN east coast GTs and they did not attend, because of the format. Now if that is the case, I'd hope the choice of ToS format gained something at a loss of player attendance. However, I don't think it did. There are always going to be people that won't attend, but there are choices that increase that number and decrease it. ToS decreased it (do not be fooled into thinking that the draws of a FREE, fully food-comped IN VEGAS tournament that was billed at the first GW championships did not artificially inflate the attendance).

I'll give you an example of reasonable cost/benefit decision making. Why did they use "no comp?" My guess is that they don't want to openly admit that their game needs balancing or undertake the difficult task of trying to balance it. So the trade off would be fewer players for not openly admitting their books are poorly balanced and opening that whole can of worms. That I can accept.

Where I get confused is the whole "relative" scoring. That doesn't benefit anyone. Sure, it's their system, but what is the BENEFIT? I struggle to see a net benefit. Maybe they wanted to promote more diverse armies. There are better ways to do that than make overall be decided by your relative standing. Here's a very simple solution that I thought of in 2 seconds that fixes much of the issue. Give best in race awards based on relative in race performance. Give overall based on battle. Is it perfect? No. Is it significantly better than the current system at the cost of 2 seconds of thought? Heck yeah!

I'm not sure why I keep debating this point. I guess I foolishly hope that people will wake up and expect more of their TOs, rather than just settling. With all the money and time that goes into this hobby and for a tournament weekend, we shouldn't be OK accepting of shoddy decision making.

well now Im kicking myself for walking out of there Sunday without a print out of the final overall standing as it appears they arent releasing them (at least arent answering any emails on subject from what I can tell).

Why, Im not sure...

Nothing like your first post on Dakka...

Neway my name is Lincoln Tidwell and I won TOS with a dwarf army. My record was 4-1 and my last game was on table 1. I think I got 2 or 3 best game awards because apparently I'm an enjoyable opponent and my army list wasn't too cheesy.

My first game was against another dwarf player, second was skaven, third dark elves, fourth empire, and fifth dark elves. I won Adepticon last year, finished 4th this year and generally finish in the top of the field at most tournaments our club attends on the east coast. Glad I was able to take it home for Dwarves.... Really didn't want to play my Daemons and my TK are still in the painting booth. Go Dwarves!

www.innercirclegamingclub.com

I think GW intentionally created a tournament that encourages people to bring all the different armies, not cheese it out, and play nicely. That's the best way for them to represent their product. I like all tournament formats and I am glad that there will be at least one large tournament a year that uses a format like Throne of Skulls. The more that the larger 40k tournaments are NOT like each other the better in my opinion. Free thinking and creative tournament organizers make the hobby better, just like a good GM does in a role playing game... they create variety and a myriad of trials to test your imaginary people against.

I'm excited that over the course of the next year+ I will have the opportunity to play in all different types of events from Broadside Bash with comp and other soft things, to Slaughter on the Strip with soft and hard scores fairly equal, to Ironman using ToS format, to Adepticon and NOVA with their much tweeked competitive formats. Variety = Good.

PS Congrats Lincoln!

BladeWalker wrote:I think GW intentionally created a tournament that encourages people to bring all the different armies, not cheese it out, and play nicely.

You do realize that there was NO COMP and no incentive whatsoever to take anything but the hardest possible build within your respective race. Or am I missing something?

The incentive is the playing nicely part, you have to get favorite opponent votes to do well. If you can do that with the hardest possible build then ok, most people that I play don't like to be hit with max hard builds unless you discuss it ahead of time. This tournament basically said, bring your friendly list and have a god time... if someone brought the max build, they were intentionally trying to focus on wins rather than favorite opponent votes and vice versa. I'm not saying you can't be nice and play the best list, but if your opponent plays 5 nice guys is he going to vote for the guy with the max hard list that tabled him or the guy that made it a fun game even when it was in the bag?

Haha, excuse me for focusing on wins at a tournament. Silly I know!

Nevertheless, pretty sure allowing you to take anything in your book, including special characters, is discussing what's allowed ahead of time. Anything is allowed, as sent out pre-tournament by the rules pack. In fact, by not bringing the hardest build you're ruining MY fun, because I roll you with no challenge. If you brought a competitive list then we'd have had a fun, competitive game.

There a 2 sides to the coin. It really depends who you play. I got a best sports vote by essentially tabling a guy bottom of turn 2. The incentive to take a soft list simply isn't there. There is some incentive to coddle people with easily hurt emotions to earn sports votes for sure, but I already said why I think that is a silly thing to have in a tournament many a time.

Maybe you didn't walk around the fantasy side, but there were quite a few double hydras, double flamers / masque, teclises running around (I took double hydras so I'm not saying this is a bad thing). However, if there was such an incentive as you say, I doubt we would have seen such lists.

But Dwarves won Fantasy right? It seems that Lincoln took the right approach to the tournament and won it, while others took a different approach and are upset. The same thing happened in 40k, a new GK list rolled everyone it faced but it lost overall to a BA player with a more balanced list and different approach to the tournament. It IS silly to focus only on wins in the ToS format, it helps but winning at the expense of someone else's good time won't get you very far. I think you are experiencing the incentive to not bring the newer army or nastier combo now... if everyone is playing what you are then you have almost no chance to win best overall. If you are going to try for best overall you have to think outside the box of just "bring the heat", save that for almost every other tournament in the country.

pretre wrote:Wow. I like how most of the criticism for this event is from people who didn't go. Why not just let folks reminisce about the event and talk about it without being downers? Or start a new thread to talk about scoring.

I agree.

Let's talk rematches. I had a really close and fun game with Toby and his Eldar which I would love a rematch on. Anyone else?

I want a rematch with you, Dugg! My wolves are still embarrassed by their one and only tabeling to your Orks!

@ Reece ANYTIME BROTHER!!!!!

Let's get together outside of a Tournament, get some drinks and play a 2 out of 3 rematch. What do you say?

Btw, I'll bring my "I TABLED REECE" T-Shirt to the BAO ;-)

Hahaha, sounds good to me!

Anyone get a response from GW if/when (and where) the overall standings would be released? Ive sent a few emails and only got the sound of silence.

thanks.

I always love hearing from the players who's whole goal in this game is to bring the biggest dick-hammer army and then claim their win record is based on anything else...

If you want a no comp, no sport tournament where you can bring the cheesiest possible army meant to win games for you without the need for skill, well, GW already has that. It is called 'Ard Boyz. So please feel free to enjoy it.

As for any tournament other that 'Ard Boyz, some system is used to force players to take toned down list, use their actual skill, and win.

The fact that GW gave total free will in the tournament (all SCs allowed, etc) yet put in a system of control works well. If you can not play without the d-bag hammer, then take your hammer. Just hope that someone does not do equally well as you while not being a d-bag.

The only valid complaint i heard and agree with is the lack of Battle points to differential wins. It encouraged people to just simply go for the minor victory... though to truly do a mission with battle points would require them stepping outside the 3 basic missions from the book. I truly hope to see mission diversity and a battle point system instituted into ToS 2012

If you want a no comp, no sport tournament where you can bring the cheesiest possible army meant to win games for you without the need for skill, well, GW already has that. It is called 'Ard Boyz. So please feel free to enjoy it.

The 'Ard Boyz finals was one of the qualifying events for this tournament, just fyi, in addition to many other tournaments that did not feature comp or sportsmanship scores.

Also, from what I understand about it, the format didn't really do anything to curb so-called "cheese" on a list-by-list basis, only on a codex-by-codex basis. If you brought a pure fluff Space Wolf army, for instance, you still were competing against all of the completely optimized Space Wolf players.

Californiagamer wrote:Anyone get a response from GW if/when (and where) the overall standings would be released? Ive sent a few emails and only got the sound of silence.

thanks.

Doesn't always happen quickly. Figure that Ed and his crew got back sometime Monday. At some point after that they doublecheck the results, and send them off to "guy who controls the website". At this point it gets added to his workload and goes up on web depending on what else is going on that week.

I'd assume they'll be up soon. They probably have 50+ people emailing them over and over asking about the same thing, which is why you aren't getting replies. Give it a few days.

Themason wrote:I always love hearing from the players who's whole goal in this game is to bring the biggest dick-hammer army and then claim their win record is based on anything else...

If you want a no comp, no sport tournament where you can bring the cheesiest possible army meant to win games for you without the need for skill, well, GW already has that. It is called 'Ard Boyz. So please feel free to enjoy it.

As for any tournament other that 'Ard Boyz, some system is used to force players to take toned down list, use their actual skill, and win.

The fact that GW gave total free will in the tournament (all SCs allowed, etc) yet put in a system of control works well. If you can not play without the d-bag hammer, then take your hammer. Just hope that someone does not do equally well as you while not being a d-bag.

The only valid complaint i heard and agree with is the lack of Battle points to differential wins. It encouraged people to just simply go for the minor victory... though to truly do a mission with battle points would require them stepping outside the 3 basic missions from the book. I truly hope to see mission diversity and a battle point system instituted into ToS 2012

I'd say all of the players you're trying to lump together in this thread have had well spoken, valid complaints. Meanwhile, your 'defense' of TOS and personal crusade on people who think a better competitive system is possible while still having fun, is actually full of personal attacks and if one had to qualify it, would probably call it pretty d-baggy.

Just an observation.

Themason wrote:As for any tournament other that 'Ard Boyz, some system is used to force players to take toned down list, use their actual skill, and win.

The common misconception is when you both take the hardest possible lists, the game takes no skill. That should actually be the time when skill is MOST important, as the relative power difference is minimized. If you are forced to take a toned down list, two things happen.

1. You take the hardest possible list within the requirements and so does your opponent. You arrive at the same situation as if there was no comp, as players have the "hardest list possible." While armies are not as good as the totally comp-less armies, they are just as strong when you compare them to the rest of the field.

2. You create games that require LESS skill to win, because there are greater mismatches in relative army strength. One guy tones it down a little and one guy tones it down a lot (because they have different ideas on what toning down means). Now the guy that toned it down less steamrolls the other guy, because the other guy took an even softer list. Soft comp (player/judge graded) makes this mismatch gap even wider, as certain people value certain combinations extremely differently, allowing power lists to slip through the cracks and encouraging people to create a wider gap between armies.


The games that require the most skill to win are when the power level of the armies are equal. Whether that is kairos and 12 flamers or no magic and 100% core. What matters is that people take strongest combinations within the restrictions so as to minimize relative army power.

No comp DOES NOT EQUAL no skill. That doesn't mean you can't have HARD comp, to change the units that people use, but you should not be encouraging people to increase the army mismatch percentage.

mikhaila wrote:

Californiagamer wrote:Anyone get a response from GW if/when (and where) the overall standings would be released? Ive sent a few emails and only got the sound of silence.

thanks.

Doesn't always happen quickly. Figure that Ed and his crew got back sometime Monday. At some point after that they doublecheck the results, and send them off to "guy who controls the website". At this point it gets added to his workload and goes up on web depending on what else is going on that week.

I'd assume they'll be up soon. They probably have 50+ people emailing them over and over asking about the same thing, which is why you aren't getting replies. Give it a few days.

Yah youre right. Dont know if its just my web browser but it appears they took down the ToS Coverage this am and are updating perhaps. http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=300002§ion=community&pIndex=0&aId=15000018a&start=1&multiPageMode=true

just impatient to see what the overall breakdown was.

Themason wrote:I always love hearing from the players who's whole goal in this game is to bring the biggest dick-hammer army and then claim their win record is based on anything else...

If you want a no comp, no sport tournament where you can bring the cheesiest possible army meant to win games for you without the need for skill, well, GW already has that. It is called 'Ard Boyz. So please feel free to enjoy it.

As for any tournament other that 'Ard Boyz, some system is used to force players to take toned down list, use their actual skill, and win.

The fact that GW gave total free will in the tournament (all SCs allowed, etc) yet put in a system of control works well. If you can not play without the d-bag hammer, then take your hammer. Just hope that someone does not do equally well as you while not being a d-bag.

The only valid complaint i heard and agree with is the lack of Battle points to differential wins. It encouraged people to just simply go for the minor victory... though to truly do a mission with battle points would require them stepping outside the 3 basic missions from the book. I truly hope to see mission diversity and a battle point system instituted into ToS 2012

George, you're my friend, but give me a fething break. You play a balls out Blood Angels list. You take min/maxed dev squads, Mephiston, death company, assault squads, etc. You have no ground to stand on from the point of taking "skilled" armies.

The book missions are the most balanced missions out there. They allow armies that aren't able to crush other armies to win by going for minor victories. That is game balance and that does require skill.

When you use battle points it does stratify the field more, but it also encourages people to bring armies capable of crushing the other army as that is the only way to win the tournament. That means less army diversity. By using book missions, a wider variety of armies are able to compete by getting equal points for earning a minor victory which armies like Tau, Crons, etc. are only capable of pulling off in most cases. That is a good thing. It requires more tactics than simply taking a top tier list and it encourages people to bring a wider variety of lists.

I got a spreadsheet of the results a few minutes ago, it appears it was emailed to all the participants. Let's all meet in Vegas for Neoncon/Slaughter on the Strip in November, I'm sure there is more trouble we can get in somehow...

Speaking of the results sheet, did anyone else notice anything off on it? Either one of my opponents lied when he told me (unsolicited) that he had given me his best player vote, or it wasn't counted for some reason. Had it been counted, I would have gotten best Tyranid player.

I got the email too...Wow there were in fact 10 Eldar, 11 IG, 10 SW, 10 SM and the rest of the armies represented were smaller in number, who would have thunk? Plus, ALL of the Eldar players that got above 10 (except for me) did so because of 2-3 Favorite opponent votes... Way to throw off the average guys! Eldar had best sports in general =).

Good job pointy ear players! I'm trying to figure out why there were 5 Daemon players on Saturday and only 3 showing up on the final sheet. At first I thought it was because they dropped but I see players from a few other factions that did not play at all on Sunday, and their average was factored into the overall for their faction. If those other two players were still counted my overall may have been much higher. I totally understand why they would drop them from the scoring if they were just solid zero scores but it seems like if you drop a player for not being there Sunday you would drop all the players that weren't there Sunday?

It's interesting how much favorite votes played a part in that system (and day two drops), way more than I thought. One interesting thing is that the more Fav Op votes people of your race got, the more the average got pushed up, which meant that the nicer the other people with your army were (or more pity votes they got) the worse chance you actually had of winning. So, not only could you get hosed by people playing the same army doing well, but by being nice people too. So, the best option is apparently to play a medium army that is played by a bunch of jerks, haha.

Yeah, Phazael, the favorite opponent votes killed the Eldar (and probably every other armies) average and brought it up to 9.22 (it probably would have been between 5-6 if not for that...Everything else was something like 4-7 average except for Orks that got freakishly high scores (avg was 12+).

On the bright side, even with 3 favorite opponent votes, the best the other eldar could have done is tie me if I didn't get any favorite opponent votes but I was lucky and got 2 myself...

I think it would have been better to not have favorite opponent votes count for overall standing and just count them for tie breakers or something. Oh well, it was a very fun tourny that's for sure, I hope everyone else had a great time!

I was surprised how well Orks did. They seem to have had the highest consistent scores.

5 Ork Players:

[2] 4W/0L/1D
[1] 4W/1L/0D
[1] 3W/2L
[1] 2W/2L/1D

Or, to put it another way:

Top battle scores:
15 x1 (GK)
13 x4 (Orks x2, BA, GK, IG)
12 x5 (Eldar, GK, Ork, SM, SW)

60% of Ork players had battle scores in the top 10. 40% in the top 5.

Reese, you obviously need to switch to Orks with us.

Hey, I'm Mike Somerville, I won Best Imperial Guard.
I got zero sportsmanship votes, apparently I was an ass or something?

In any case, the ork players did do surprisingly well. I was surprised at how incredibly awful most of the BA players did.

Some of you seem surprised that people brought "rough" or "hard" lists, this is a tournament, what did you expect?

And, hey Reecius, it was nice to meet you on Saturday.

-Mike

Saint Omerville wrote:Hey, I'm Mike Somerville, I won Best Imperial Guard.
I got zero sportsmanship votes, apparently I was an ass or something?
-Mike

There is no apparently about it mike...

Ps its spencer.

Saint Omerville wrote:
I got zero sportsmanship votes, apparently I was an ass or something?

-Mike

That's a silly way to look at it. You only got points if your opponent's voted you their favorite opponent of the tournament. So even if you were incredibly nice if all 5 of your opponents had other games against even friendlier people then youself then you'd still get no sportsmanship points.

In other words, this system rewards exceptional sportsmanship rather than punishing general douche-baggery.

Exactly. I was surprised to get three votes. I would have been happy with one or two, certainly.

The spreadsheet's aa bit of fun to play with. I wonder how Rankings would sort it. If you sort by Overall Points, then by skulltaker points, the top twenty goes:

1. Doug Johnson, Orks, 17 total, 5450 skulls
2. Tony Grippando, Orks, 16 total, 5778 skulls
3. George Mason, BA, 16 total, 4200 skulls
4. John Hermann, GK, 15 total, 4771 skulls
5. Garye Lawrence, SM, 15 total, 4572 skulls
6. Adam Gati, Eldar, 15 total, 4153 skulls
7. Ragnar Arneson, CSM, 14 total, 4985 skulls
8. Geoffrey Zatkin, Orks, 14 total, 3963 skulls
9. Michael Somerville, IG, 13 total, 6426 skulls
10. Jonathon Wong, SM, 13 total, 4676 skulls
11. Tony Kopach, SW, 12 total, 6360 skulls
12. Chris Shriner, GK, 12 total, 5715 skulls
13. Dave Walz, Eldar, 12 total, 4965 skulls
14. Dustin Poston, DoC, 12 total, 4744 skulls
15. Toby Walker, Eldar, 12 total, 3126 skulls
16. Alex Fennell, CSM, 12 total, 2601 skulls
17. Russell Jacobsen, SW, 11 total, 5373 skulls
18. Marshall Reeves, IG, 11 total, 5302 skulls
19. Matthew Lau, Eldar, 11 total, 5194 skulls
20. Casey McNamara, SW, 11 total, 5080 skulls

@saint omervill
Nice to meet you as well! And Congrats on first fishing well.

@gz
I got an ork army! Haha, I will be joining the green tide soon!

Has anyone who ordered a shirt at the event heard anything about the status of their order?

Anyone talk to the RHQ guys about posting the results of this Tournament? I wouldn't know how to submit these results on there excel submission they have. You've got overall scores, best Generals and so on, but the Throne went to the best margin of victory so I don't have a clue what would be the way to do this.

@Reece - any thoughts?

No dark eldar in the top 20? Wow. Anyone want on shed some light on why that is? Did no one bring them?

Swilkins wrote:

Saint Omerville wrote:Hey, I'm Mike Somerville, I won Best Imperial Guard.
I got zero sportsmanship votes, apparently I was an ass or something?
-Mike

There is no apparently about it mike...

Ps its spencer.

If anyone knows anything about being an ass, it is Spencer.

I've played you MIke, I thought you were a nice guy and a great opponent. I can't imagine you being an ass.....as someone else posted, it's all about who is friendlist and the most fun....

Dracos wrote:No dark eldar in the top 20? Wow. Anyone want on shed some light on why that is? Did no one bring them?

Only five people brought Dark Eldar. A few were right on the cusp of the top 20, and the army had the second highest average score next to Orks. I haven't checked the scores recently but I think we were all within 2 points of each other; scoring an 11, 10, 10, 10 & 9.

Dugg, I'm going to try submitting it over to Rankings (now that their site's back up; it was down for ~ a week). I think probably the best way to represent the event's scoring priorities is sorting the spreadsheet by Grand Total, then by Skulltaker points.

Anyone have a better idea?

@ Mannahnin, That would be awesome of you. I think that would work as long as you can add in all the Best Codex Generals, Best Painters and Throne Winners. Which ever way you think is best within RHQs excel sheet.

Anyone get their shirt yet? Anyone coming back to Vegas in November for Neoncon?