Since I've been attending 40k GT's for the last 5 years, I've noticed a steady decline in attendance. A lot of people seem to want to chalk this to the edition changes, but I think that's simply not the case.

I think the problem lies within most of the top players. They forget about the primary purpose of the game. They make it their sole objective to crush there opponents without regard for having fun or sportsmanship. One of the best definitions of sportsmanship I've heard is "having a vested interest in making sure your opponent has a good time too". Taking balls out lists (Ad lance and 3 riptides for example) and trying to break the game (rules lawyering) is not conducive to that end. That type of behavior also eschews the hobbying aspect of the game. Even as a GT regular, something that makes me not want to attend future events are models that look like dog poo.

Most of the time, first time GT players show up with whatever they have. Often times it's not what we would call competitive. These players often end up playing against lists they have no chance against and becoming discouraged. Worse than that, they don't have fun, and having fun is the primary objective of 40k. When new players don't have fun, they don't come back. Tournaments gradually get smaller, and the game dies.

I spoke with some people at BFS about a new format of tournament called Highlander. In a nutshell, it only allows one of each unit ,(one riptide, one knight, one land raider, etc.....) and no battle brothers. I'm sure a lot of people will say it just creates a different meta so the broken stuff will just change. While true, it will make games more competitive for people who are simply bringing models that they like to play with. How many people just bought models they thought were cool when they first started? It makes lists like that more relevant.

If you disagree with that format, what do you think should be done to help get new players to keep coming back?

 Master Shake wrote:

Most of the time, first time GT players show up with whatever they have. Often times it's not what we would call competitive. These players often end up playing against lists they have no chance against and becoming discouraged. Worse than that, they don't have fun, and having fun is the primary objective of 40k. When new players don't have fun, they don't come back. Tournaments gradually get smaller, and the game dies.

I'm not a GT attendee, but if this part of what you said is true, then that is something that needs to be addressed. 'Tournament players' shouldn't be attending a "Grand Tournament" with uncompetitive lists. This is, after all, a Grand Tournament.

It sounds like what is needed are more tournaments, but not more Grand Tournaments. It sounds like players need more opportunities to play against new opponents and new armies. While tournaments for the "best of the best" and the like are a part of the hobby, they don't need to be the focus of the hobby (or even of the tournament scene). If you have a lot of people showing up at GTs with uncompetitive armies, then it sounds like these people are having trouble finding regular opportunities to play, and are using the tournaments as a source of games. Perhaps we need fewer 'major tournaments' and more frequent local 'tournaments' (or even just open gaming) to allow people to play the game, and not to focus on tournament prizewinning.

This would benefit everybody. New and casual players would have more opportunities to play, and to meet new players, and to hone their skills if they wished to 'go tournament'. Die-hard tournament players would be able to know that actual GTs would consist of skilled, regular players with competitive lists, encouraging them to attend for serious competition. The challenge might be getting people to attend a gaming event that wasn't presented as a GT (and to pay to do so).

Neil Gilstrap's been leading the Highlander charge forever now ... I think the BFS / others are pushing to start using this already, and I know the DC locals do it on occasion.

FWIW most tournaments are not experiencing decreased attendance. BFS had about the same or more, so did Michigan GT, LVO is doing better than last year on sales, NOVA had more 40k players during its day track this year than ever before (though some went over to the Narrative instead of the GT now that it had a day track), etc. etc.

I do think format / missions / rules do have an impact on attendance, and events that do not present broadly appealing ones will see substantial reductions, but most events are showing similar or increased attendance with good formats/missions/rules/etc.

Highlander is intriguing though ... and another way to have fun building lists!

Da Butcha wrote:
I'm not a GT attendee, but if this part of what you said is true, then that is something that needs to be addressed. 'Tournament players' shouldn't be attending a "Grand Tournament" with uncompetitive lists. This is, after all, a Grand Tournament.

I completely disagree! I've attended several GTs for both fantasy and 40k, and having a competitive list is by no means a requirement. If you go way back, in fact, painting and theme were as or more important than list construction.

Things have shifted a bit in that regard, but by no means do people need to have a competitive list to attend these events. They do need to know what they're in for, though- which is a rather intense meta at the moment.

Also, to MVBrandt's examples- I doubt you'll see declining attendance at the very top GTs (you listed BFS, LVO, and NOVA) unless the game enters a much worse state than it is in now. Even in that case, it's the smaller events that would feel the pinch first. I can't speak to this beginning to happen or not- I only know that at my FLGS, fantasy previously dried up (along with some of the fantasy events in this area), and now 40k is doing similarly (again, just at my FLGS).

For me, this means broadening my scope a bit- at my FLGS, I just participated in an Infinity league, am playing some X-wing now, and we'll be doing another Dropzone Commander one soon (as well as a Dark Heresy 40k RPG on the side). Malifaux is all the rage there, although I haven't gone in for it yet. I see a lot of GTs catering to this, too- a friend and I will be attending MechaniCon next week, for example, just to play X-wing! And I'm considering whether to register for these type of events at AdeptiCon and, possibly for the first time since I started attending, forgo the 40k team tournament.

I'm still undecided on that last bit, but the point remains- I think events are going to continue to need to diversify, as many have been for some time, if they want to mirror gamer's interests. It's no longer a one car show! And that, in the end, is a very good thing

BFS discussed Highlander to use for our Winter League. It sounds very interesting and actually fun. Not really sure how it translates to the Tournament Scene.. but I would enjoy play testing it out and see how it works.

I think Neil has a pretty strong starting rule-set for it. I think the next step might be to develop a handful of tight missions around it.

Interesting fact around the BFS attendance this year.... We actually had a couple of more players this year then last years GT so our numbers increased. We did this going head to head with the NYC ComicCon and losing about a half dozen players who have attended BFS 40k pretty much every year to Malifaux and X-wing Tournaments which we held for the first time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MVBrandt wrote:

I do think format / missions / rules do have an impact on attendance, and events that do not present broadly appealing ones will see substantial reductions, but most events are showing similar or increased attendance with good formats/missions/rules/etc.

+1

Lets also not discount the sheer number of events now going. We had 3 GT's last weekend. Feast, Michigan, and BFS. I now don't have to fly and don't have to drive more than 10 hours to hit 6 GT's in year. Time was I got 2 GT's a year, maybe 3 if I was willing to go to Seattle or fly for another event.

We'll see how it goes. I think the biggest impact is the format of the event. People do want limited 40k. It's finding the right balance that's hard.

Part of it is lists but while deathstar hammer would have killed 40k the shift to 7th actually is going to help it. It just might take people a second to recover from 6th edition deathstar hammer.

I think the problem is with the attitude that the TOs seem to present. The competition between TOs to get people to their events seem to exude a poor appearance and a too competitive attitude.

Da Butcha wrote:

I'm not a GT attendee, but if this part of what you said is true, then that is something that needs to be addressed. 'Tournament players' shouldn't be attending a "Grand Tournament" with uncompetitive lists. This is, after all, a Grand Tournament.

Like many other groups of players, you are missing the point of Grand tournaments and I think, 40k in general.

The point is to have fun. Not to win $300 dollars worth of toys, so you can eBay them and pay rent.

 Master Shake wrote:

Da Butcha wrote:

I'm not a GT attendee, but if this part of what you said is true, then that is something that needs to be addressed. 'Tournament players' shouldn't be attending a "Grand Tournament" with uncompetitive lists. This is, after all, a Grand Tournament.

Like many other groups of players, you are missing the point of Grand tournaments and I think, 40k in general.

The point is to have fun. Not to win $300 dollars worth of toys, so you can eBay them and pay rent.

I think most top players tend to find winning to be a great deal of fun.

EDIT: that was perhaps, a pithy and, most importantly, incomplete answer. People who are best at this game enjoy the challenge of creating the soundest theory, and testing that theory against top players. They enjoy being highly competitive, and there is nothing wrong with that, at all. They are having fun. They're having the fun that they enjoy from mastery of their hobby.

There is no wrong kind of fun to have with your toy soldiers.

 Valhallan42nd wrote:

 Master Shake wrote:

Da Butcha wrote:

I'm not a GT attendee, but if this part of what you said is true, then that is something that needs to be addressed. 'Tournament players' shouldn't be attending a "Grand Tournament" with uncompetitive lists. This is, after all, a Grand Tournament.

Like many other groups of players, you are missing the point of Grand tournaments and I think, 40k in general.

The point is to have fun. Not to win $300 dollars worth of toys, so you can eBay them and pay rent.

I think most top players tend to find winning to be a great deal of fun.

Having won a few GTs (and now in multipe games, har har), I can't say I've ever looked through my prize pool or even been aware of it the day of the win. I won some stuff at BFS yesterday and haven't really looked at anything yet even. Winning can be fun, if you do it and enjoy the games along w/ your opponents. I haven't experienced most winners playing for the glory or the loot.

Playing for loot is much more of a Local event thing than a GT thing IMO.

If I go to a LGS and drop $10 for entry win and get say $50-60 store credit. I make out and can support my hobby.

If I travel to a GT, book a hotel, maybe fly, pay $50 for a ticket, at least the same for food. That prize support has to be huge to offset my costs.

People go to play games, and have fun generally.

That said I have played some people that are far more concerned with winning than having a cordial game.

The marketing part of my brain is telling me well you have identified the symptom of the drop in attendance, you have not identified the cause!

Try and talk to players who use to come to tournments, and ask why they no longer come. Sometimes their are common themes between responses that may surprise you.

In my experience these are some of the causes I've seen been the issue.

-Player culture (Top players crushing people for example.)
-Cost to enter (Maby the entry fee is to high?)
-Prize support (Do you only have one larger prize for the top player? Maby consider supporting a 2nd, 3rd and/or wood spoon awards.)
-If it's the appearance of armies like some people suggest and you just do a few large tournaments, then introduce a award for best painted army.

If top players are crushing people like you suggest do not introduce sportsman ship scores. Their abused to much, and don't fix problems. (What you tabled my army? F you, I'm going to give you a low score because of your cheesy power list.)

In my experience stuff like doing gimmicks for each tournament worked best. (Maby one tournment their are restrictions tank AV, max % of points can be spent in a FoC slot, ect) Gimmicks encourage more list building and top players to adjust their list.

 Lockark wrote:
The marketing part of my brain is telling me well you have identified the symptom of the drop in attendance, you have not identified the cause!

Try and talk to players who use to come to tournments, and ask why they no longer come. Sometimes their are common themes between responses that may surprise you.

In my experience these are some of the causes I've seen been the issue.

-Player culture (Top players crushing people for example.)
-Cost to enter (Maby the entry fee is to high?)
-Prize support (Do you only have one larger prize for the top player? Maby consider supporting a 2nd, 3rd and/or wood spoon awards.)
-If it's the appearance of armies like some people suggest and you just do a few large tournaments, then introduce a award for best painted army.

If top players are crushing people like you suggest do not introduce sportsman ship scores. Their abused to much, and don't fix problems. (What you tabled my army? F you, I'm going to give you a low score because of your cheesy power list.)

In my experience stuff like doing gimmicks for each tournament worked best. (Maby one tournment their are restrictions tank AV, max % of points can be spent in a FoC slot, ect) Gimmicks encourage more list building and top players to adjust their list.

Problem is, his symptom is inaccurate. GT attendance by and large is not dropping, nor is his symptom reflective of how most "competitive" players think when they attend a GT (in other words, most do not attend for the phat lewt or massive glory ... they just want to catch up with friends and play good games, and enjoy winning well enough).

If there is a disparity in army class between the top players and the first time players, that resides squarely on the system being played.

If math theory becomes the driving choice in army and unit selection and has a larger determining factor in game outcome, then it is squarely on the system being played.

If you have to force an army creation type to bring parity back and increase effect of generalship on game outcomes, that sits squarely on the fault of the system being played.

GW games, in their current incarnation, are the reason fewer people are shelling out money to play in tournements. They are the reason that alternative systems (Malifaux, Infinity, Bolt Action) can find enough players to put together a tournement scene. Ask any ten players of a different system why they are playing it, and I am betting a full 50% will cite somekind of problem with GW's current offerings on why they expanded their horizons.

Tournament culture is tournement culture. If doesn't matter if it is MtG, 40K, chess, or tiddlywinks. Changing the culture, might bring in new players, but it is just as likely to drive off the existing crowd.

Breng77 wrote:

People go to play games, and have fun generally.

This is the reason I spent 10 hours in a car this past weekend to go to the Michigan GT. I get to see my buddies from all over that I maybe get to see twice a year.

If people attend purely to catch up with old friends and have a good time, then why do you think missions have an effect on attendance?

They apparently didn't effect NOVA! lol

BAO 2014 this year sold out with only 1 month to prep and sell tickets.

LVO 2014 Sold out completely.

LVO 2015 is about to sell out for 40K, 4 months out from the event. (And our Highlander vent is proving to be quite popular, too!)

Guardian Cup 2014 sold out and had a wait list.

Brawl in the Fall sold out and had a 30 person wait list.

I could go on, but I think you all get the picture. 40K tournaments in a general sense are super healthy, I think there is just variance from event to event based on a host of factors that are not directly related to the game itself: marketing, venue, format, local culture, etc.

I haven't really been active here for too long but doesn't the OP post something hammering on tournament players quite often?

For me, I go to tourneys as much as I can. But i have a family and two small children and live in the middle of nowhere.

As Hulk said, he can go to a multitude of Gts within driving distance. I am able to at least make a few a year within 150 miles or so.

If anything i think the tourney scene is doing quite well. If anything we have too many events to choose from so the attendance pool is smaller at alot of events because they don't have to wait to go to LVO or NOVA or Adepticon to get theri games in. There are tourneys somewhere on any given weekend.

 Master Shake wrote:
If people attend purely to catch up with old friends and have a good time, then why do you think missions have an effect on attendance?

They apparently didn't effect NOVA! lol

I'm surprised at a comment that infers the only reason someone would care about a mission would be whether or not he/she could win at it.

Also, BeeCee, the OP is both a good / relatively harmless fellow, and a competitive tournament player who brings beater lists to tournaments. FWIW.

Fair enough, i retract any negative statements.

I was actually inferring that missions have no effect on having a good time, IMO.

I've seen nothing but bigger numbers from the events that actually happened this year on the west coast. BAO is the only standout in that regard as they dropped numbers from last year (due to a smaller but *much improved* venue) and yet they still sold out with about 5 weeks to sell tickets. LVO next February is nearly sold out and had to expand the room block once already.

By contrast, on the other side of the country, the 11th Company GT, by all accounts a great event, has plenty of tickets for sale with a few weeks left to go.

I don't think the competitive state of the game has much effect on tourney attendance at all. Consider all the work that goes into booking a large event, and then consider that the schedules of 100+ people have to line up perfectly to make it there (particularly a difficult feat during holiday times, which is why attendance tends to drop off in November events). If I had to list every factor that could cause somebody not to attend a GT I could fill three pages before I even touched on reasons that have to do with the actual state of the game of 40k.

Highlander stuff is cool too, though!

 Master Shake wrote:
I was actually inferring that missions have no effect on having a good time, IMO.

My counterpoint was that they DO have an effect on a good time. I do not know many people that enjoy the majority of their time at a con (which 2.5-3 hour 40k GT rounds in a 5+ round GT represents) spent playing crappy missions.

What would you consider a crappy mission?

 Master Shake wrote:
What would you consider a crappy mission?

Irrelevant. My opinion on crappy missions is only my own. The general point is that if an individual doesn't like the missions he's playing, he's not going to enjoy the game as much. I don't like Maelstrom, personally, so I don't enjoy games played with Maelstrom. That doesn't make Maelstrom objectively crappy, but it does mean I'm less likely to attend a tournament with Maelstrom missions, b/c I won't enjoy myself as much by some %.

Back to the main point - the theory that people attend tournaments for the prizes and glory and to kick teeth in is broadly inaccurate if applied to most "competitive" players. Most folks attend to have a fun time and catch up with friends. They are more likely to attend an event with missions and format that they consider more fun, then. Pretty consistent with the concept.

Also, Kelsey, don't start trolling (not saying you are at all, just that you do sometimes in these types of threads, <3).

I'm trying my best to leave my trolling pants in the closet, Mike!

yeah the one day rogue trader style events are probably hurting.

I don't play one day events anymore.
I prefer to play in 3 or 4 2 day events a year now.

so I will go to adepticon and 3 two day events in the PNW.
I will go play pick up games a FLGS on wednesday night but my weekends are to special to waste in a crappy little store anymore.
tourneys are not seeing less people. there are just more events now then in the past sure a used to be able to play in a RT almost every weekend in the early 2000's but those days are gone and have shifted to larger events. Adepticon will sell out again in less then 24 hrs and other events will continue to sell out. Why do you think that events are shrinking? sure you might think that are not your thing anymore because the guys who win are jerks. I win every event i play in because i go to hang with friends and throw some dice.

 Darkness wrote:
I think the problem is with the attitude that the TOs seem to present. The competition between TOs to get people to their events seem to exude a poor appearance and a too competitive attitude.

Citation needed. Please give examples of this other than anecdotal examples.

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:

 Darkness wrote:
I think the problem is with the attitude that the TOs seem to present. The competition between TOs to get people to their events seem to exude a poor appearance and a too competitive attitude.

Citation needed. Please give examples of this other than anecdotal examples.

+1

 skkipper wrote:
yeah the one day rogue trader style events are probably hurting.

I don't play one day events anymore.
I prefer to play in 3 or 4 2 day events a year now.

so I will go to adepticon and 3 two day events in the PNW.
I will go play pick up games a FLGS on wednesday night but my weekends are to special to waste in a crappy little store anymore.
tourneys are not seeing less people. there are just more events now then in the past sure a used to be able to play in a RT almost every weekend in the early 2000's but those days are gone and have shifted to larger events. Adepticon will sell out again in less then 24 hrs and other events will continue to sell out. Why do you think that events are shrinking? sure you might think that are not your thing anymore because the guys who win are jerks. I win every event i play in because i go to hang with friends and throw some dice.

I think this aspect might've been missed. Just because the big events are doing well doesn't really indicate much about smaller ones... I'm very much like skippper, ready to register for AdeptiCon the moment it goes live, but not likely to play in a local 40k RTT anymore.

For me, 40k is such a mess right now that I have no real desire to play in a competitive environment. I still love going to events for the social aspect, and the Nova Narrative was fan-freakin-tastic.

What I've been observing is event attendance up but 40k GT attendance specifically down. There's more games popping up, more alternatives to GT 40k and so on.

Yeah, that's where I'm at too, Chumbalaya (just speaking for myself, not necessarily a trend).

MVBrandt wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
The marketing part of my brain is telling me well you have identified the symptom of the drop in attendance, you have not identified the cause!

Try and talk to players who use to come to tournments, and ask why they no longer come. Sometimes their are common themes between responses that may surprise you.

In my experience these are some of the causes I've seen been the issue.

-Player culture (Top players crushing people for example.)
-Cost to enter (Maby the entry fee is to high?)
-Prize support (Do you only have one larger prize for the top player? Maby consider supporting a 2nd, 3rd and/or wood spoon awards.)
-If it's the appearance of armies like some people suggest and you just do a few large tournaments, then introduce a award for best painted army.

If top players are crushing people like you suggest do not introduce sportsman ship scores. Their abused to much, and don't fix problems. (What you tabled my army? F you, I'm going to give you a low score because of your cheesy power list.)

In my experience stuff like doing gimmicks for each tournament worked best. (Maby one tournment their are restrictions tank AV, max % of points can be spent in a FoC slot, ect) Gimmicks encourage more list building and top players to adjust their list.

Problem is, his symptom is inaccurate. GT attendance by and large is not dropping, nor is his symptom reflective of how most "competitive" players think when they attend a GT (in other words, most do not attend for the phat lewt or massive glory ... they just want to catch up with friends and play good games, and enjoy winning well enough).

I assumed he was talking about specifically his area/a tournament series he ran in the GT format.

I ran a GT this month that restricted units outside troops to 0-2 and it was very well received. Also seemed like most people had a better time overall.

I think Games Workshop is the reason why tournament attendance (outside of GTs) is down. It's the fact the GT crowd is what it is, along with the great folks behind it (Reece, Chandler, Mike Brandt and all their respective teams), that keep those stages filled to the brim with waiting lists. That a third party defined rules of engagement where you can have 5~8 games in two days that don't have any further negotiations beyond whether you have beer before, during, or after the game makes for good times. NOT loosely defined hogwash of "should I or shouldn't I take this or that..."

Games Workshop introduced the loosest ruleset with more random bloat to date in a market filled to the brim with hungry competition. The fact the GTs stay full and, to my limited view, the local RTTs are ailing, is what we have all tacitly known: good rules structure makes a good game with helps promote a good community. And the fact that the 40k community that attends these events will have a good time if you give them bricks and boards and told to make their own game (as long as, again, beer is involved in the discussion...). They'll continue to strive to make the best with what they are given for the sake of friendships stemmed from the plastic army manz.

In my area, I probably have on choice for 40k tournaments with an hour drive on a monthly basis. Or I can simply chuck a stone in a direction and find a Steamroller event for that weekend. As long as the GT folks have a pulse on the community and diversify their game offerings and as long as they are pulling in the attendance, then the large events will stay successful until/unless something even more drastic this way comes from GW.

Fantastic post, TheKbob! I agree with everything you've said, and it mirrors my own experience / what I see happening my area, but you've put it into words much better!

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:

What is this an answer to? Is your answer to the OP's question about why attendance appears to be down in tournaments is because you and your two friends aren't competitive and will not play the game with people who are competitive so that is why attendance is perceived to be down in tournaments? What does this comment have do do with anything the OP is questioning? Or are you trying to turn this post into yet another competitive vs narrative gamer threads of which there are many and they all stink?

lmao OK bro...

I've been to quite a few events over the last few years, and they've been pretty good at avoiding the 'Win At All Costs' crowd.

The two major pillars of the Throne of Skulls/Council of War/Campaign Weekend stuff is:

(a) it's nigh - I'd go so far as to say completely - impossible to win an event without a substantial proportion of favourite game votes. That's probably the single most important element to my mind, because if you can't get it through your head that, tournament or not, the point of this hobby is to be enjoyable for both parties involved, then frankly you can win as many games as you like but I don't want you to win any event. Ever.

(b) on a campaign weekend event, there are loads of individual awards but spending two days making fourteen year olds cry with your particular interpretation of the rules that makes your army invincible isn't one of them. You win or lose as a team/faction/whatever.

(c) Tournament 'results' aren't based on your placement in the mass of contestants as a whole but your placement relative to your peers - i.e. those with the same army faction. So there is a 'best Marine player', 'best Imperial Knights player' etc. This means that turning up with that list from the internet from the newest codex doesn't help you, and if you really want an award, turning up with Adepta Sororitas, or Militarum Tempestus or a similar not especially competitive list and playing well with it is actually your best bet.


As to turnout - aside from local store events, most of the events I've been to have been Warhammer World run, and they've had a damn good turnout. I've got a lot of time for the Events Team there - they put a lot of time and effort into their stuff. Granted "it's their job" but there aren't many of them, they have other responsibilities too and between systems they put something on something tournament-esque pretty much every other weekend.

To the OP. If you want to see tournament size go up I'd suggest exactly the opposite of GW has been releasing the last 3 years. Basically please make list building back to a single army list no bull gak Low no allys no detachments. .. These are things that should build the narrative and bring random fun combos to a game. This has no place in competitive play. Competitive means level field, every man has one book and one army list just like 5th edition. Once GW decided to release more the a couple codexs a year it makes it almost impossible to tell what is a legal build or not... just like what happened at feast of blades with their small list issues. .... but if it was 5th edition it was black and white. One force org one book.

 Master Shake wrote:
Since I've been attending 40k GT's for the last 5 years, I've noticed a steady decline in attendance. A lot of people seem to want to chalk this to the edition changes, but I think that's simply not the case.

I think the problem lies within most of the top players. They forget about the primary purpose of the game. They make it their sole objective to crush there opponents without regard for having fun or sportsmanship. One of the best definitions of sportsmanship I've heard is "having a vested interest in making sure your opponent has a good time too". Taking balls out lists (Ad lance and 3 riptides for example) and trying to break the game (rules lawyering) is not conducive to that end..

What do you consider "rules lawyering"? What if two players have a genuine disagreement on what a rule means, and the rule is so shoddily written that it's impossible to look at it and say "You're right, you're wrong.". Invoke the "cheat on a 4+" rule, and potentially decide the game with one dice roll? That doesn't sound terribly fun either.

 Masos wrote:
To the OP. If you want to see tournament size go up I'd suggest exactly the opposite of GW has been releasing the last 3 years. Basically please make list building back to a single army list no bull gak Low no allys no detachments. .. These are things that should build the narrative and bring random fun combos to a game. This has no place in competitive play. Competitive means level field, every man has one book and one army list just like 5th edition. Once GW decided to release more the a couple codexs a year it makes it almost impossible to tell what is a legal build or not... just like what happened at feast of blades with their small list issues. .... but if it was 5th edition it was black and white. One force org one book.

That doesn't work, because some armies will still have killer builds with their one book. The problem is the poor balance within books, taking combos of them only aggravates it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At heart, I think the problem is that 40K just isn't suited for tournaments. The rules are too unbalanced, and the options too varied in value for their points. And winning is kind of inherent to a tournament, otherwise why bother with any sort of ranking or record of who won games? Just show up and have a bash with whoever's around. If you think about it, you're blaming players for trying "too hard" to win....after entering an event with a winner! There seems to be an association between the list you run and what sort of person you are, that just plain doesn't exist in more balanced game systems.

I played all GT's in the Netherlands for years, but stopped a few years ago because of several reasons:
- The cost went up (in itself the smalles problem)
- Points for painting were more and more subjective (but predictable) and in many cases relative to how well you knew the organisation; quite some players knew their points beforehand.
- the number of players that played to win (not even a problem) only in combination with bad sportsmanship and (IMO a problem) got higher

In the end: less fun for more money.
For me winning is nice, but playing well is more important to me than playing to win.
I play since Rogue Trader and ik can win if i want, but it's more interesting to play a completely different thing and do well then use the current holes in the rules and win.

I do still attend smaller tournaments though, but also there the fun depends on who organises it and who comes to play.

One addition though: the new edition does not help in regard to balance. Not at all.
Will not stop me from the few tournaments i still attend, but did, again, diminish tournament attendance.
Maybe at most from players that thought "new edition, maybe nice to try a tournament" that then faced extreme Necron barge armies, Sneaky Allied combos and more Bikes, Thunderwolves and Thunderfire cannons than ever seen in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I even forgot the most important thing: how to fix it.
Well, i don't really know.

The biggest flaw in the current tournament rules system (objectives) is that you need to reach an objective, you do not need to hold it.
So being fast is the most important thing, being fast with a good armour save means you can get somewhere and have survivability there.
If you are slow or have no armour, well, then you lose.

The biggest flaw in the armycomposition is that everything is allowed and there is nothing to balance it.

I understand it's good for the hobbyist and it is good for sales (of certain units).
But it does not solve any hobby problem (in friendly games we always allow anything), it does create tournament problems.

We all know freedom in armycomposition this is not how the rules are used in tournaments, it leads to more of the same, not more variety.

If you change these 2 things, you are talking off a new edition, because these are the only real changes in the new edition.

I play lots of game systems.
Armycomp should be a factor, luck should be a factor, but SKILL should be the biggest factor (50+% will do).
Blood Bowl, Epic Armageddon, Warmaster, Dystopian Wars, even Battlefleet Gothic can get to this 50%

In a good system there is balance and at least most (preferably all) units should be worth their points in the game.
No game system is perfect, but there are levels.
In WH40K skill does still matter, but armycomp has gone way over 50% in the average game.
In most battles in 7th i know beforehand what army will win, not what player.

And there is no solving that.
And i am afraid there is no solving the result of that, tournament attendance.

I think the biggest factor in all of this is trying to change the mentality that winning with the best list is the same as winning in the best way - everyone having fun.

This can come down to figuring out a different system of generating a winner and making those "fun" events better then the so called ball crusher events we see. Trust me TO's are watching every event in order to ensure their investment doesn't blow up in the faces in the next few years. A lot of the TO's have contracts they sign to get a good 2-3 year rate on the location - so generating a bad vibe for an event can kill them.

So let's look at the top things people kind of want.

1. Restricted army building in order to remove combos/unfair advantages/etc. This is one that everyone talks about but when you put your junk on the table no one wants to fully pull the trigger. I have always said - screw it make a ban list and call it a day like Magic and other Highly competitive games do. We all love options and variety but I think most players can point to certain things and armies that cause issues. Whenever you build a new list you should ask yourself - how long will 6 serpents take to table this army? Or what happens when I face a C'Tann/Revenant? It is pretty simple to see the worst things in the game right now.

So then restricting these things might be needed to keep the game breathing right. We could go Highlander (Which works great right now with everything scoring and a few armies needing the ability to duplicate a troop to ensure they re battle forged) which is a neat idea. We could go locked in only one Book armies. We could limit the sources like others do. It is hard because each style has a vocal minority that just screams if their idea isn't used or the idea presented doesn't butter their bread for their version of 40k.

2. Events the emphasis fun over complete destruction. We all want to have fun and the issue comes in we all have different kinks that make the game exciting. It might be fun to see how fast an optimized army tables you. It could be your thing to bring a subpar list and win most of your games. The event could just be a place to showcase your amazing painting/conversions and winning is an afterthought. I think more events might just need to try and push a more fun option to ensure player turnout. If you make the Highlander Championship - go on how their could only be one and do a decent amount of prize support spread down the Top to the Top player armies - you might see a big turn out. I think we need to bring back some more player love to make sure we keep going.

3. Unified system - either for reporting, scoring, ranking, etc. Something to unify all these events and make players feel like they can go from the East Coast to the West Coast and know how the game will work for themselves. Nothing is worse then to get to an event you thought was cool with your list and then find out halfway through you "cheated" because the list wasn't fully vetted. And we all know how hard it is to judge lists too? I mean - so many different options, rules, etc can get mixed in. Heck FW has changed rules and armies so many times it gets hard to keep those things in check.

Sorry this rambled on - baby came in plus some house issues makes Goatboy a tired man. I personally like the idea of Highlander as armies will become the armies you see in White Dwarves and on GW's site - and they usually end up looking better and at least fun to play/lose with.

The one thing I haven't seen in this thread is the only thing I was really interested in seeing.

Is there any data to support the assertion that there is decreasing attendance at tournaments? Our local scene seems to have fairly consistent tournament turnout. I'm not a member of the GT scene, so I have no idea about that.

Does anyone have attendance numbers for the GTs that have been in existence over the last five years or so? I'm curious to see if this perception is accurate to reality.

As noted on page 1 by Reecius / MVBrandt et al, GT attendance at big events is doing fine.

Several of us posted about declining RTT attendance / events locally, but you're not going to find nationwide compiled data on that or anything.

Yup - the bigger GTs are doing fine as they diversify their own events. Plus being in big cities helps a lot as well as a lot of the bigger events have more internet presence in order to help drive attendance, overall feeling of getting together with old friends, and generating interest. The big events will normally stay big while the smaller ones get hurt.

But really - lack of big pushes of talking about the event hurts some of these things. You know all about the Nova and LVO because Mike and Reese are talking about it all the time. It helps a lot.

So is this all anecdotal, sky-is-falling, hand-wringing on the OPs part then?

Seems to be that the GT scene is alive and well.
I would love to attend a GT, but finding time to do so in between career, family, friends, and other interests makes it harder and harder to do so.

I really dont see this at all living outside chicago 20 min from adepticon. They just had to triple the space they are using for that simply because they outgrew 40,000sq feet of space

Again - the big ones do fine because they are all not about 40k - and living 20min from Adepticon gives you an advantage many other folks don't have.

But again - yeah the big ones are not going to hurt because they can do all sorts of other events that make it not just a RTT etc. You don't have to play games and have a good time. A lot of events are just that - a Warhammer event. Thus they see a drop off as the game becomes less exciting for people to spend the money to drive/fly out etc.

 House Griffith wrote:
So is this all anecdotal, sky-is-falling, hand-wringing on the OPs part then?

Seems to be that the GT scene is alive and well.
I would love to attend a GT, but finding time to do so in between career, family, friends, and other interests makes it harder and harder to do so.

For the most part yes, most GTs have experienced no real noticeable change in numbers that I've seen, beyond wargamescon and feast of blades from what I've seen. Feast has a unique model in which it went to a pretty drasticly changed format, but sources from feeder events around the country - who didnt want to pay to run feeders (i heard, no clue if true) so that lowered attendance.

I will say life this year kept me out of smaller RTT events locally while I still attended 5 GT's and have a 6th coming up. I actually think it's easier for me to do a GT than an RTT because it's easier to plan a weekend and since it's more of an investment there is sudden last minute backing out.

That said our local area runs 1-2 RTT's a month and attendence is between 8 and 18 mostly. Really depends on the store, time frame it's advertised, and what else is going on. Winter normally equals bigger events for us too since there isn't anything else to do

EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

From my experience at recent small RTTs of 7th edition is any event that does not have FoC limitations and LoW's and just allow anything goes for the most part have suffered from low attendance.

Who wants to go to an 8 man Tournament and face 4 armies with C/Trans or multi CADs.

Arent we seeing a trend of GTs not limiting CADs and LoWs having trouble with attendance ? FoB and Wargamescon are recent examples. I will be interested to see Mechanicons attendance since they have little restriction.

 Fenris Frost wrote:
EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

Not sure if serious.......

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Fenris Frost wrote:
EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

Not sure if serious.......

Exactly what I am talking about.

That's a lot of pent up anger over people spending their weekend playing 40k.

The 40k bourgeoisie? Really? And tournaments exist to further their agenda?

Dude, chill. It's a weekend away from the missus, getting drunk and playing with toy soldiers. It's not a Bilderberg summit.

 Thud wrote:
That's a lot of pent up anger over people spending their weekend playing 40k.

The 40k bourgeoisie? Really? And tournaments exist to further their agenda?

Dude, chill. It's a weekend away from the missus, getting drunk and playing with toy soldiers. It's not a Bilderberg summit.

Ah yes, I forgot, it's only okay to make a big deal about this game and write some kind of dissertation when you're part of the elite crew. Then it's "an insightful look into the dynamics of the current world and local meta interaction, and the current feelings of the playerbase as pertains to the modern iteration of the 40k tournament gameplay standard.

You don't have a name everyone recognizes, though...you just get the old "bro chill it's just a stupid game god I can't even believe you care" treatment.

 Fenris Frost wrote:

 Thud wrote:
That's a lot of pent up anger over people spending their weekend playing 40k.

The 40k bourgeoisie? Really? And tournaments exist to further their agenda?

Dude, chill. It's a weekend away from the missus, getting drunk and playing with toy soldiers. It's not a Bilderberg summit.

Ah yes, I forgot, it's only okay to make a big deal about this game and write some kind of dissertation when you're part of the elite crew. Then it's "an insightful look into the dynamics of the current world and local meta interaction, and the current feelings of the playerbase as pertains to the modern iteration of the 40k tournament gameplay standard.

You don't have a name everyone recognizes, though...you just get the old "bro chill it's just a stupid game god I can't even believe you care" treatment.

So... seriously. Are you trolling? Because now you've really left the reservation.

 Fenris Frost wrote:
EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

This post just indicates that you have no idea what you are talking about. You've built yourself a nice little box based on ignorant assumptions. It might behoove you to actually go see a GT. You don't have to participate. Come out of your box and just go see one. It'll open your eyes.

Let's ratchet down the language in this thread, please. Remember, Rule #1 of Dakka is "Be Polite". We should be able to discuss gaming with toy soldiers on the weekends without resorting to insults! Thanks.

Open my eyes to what? What real 40k is like? How the big boys play? Enlighten me, man. Because as far as I know, a GT is the same thing as an RTT except with more rounds (and more self-aggrandizing organizer hoopla).

It is the epitome of everything wrong with this game that I need to somehow blow a grand on a 40k vacation weekend with "the stars" before my opinion counts. I run a club, I keep a store open, and I oversee people every weekend playing this game instead of just one a year. What makes me not qualified to explain why those people prefer to come play at my place every week and avoid GTs and RTTs like the plague?

If you want to know why people AREN'T going, guys like me are the experts on that...not you lot with the stats in your sigs. That's all I'm getting at.

GTs survive on the underlying communal mentality. Mechanically, they are nothing but a more complicated, larger scale RTT (that more people have messed with, format-wise).

Most GTs are dozens upon dozens of really cool people socializing, playing warhammer, drinking beer (or soda or water), getting food together after meeting each other over games and conversations, checking out cool armies, and generally having a great time.

At all GTs, one person wins something. In the case of most of those people, they don't even care what they won. Elitist stat-padders are by definition the minority. "That guy" is more commonly the local RTT winning "big fish in a small pond," who rarely chooses to leave that pond for broader seas.

The stuff you wrote does not reflect reality. I can understand coming to those sorts of conclusions based upon a series of predispositions and preconceived notions, and you are generally part of a very large crowd of people who do not have experience with GTs, yet still spout the same broad thesis implying they are an ego-stroke-fest among some sort of small elitist group of hyper competitors.

Your cake is a lie. It's costing you a potentially fun time. Alternately, it's costing a bunch of really fun people who go to GTs and win a few, lose a few, and have a lot of fun the questionable pleasure of your company. No idea.

Also, most of the people who go to GTs are people who like to Build, Paint, Play. I can tell you from interactions with thousands of 40k players, that most of them live and die by that ... and attend GTs to practice and share in that very activity and hobby.

Keep in mind also that comments like "I run a club, I keep a store open, and I oversee people every weekend playing this game instead of just once a year" further exemplifies the [understandable, truly] ignorance with which you've come to your conclusions. Most of us who run major events (or even attend them) do all of those things ourselves, to greater or lesser extents.

The imagined state of a TO being a guy looking to stroke his ego amongst an elitist group of hyper competitors that he only sees once a year at the one event he runs, and who does nothing else throughout the rest of the year, screams "I have no idea what I'm talking about."

That said, I'm not particularly hurt by this. You are. We'll go right on hosting dozens of events of varying size annually, socializing and gaming with hundreds of fellow hobbyists, raising thousands of buckaroos for good charitable causes through the events that we run, and watching tons of gamers have a fantastic time traveling to local, regional, national, and international GTs and events. That you are not part of them through willful ignorance (and I don't mean that harshly ... I just mean that you are lacking real knowledge or experience on your subject matter, by proof of your own words, and you are willfully committed to maintaining that lack of knowledge, also by your own words) is really no skin off anyone's back. GTs are open play experiences - anyone can show up and play. If someone doesn't want to, that's cool also.

PS/Edit - I've literally almost NEVER seen a GT attendee say something like: "THOSE LOCAL ONLY PLAYERS WHO WON'T ATTEND GT'S ARE SUCH donkey-caves! THEY RUIN THE HOBBY FOR PEOPLE!" I have seen a lot of people who refuse to attend GTs say things like "IT'S JUST A BUNCH OF ELITIST PRICKS LOOKING TO PAD THEIR STATS!"

It doesn't take much to guess at which of those two groups most often comes off as actually elitist.

Fenris, for myself, I will try to answer a few of your questions:

Yes, a GT is a more complicated, larger scale RTT. However, some of the things you're reacting to ("weekend with 'the stars'" for example) are not my experience of going to either a GT or RTT.

Usually, I'm going with local friends, or meeting up with friends from abroad- not necessarily famous ones. I've gotten to meet legoburner (the man behind the curtain of Dakka, who does all the coding, etc) at 3 different conventions, and it's been awesome!

Big events are also an opportunity for me to build and paint a new army for the goal of using it at that event. Sometimes they also offer unique events/settings/rules, like the AdeptiCon team tourney that I've participated in a few times. It really is, for me, about having a good time and getting together with friends.

Obviously, my local friends I can see anytime but it's still fun to build towards and go to a big event together, and it gives me an opportunity to see friends that don't live nearby, too.

So, I think you are reacting to a certain idea of what these events are, and while that stereotype might apply to some people/events, it certainly doesn't apply to all, or even most!

Hope this helps show where I'm coming from, at least . I think you're getting a little far afield on some things here, though, since it sounds like you might not ever want to attend an event, which doesn't really contribute to their increased or decreased attendance. Your say does matter, of course, just like everyone's here! But, I think some of the things you're saying are more an impression than a reality (although impressions matter, of course- the impression that 7th edition is a nightmare to work through and play, and that you'll face super heavies every game or the like, is a major deterrent to people attending certain tournies, even if that impression isn't always reality).

See, now, I will tell you this:

These last two posts here did a better job of dispelling my dispositions against GTs than anything anyone has said to me on the subject, so far. Both very well said, and neither was dismissive.

The thing is, I want to support this game. I love it enough that I devoted six years of my life to bring it to other people. And when guys like me have these impressions, wrong though they may be...it may as well be true for all I've heard it contradicted. I appreciate that my ignorance is acknowledged here, albeit in a respectful way. I am ignorant, there is no way around that fact -- but the question I pose is why I (and others like me) prefer to avoid the whole thing. It's more esoteric than mechanics or promotion...it's a vibe. It makes us small-time guys feel like we just plain don't belong, or aren't wanted, or some combination of the two.

What was done here with these two posts, on a bigger scale, will change a lot of minds. I know I will be referencing both of these a lot when trying to show the pros and cons as they have done a good job of illuminating the blind spots in my own experiences and focusing on more positive aspects.

What sticks most is that, yes, impressions matter -- even though mine are likely wrong, they are also common for one reason or another. I don't want to never go to a GT, I want GTs to innovate and reach a new plateau and shed this bad rep and make these antiquated ideological vibes a thing of the past. The guys like me are as guilty of old prejudices as anyone (though, admittedly, the earlier post still basically has a passage with "GTs are awesome and I am part of this awesome and you aren't" -- but it is for the sake of illustrating your point, and not malicious or egotistical as I read it).

I am exalting both of these posts. Thank you both for helping me to understand. If more people addressed these kinds of esoteric vibes this way, perhaps the prejudice among people in my style of play would be less. I know it has lessened it for me.

Hey Fenris,

Why is spending money on a "vacation" to have a 40K weekend with the "stars" a bad thing? For example - at AdeptiCon, the European Team Championships and other events, I get to meet up with a lot of friends I have the opportunity to see maybe a couple of times per year. Everyone comes from a lot of different places and I truly value their friendship. They include hardcore and mid level tournament players, general hobbyists, top tier painters, other event organizers and more. I value the time I spend organizing a "Grand" convention, playing a competitive/fun game, drinking, eating, discussing tactics, checking out cool models/displays and the list goes on and on. We each can get out of it what you choose.

Regarding sigs - not everyone who is a coordinator or attendee of events requires sigs with stats. I'll raise my hand in the category of no stats in a signature. I just don't care. Yet I still will work to play a competitive game and help with many others to organize a "Grand" event where the ultimate goal is to have a ton of fun for all types of hobbyists from all ends of the spectrum. This is where there might be some misrepresentation per your comments on underlying motives. I along with many others have no desire to do this work just to have a spot light on us. A lot of us perform this labor of love just so people can have fun. Nothing more, nothing less.

Ultimately - If you choose not to have a good time, you won't. However, there is so much to be had at several of these events, you would be hard pressed not to have fun.

EDIT: MVBrandt and RiTides beat me to the punch.....

What a thread! Is there diminishing tournament attendance? That's a good question to ask. Do people actually keep track of attendance at anything other than the big events? I didn't attend NOVA in a long time but I'm local and from what I gather the GT itself has stable attendance, but they've also expanded into the narrative tournament which I understand is growing in number...I could be wrong...again I'm not really in the tournament scene much anymore.

Personally I could never see myself entering a GT ever again because of the time commitment involved. I find it hard to justify spending an entire 12+hours throwing dice. So attendance may be less about the mission, the game, the players, GW, or "elitists" and more about life. here's an interesting question too:

Is the average age of tournament goers increasing over time? Are 40k players getting older? or is there a steady stream of young players to keep this hobby going?

I dont know about you all but now there are so many tournaments all over the place that I am able to attend more tournaments than I ever have before and I think its awesome.

I think now its more about the fact that people have plenty of local options instead of just having a few in a year.

Mike did a better, more diplomatic job of replying above. But I'll add some of the post I was working on before he posted.

In my experience people go to GTs for a several reasons:

1. to get in games of 40k. Lots of people can't get in as many games of 40k as they would like in their normal schedules. Going to a GT allows them to pack in a bunch of games in a relatively short time period. I can get a game a week normally. A GT gets me 5 or more in two days.

2. to play armies and people they don't usually play. I got to play against sisters of battle once at a GT. Not been able to play them since.

3. to see beautifully painted and converted armies. And play against them. My first game at my first GT was against the army in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/309260.page. Another stand out army from that event was Mike Strange's techo nids. At the time my local group was a couple of basement gamers with lots of unpainted stuff and horrible proxies (CDs as drop pods, chaos marines as tau drones, terminators as crisis suits etc etc)

4. to see friends they made at other events.

And that's it.

On a local level I remember back in fifth edition you'd see well over 20 players at an RTT while now you rarely see over a dozen.

 Fenris Frost wrote:
Open my eyes to what? What real 40k is like? How the big boys play? Enlighten me, man. Because as far as I know, a GT is the same thing as an RTT except with more rounds (and more self-aggrandizing organizer hoopla).

It is the epitome of everything wrong with this game that I need to somehow blow a grand on a 40k vacation weekend with "the stars" before my opinion counts. I run a club, I keep a store open, and I oversee people every weekend playing this game instead of just one a year. What makes me not qualified to explain why those people prefer to come play at my place every week and avoid GTs and RTTs like the plague?

If you want to know why people AREN'T going, guys like me are the experts on that...not you lot with the stats in your sigs. That's all I'm getting at.

GTs survive on the underlying communal mentality. Mechanically, they are nothing but a more complicated, larger scale RTT (that more people have messed with, format-wise).

I'll still take a stab at this and what he meant by "open your eyes". In a friendlier sense, you're basically doing all in your power to espouse the evils of something, why it's not for you, and why you go out of your way to convince people in your club that GTs and even RTTs are awful - but you've got no firsthand experience yourself. It'd be similar to telling people about how restaurants are terrible, stuck up places, and they should never eat a meal that isn't at home - having never been to a restaurant yourself.

I've been (and continue to be) on both sides of this - I frequently attend "competitive" events such as RTTs and GTs, and also have for years (15?) played in small clubs, where plenty of the members wanted nothing to do with GTs and RTTs, which was fine. But going out of your way to criticize the other side of the coin is nothing more than something you yourself had an issue with in your earlier post:

At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other

You're literally doing exactly that, without even having given tournaments and organized play a fair shake.

Mechanically you're right - GTs are nothing more than scaled up RTTs, and to go one further, RTTs are nothing more than organized casual play. But the point you're missing is why you would want to attend a GT, you said:

It is the epitome of everything wrong with this game that I need to somehow blow a grand on a 40k vacation weekend with "the stars" before my opinion counts.

Validation is not why you attend a GT. Exposing yourself to a larger 40k community, and to players from different regions than those that attend your local store, is why you play. You'll meet some great people, see some new armies, come up with new modelling ideas, see awesome and clever combos and tricks you hadn't thought of, etc. But mostly, they're about meeting new people and the social aspect.

I run a club, I keep a store open, and I oversee people every weekend playing this game instead of just one a year. What makes me not qualified to explain why those people prefer to come play at my place every week and avoid GTs and RTTs like the plague?

Don't make it into a "I'm just as good as you guys!" competition - there's no reason to measure amongst a bunch of like-minded people that just want to get down on their free time with toys. I'm sure you do awesome stuff for the hobby - but in arguing against organized play, and telling people who have never been to GTs and RTTs they should never go because they're evil, you're only hurting the hobby community and limiting those players to playing just within their immediate region.

 Arschbombe wrote:
Mike did a better, more diplomatic job of replying above. But I'll add some of the post I was working on before he posted.

In my experience people go to GTs for a several reasons:

1. to get in games of 40k. Lots of people can't get in as many games of 40k as they would like in their normal schedules. Going to a GT allows them to pack in a bunch of games in a relatively short time period. I can get a game a week normally. A GT gets me 5 or more in two days.

2. to play armies and people they don't usually play. I got to play against sisters of battle once at a GT. Not been able to play them since.

3. to see beautifully painted and converted armies. And play against them. My first game at my first GT was against the army in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/309260.page. Another stand out army from that event was Mike Strange's techo nids. At the time my local group was a couple of basement gamers with lots of unpainted stuff and horrible proxies (CDs as drop pods, chaos marines as tau drones, terminators as crisis suits etc etc)

4. to see friends they made at other events.

And that's it.

Your views on GTs are exactly mine! I go so I get five to seven great games with similarly-minded people who field fully-painted armies. My first GT was playing Fantasy at Nova in 2011. I was nervous as hell and intimidated. Needless to say, competitively, I got massacred almost every game. However, community and camaraderie were clearly more important than winning. It was that experience that led me to attend Adepticon (Fantasy/40k), Nova (40k), and Wargamescon (40k) over the last couple of years.

At these GTs I have never felt the need to be more competitive like doing a "training regimen" or anything like that. I have continued to build and paint the armies I like. I practice a bit so I know the rules and, as such, I always have a great time at GTs.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
On a local level I remember back in fifth edition you'd see well over 20 players at an RTT while now you rarely see over a dozen.

Thing is I also remember there being like 3-5 in a year in my state/area.

Now I know at least 3-4 stores in commute distance that have a monthly event.


Edit - commenting on below.

That is exactly my point, there is no shortage of events now. It stopped being you HAVE to go to this event or you wont get a chance to for X months. Now you can pick and choose, while that might drive attendence down at any given event overall I think it is a good thing

I am lucky where I live in Florida you can almost go to an RTT any weekend if you're willing to drive up to an hour.

 Fenris Frost wrote:


If you want to know why people AREN'T going, guys like me are the experts on that...not you lot with the stats in your sigs. That's all I'm getting at.

If you'd been reading the thread, GT's aren't asking why people aren't going, they're too busy selling out in terms of tickets. Clearly the big GT's aren't missing you if they're selling out. If you're content with your local group, why crap on events you have no intention of attending? I get a bit frustrated with the regional nature of what 40k has become but I try and keep that to a low key hostility at worst.



I'm not attending big GT's because I still prefer 5th ed style old school 1 v 1 codex style of play, the game I wanna play isn't really represented yet. When I hear about feast going to 1500, all of a sudden I have hope for the direction gt's or "the game" is going. When I hear more and more rumblings about highlander, I get excited.

Thekbob hit the nail on the head though, any angst or strife in the game/community lays squarely at the feet games workshop and the bloated mess they've dropped at our doorstep. Every event is different. I'm tired of the casual v competitive stuff and all the crap about social contracts. When I hear about what people bring, I don't judge the individual, I judge the format or rules that allow for it. When I hear about a 3 tides and a knight formation being a legal list, it's funny and depressing in equal measure, but that doesn't mean I think badly of the individual playing it, I just don't think I'd want to play against that. I know why mvbrant doesn't wanna crap all over maelstrom missions, simply put that's not a game he wants to play and I share that sentiment. I do know that less restriction will see dumber and dumber stuff on the board, where as something like highlander, as goatboy has pointed out, will actually see a return to real freakin armies on the board instead of just a mish mash of crap. Remember when one army battled another army in white dwarf? That was swell.

If the tournament scene in your area is that bleak, have you guys ever thought of organizing tournaments of your own? Someone has to put in the work. If other area TOs have given up, maybe someone else needs to step up.

The problem with so many threads of this nature is that they start with an anecdotal account:

 Master Shake wrote:
Since I've been attending 40k GT's for the last 5 years, I've noticed a steady decline in attendance.

And then they follow it up with a conclusion that cannot actually be substantiated in any way, shape or form:

A lot of people seem to want to chalk this to the edition changes, but I think that's simply not the case.

I think the problem lies within most of the top players. They forget about the primary purpose of the game. They make it their sole objective to crush there opponents without regard for having fun or sportsmanship.

We as individuals often believe that our own experiences are indicative of the entire world, when we have no data to back that up. Does nobody play Apocalypse games in your area? Then Apocalypse must not be played by anyone anywhere, and be a huge financial failure for GW, etc, etc, etc.

As Reece and Mike Brandt have pointed out, attendance is not necessarily down for 40K tournaments in general, so the basic premise of this entire conversation might be completely moot. In specific communities, sure that may be the case, but the reasons for that decline would also depend on a variety of factors that can be entirely dependent on that local area.

Assuming attendance is down in your local area, the only way to actually get any kind of meaningful data is to poll as many people as possible. However, this is very tricky as you're usually only able to poll people who are actually attending the event, and not the people who are interested in attending but are not attending for one reason or another. Trying to poll online similarly only gets you data from people that are on your mailing list or on your forums, etc…so again there is no sure way to know whether you're actually getting data back from the group you're trying to reach.

Therefore, IMHO, the best way forward is to kind of abandon the concept of a single format tournament comprised of hundreds of players, and instead go for a multitude of different smaller tournaments each catering towards a different style of play within the umbrella of the one big event. Then based on how attendance goes for each particular event, over the years you can start adjusting how many spots are available in each event as needed. Of course, running multiple tournaments is even more work for the tournament organizers, and often involves having additional staff on hand to run each one…but that's kind of just the pill that has to be swallowed in this day and age, I think.

If you're just looking to run local RTT style tournaments, then again I think the key is to mix it up. So one month you may run one format of tournament, but then the next month you run a different format, and so on. If people just don't show up to one particular format, then you know it needs to be modified or nixed altogether.

The reality is, even if you knew with 100% certainty that attendance was down and with 100% certainty what the primary reason was for that, you'd *still* struggle to implement a solution that would make the majority of players happy…that's just the nature of the beast. So providing multiple different formats (as many of the bigger events are now doing) is the closest you can come to trying to please as many people as possible.

@ Fenris: Since I'm a seeing is believing guy, if you can swing up to Da Boyz GT in NY in November, I'll cover your entrance fee. It's easily my favorite event of the year and if a weekend there doesn't convince you that a GT is about more than just being hyper competitive, nothing will.

I feel like most of what Fenris is bringing up is a perception based upon the horrible management GW has of the game. No other game is as divisive as 40k, in my experience, because it's a hot mess that just gets left to bake in the sun day in and day out. The hottest of street trash, IMO.

And even that being said, a well nurtured community with something cool like one source limited (exceptions being made for hilariously stunted armies like Inquisition or Sisters of Battle) gaming, like the good edition of 40k, and even highlander, could persuade me back to the game. That's assuming I'd get around the start-up costs and the rules cost, but that's another issue entirely.

That said, GTs are great and the folks at it are great. I know, in the future, I plan on attending them for other games.

I've seen "highlander" mentioned a few times... forgive my ignorance, could someone explain what this is (or link me to a description, etc)?

 RiTides wrote:
I've seen "highlander" mentioned a few times... forgive my ignorance, could someone explain what this is (or link me to a description, etc)?

Where you are allowed one and only one of a unit entry is allowed except basic troops (which may or may not be enforced for troops depending on the tournament). So a legal necrons list could only take one anni barge, one ghost ark, one CCB, and one night scythe and then fill out the rest instead of 2x CCB, 3x Anni Barge, and the rest Scythes/Ghost Arks.

It means no unit spam, essentially. It sounds like a good plan for most books, but really crappy books like the new GK, Inquisition, Sisters of Battle, etc. are all extremely limited to unplayable in said format.

I really don't know why people even attend competitive 40K anymore. The results are pretty much determined in the list creation phase before any dice are rolled . Tactics plays a very small part in the game anymore, and I am talking real tactics, not loophole easter egg stuff like congo lines and deploying vehicles sideways to you can pivot to gain inches. You can fix a lot of problems with two things. Bring back unit number limitation (old skool 0-1 stuff, highlander seems a good start) and get rid of the allies matrix. If you play Eldar, play Eldar....not some Frankenstein with 4 factions represented (primary, allies, formation, dataslate). You get the point.

 quickfuze wrote:
I really don't know why people even attend competitive 40K anymore. The results are pretty much determined in the list creation phase before any dice are rolled . Tactics plays a very small part in the game anymore, and I am talking real tactics, not loophole easter egg stuff like congo lines and deploying vehicles sideways to you can pivot to gain inches. You can fix a lot of problems with two things. Bring back unit number limitation (old skool 0-1 stuff, highlander seems a good start) and get rid of the allies matrix. If you play Eldar, play Eldar....not some Frankenstein with 4 factions represented (primary, allies, formation, dataslate). You get the point.

Well, Im going to my first one this month as a Tyranid player to play against harder lists than I normally could in my local area and to enjoy the hobby in a new setting. I get to see other peoples cool toys and they get to see mine, and I hope to be best tyranid at most with no concept of winning the tournament involved. Not everyone goes to cheese their vehicle movement or create patchwork armies.

As a former 5 tourney a year player, the new edition killed the game for me and atleast 10 other members of my gaming group, the hogs of war. We used to go to all the big tourneys, now we are all split up playing different games. 6th Ed was borderline unplayable.

 Iechine wrote:

 quickfuze wrote:
I really don't know why people even attend competitive 40K anymore. The results are pretty much determined in the list creation phase before any dice are rolled . Tactics plays a very small part in the game anymore, and I am talking real tactics, not loophole easter egg stuff like congo lines and deploying vehicles sideways to you can pivot to gain inches. You can fix a lot of problems with two things. Bring back unit number limitation (old skool 0-1 stuff, highlander seems a good start) and get rid of the allies matrix. If you play Eldar, play Eldar....not some Frankenstein with 4 factions represented (primary, allies, formation, dataslate). You get the point.

Well, Im going to my first one this month as a Tyranid player to play against harder lists than I normally could in my local area and to enjoy the hobby in a new setting. I get to see other peoples cool toys and they get to see mine, and I hope to be best tyranid at most with no concept of winning the tournament involved. Not everyone goes to cheese their vehicle movement or create patchwork armies.

I applaud you for that...I play vanilla marines and Iron Warriors. So I generally get my arse whooped but have a blast meeting new people. That said though if you take a trip to the top 8 players going into the final round you invariably find yourself saying the same thing; "Oh look Eldar.." or "yup another netlist" or "seriously? another one?" (the same list ran in like 5 of the top 8 spots or something). It is possible to have a blast at any tourney with your favorite list....if your concept of having a blast doesn't involve winning. If you want to win you will undoubtedly be hamstringed into playing one of a few absurd interacting list combos that exist. The problem with the allies matrix is it destroys any of what little was left of internal balance within codexes. You no longer are penalized in one aspect of the army for benefits in others. You just simply only play the hyper efficient units from each codex. A perfect example of this is the wave serpent and how people buy it. The Wave serpent is a dedicated transport. The idea being that you buy it to move your guardians around...but in actuality people simply are paying a 5-man troop tax to get access to the wave serpent. It should be the other way around....

 quickfuze wrote:
The problem with the allies matrix is it destroys any of what little was left of internal balance within codexes. You no longer are penalized in one aspect of the army for benefits in others. You just simply only play the hyper efficient units from each codex. A perfect example of this is the wave serpent and how people buy it. The Wave serpent is a dedicated transport. The idea being that you buy it to move your guardians around...but in actuality people simply are paying a 5-man troop tax to get access to the wave serpent. It should be the other way around....

I agree completely. And I think that's only exacerbated the hate on less than awesome units (in terms of their efficacy for points) and cranked the whining up to 10 on units that are really good/broken good.

I think that's what is exciting about the highlander format, you'll see good units, just not spammed to oblivion, you might also see some stuff that rarely gets to hit the table due to their ok but not great status.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheKbob wrote:
It means no unit spam, essentially. It sounds like a good plan for most books, but really crappy books like the new GK, Inquisition, Sisters of Battle, etc. are all extremely limited to unplayable in said format.

It doesn't sound perfect for all books, but I gotta say the simplicity of the format really sells it.

I read a lot of "next to we live the GTs are sold out".
I must add that this is not in Europe mainland then.

Because here they are not sold out anymore.
And recently they are even cancelled alltogether as a part of slimming down GW.
One local GW shop in Germany and hobbyists in the Netherlands are planning to take it up again, but it will be sponsored by GW at most, not organised by GW anymore.

But also other, smaller, 40k tournaments, have less attendance.

The X-Wing tournaments are doing better nowadays,
I even joined a few, nice game.

But i am MUCH more of a wargamer and love building, converting and painting.
So i find it a bit of a downer that tournaments are less interesting (balanced) and attended less.

I'll chime in that local tournaments in the Cleveland area have seen a sharp decline in both numbers of events, and attendance at the events that do occur. Some of that has to do with FLGS changes, some is likely just cyclical, and at least a big chunk is based on the new editions. I know that latter simply because my whole gaming group shifted from 40k to other games about two years ago.

Still though, I think some of the GT players raised a good point: for a working adult, 3-5 weekends a year of seeing old friends, playing painted armies on good terrain, and enjoying a genuine challenge are far preferable to spending a Saturday a month in an FLGS playing a random mix of painted/unpainted armies run by everybody from complete newbs to local tough guys.

I can drive six hours to Adepticon, and see a couple dozen people that I know, some of whom are actually happy to see me... People tend to be friendly and looking to meet new folks. OTOH, I can drive one hour south to Akron, not know a single person, and when I try to engage, I'm given the cold shoulder as an outsider. So, even though it costs more, it's a lot more rewarding to do a GT than a local RTT. Also, for people with families, it's paradoxically easier to set aside a weekend months in advance than to take a saturday on a weeks notice.

MVBrandt wrote:


That said, I'm not particularly hurt by this. You are. I'll go right on hosting dozens of events of varying size annually, socializing and gaming with hundreds of fellow hobbyists, raising thousands of buckaroos for good charitable causes through the events that I run, and watching tons of gamers have a fantastic time traveling to local, regional, national, and international GTs and events.

Jeez, Mike, at least have the respect for your unpaid volunteers to recognize the hard work they do to make the events and fund-raising successful. You didn't do this by yourself. Don't confuse the achievements of others as yours alone.

TimW wrote:

MVBrandt wrote:


That said, I'm not particularly hurt by this. You are. I'll go right on hosting dozens of events of varying size annually, socializing and gaming with hundreds of fellow hobbyists, raising thousands of buckaroos for good charitable causes through the events that I run, and watching tons of gamers have a fantastic time traveling to local, regional, national, and international GTs and events.

Jeez, Mike, at least have the respect for your unpaid volunteers to recognize the hard work they do to make the events and fund-raising successful. You didn't do this by yourself. Don't confuse the achievements of others as yours alone.

I shall edit it to "we" to address your concern, Timothy Williamson! That said, I really don't need your lecture, buddy. A lot of people sweat blood, money, and tears putting on a good show for folks, and those same people do a lot (including more money, blood, and tears) thanking the volunteers who actually make it happen. I would appreciate you trolling the places I've thanked my volunteers just as hard, and giving me props there, if your sole purpose for living is invading threads and derailing them with nitpicks fueled by ridiculosity.

It needed to be said, buddy.

TimW wrote:
It needed to be said, buddy.

Did it? Did it really?

MVBrandt wrote:


I shall edit it to "we" to address your concern, Timothy Williamson! That said, I really don't need your lecture, buddy. A lot of people sweat blood, money, and tears putting on a good show for folks, and those same people do a lot (including more money, blood, and tears) thanking the volunteers who actually make it happen. I would appreciate you trolling the places I've thanked my volunteers just as hard, and giving me props there, if your sole purpose for living is invading threads and derailing them with nitpicks fueled by ridiculosity.

Hey, was there a final dollar count on how much was raised for charity this year? I didn't make NOVA and didn't see it posted on the NOVA blog. Just something I remembered to ask.

The worldwide community of gamers who contributed raised close to $20,000 across the charity armies, silent auction items, and charity lounge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The army raffles alone raised:
Fisher House Foundation: $1,000
Child's Play Charity: $1,500
Wounded Warrior Project: $2,300
Breast Cancer Research Foundaton: $2,650
Doctors Without Borders: $7,300

Charity proceeds look excellent . Now that that's settled, let's get back to the original topic, please.

I notice that attendance is down at some events and up at others. I also notice that there are way more events then ever before. I speculate that the nearly the same number of people are playing but it is spread out now. Due to calander dates and more to choose from.