Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I’ve been to several 40k tournaments over the last few years from 1 day tournaments held by small gaming clubs and GW stores to popular CGN tournaments like Open War. But the first tournaments I went to were the Games Workshop’s official Grand Tournament and the first doubles tournament, so naturally I had high hopes for the 1st Throne Of Skulls.

When I first looked at the rules pack I was greatly concerned with the new scoring system, I appreciated the idea of calculating the average score of each race to find the best player as it brought a variety of armies to the tournament. But it was so easy to take advantage of, and sure enough there was a good deal of players that had brought hyper-optimized lists from known underpowered codexes like Necrons and the Witch-Hunters.

At the end of the weekend most of the tournament players felt cheated as the overall winner was a Dark Eldar player, this would have been okay but the fact there was only two Dark Eldar players at the whole tournament. So while other players had gotten the best scores out of 15-20 other marine and guard players this dark eldar player had won the tournament by beating just one player.

But this was also later revealed by players to be incorrect and that a space marine player had won it, which brings me on to the biggest problem; the scoring system.

I think the scoring system of 5pts for a win and 2pts for a draw is just too simple for a tournament with so many players taking part, this was later proven right when it was realised that there were multiple players with the same score, even with the extra points for best general; a system were you vote for your favourite opponent to give them extra points. This forced the events team to go with the best looking army roster which is stupid for a tournament tie-breaker and greatly annoyed the other players with the same score.

All the non GW tournaments I have been to have had a advanced scoring system to avoid such problems, a good example is the one used at Open War which uses a 20pt system for each round depending on the difference of objectives held and kill pts: 10/10 Draw, 13/7 Minor Victory, 16/4 Major Victory, 20/0 Exterminatus!
Plus they’ve also used Victory Pts as a tie-breaker rather than favourite opponent votes!

There were also other matters that ruined the tournament for me and other tournament veterans…

All the games were randomly generated so you weren’t fighting someone with the same score, it was rumoured that on the 2nd day they had split the players into a top and bottom half. A Ladder system is a huge requirement at tournaments and as a result only the last two games provided any real challenge!

With the exception of the Throne Of Skulls and Best Army trophy all the awards given for best generals were poorly made, certificates that weren’t even printed in the centre of the paper and placed in a cheap glass frame. I got an award for best army nominee and it pales in comparison when compared to awards won at smaller tournaments that cost 5 to 15 pounds.

Players also noticed that there was no free tea, coffee and biscuits in the mornings this year that was common at the previous Grand Tournaments.

Don’t get me wrong I enjoyed the company and the games played but as the GW official tournament it was a huge disappointment and felt like a weekend of random gaming which for £55 seemed like a big rip off.
Most of the players I had spoken to on Sunday evening also had a strong dislike of the new scoring methods. Saying that looking at the rosters to decide which of the 5 players had won made the tournament feel pointless. Most tournaments end with players having a sense of satisfaction but this was more disappointment and confusion.

The bottom line is I strongly recommend you don’t waste your money! I originally planned to request a ticket to the winter TOS for xmas, but after experiencing the poorly designed system I decided I’d be better off with a weekend tournament ran by a club, being held at Maelstrom games on the same weekend for half the price with evening entertainment and morning drinks provided.

Also I’ve sent a email off to GW expressing my views about the tournament’s lack of a scoring and ladder system and how it was a huge upset compared to the previous grand tournaments, I look forward to hearing their reply and if they plan to make any changes. If so I might consider attending the spring tournament.

Thanks for the Review. Sorry to hear that you were so disappointed with the scoring system.

Hopefully other will also forward thier commetns on any issues that they had.

I heard about this abomination. And yet there are always punters that are willing to shell out hard-earned $ to be abused at events like this. The mind boggles.

wolfshadow wrote:Hopefully other will also forward thier commetns on any issues that they had.

That will be a lot of people then, especially the ones who unlike me, were robbed of the 1st prize (oh yeah there were no 2nd or 3rd place prizes)

Wow thats probably the worst set of rules Ive heard of. Is there a reason why gW decides to totally abandon solid swiss pairings and the normal 40k rules? Thats absurd

I seriously believe they play and design games + Events in a total vacuum

It was a certain Jervis fellows brain child. And it's going to fail miserably. I can honestly say that most the people here in the US that won a ticket won't be attending unless it is free to the ticket holder and even then probably won't attend if they have to travel to it. It's only saving grace is it's in Vegas but now that I might be living in Minnesota I'd rather spend my travel money and time heading to Adepticon, BolsCon, Nova Open, and a Cali event or two.

Oh and this coming from such an obviously avid hobbyist only makes it more damning on the system. Cause no one out there can claim Proiteus isn't a pinnacle of the hobby judging by his armies

What Hulk said. It's a horrible system, and like most ill-thought-out system hurts the "Average" well-rounded gamer/hobbyist the most.

I don't know what Jervis was thinking. There are fairer ways to ensure all codices and list styles can have a "Shot" at swag and glory.

Was there a new rules pack for this tournament. The one GW has posted awards 3 points for a win and one point for a draw, and the FAQ for the rules states that they only do first round pairings random and that the other ones are paired on similar win loss ratio.

That does sound disappointing. I'm planning to attend the US one, but the packet (as vhwolf said) says 3pt W, 1pt D, and their event FAQ said that pairings are only among people with the same win/loss record.

Of course, now I can't find either the packet or the FAQ on their site. Can anyone else post a link?

The Throne of skulls pdf is posted in the ironman section of www.lasvegasgamersclub.com .

Seems like I am glad I did not get the ticket since I applied to late. Instead I am going to the UK 40kGT. Seemed like a better option.

Which "UK 40kGT"? I thought Throne of Skulls had replaced the GW GT?

sabote wrote:Instead I am going to the UK 40kGT

Throne Of Skulls is the new GT and this is the uk one I'm talking about.

Mannahnin wrote:Which "UK 40kGT"? I thought Throne of Skulls had replaced the GW GT?

GW yes. This is set up by many of the same people that play in the competitive GTs in the UK and do not like the Throne of Skulls format. Its also in the same place.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/318404.page

Ah, thanks for that.

Kind of funny that they didn't add "independent" to the name or anything to distinguish from the GW GTs everyone remembers, but it looks like a cool event.

Mannahnin wrote:Ah, thanks for that.

Kind of funny that they didn't add "independent" to the name or anything to distinguish from the GW GTs everyone remembers, but it looks like a cool event.

Many US tournaments don't really say independent in the header but if you read the body of the message they say they are set up in the independentuktournament forums.

Either way it really makes no difference to me if its put on by GW or not. For some reason maybe a hold over from the past people seem to think if its held by GW than maybe that adds more to the tournament.

All the GTs in the US have their own names.

"40k GT" is a descriptor over here, not the actual name of any events. The rationale being for ease of reference, and to keep them clear and distinct from the GW ones, even though GW hasn't run one in a couple of years. Just for clear communication and minimizing confusion.

It adds more to the tournament because most Indy tournaments haven't come close to the old GTs in the UK that I remember. It's not that 'GW does it' but that the ones GW used to run were fabulous events of gaming excellence where you were fed, you were drinking, you had a good time, and the rules stupidity was pretty minimal. All around smoothness.

What adds more to the tournament? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Do you mean the name "UK 40k GT" adds some value to it in some way?

Mannahnin wrote:What adds more to the tournament? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Do you mean the name "UK 40k GT" adds some value to it in some way?

No I mean having a tournament that is listed as GW apparently implies something to people which seems to be in some cases a more important tournament. If you go with what Zain60 mentioned than I guess there was a certain "standard" one could expect from a GW run tournament in the UK. Personally I was not that impressed by the ones run in the US.

I was not trying to make any point with the name UK 40K GT. The name really means nothing except one usually assumes that if an event is going to be listed as a GT that it will typically be a 2 day event with at least 100 players. But even that is not true in many cases.

sabote wrote:No I mean having a tournament that is listed as GW apparently implies something to people which seems to be in some cases a more important tournament.

I must say I thought so too, I have taken my new Grot Rebellion Mech Guard Army to 4 tournaments so far; The Yorkshire doubles held by the GW stores in yorkshire (£20), The Call To Battle Tournament ran by my own club (£5), The main CGN tournament Open War (£15) and last but not least Throne Of Skulls (£55). Which I expected to be the best one, being a held over 2 days instead of 1, but sadly it as a tournament it's the worst out of all 4 given that the other were better designed and cheaper.

It is most disappointing that the "official" tournament and by far the most expensive should be so poorly set up.

The answer, as with other GW disappointments, is to vote with your feet and your wallet.

This sounded terrible and now it sounds atrocious.

The indie tournaments are so much better. GW should look at these events which are not only popular but profitable and take notes. All of their events have gone tits up.

I doubt I will be going despite having my ticket. It sounds like a terrible event.

And another reason to avoid Tournaments.

Not all tourneys are like that, thank god. But crap this sounds bad. I thought maybe the OP was just havin a whinge when I saw the title thread and came in for a read anyway, but yeah I'd be upset too. Especially at having paid that much cash for it!

Mannahnin wrote:What adds more to the tournament? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Do you mean the name "UK 40k GT" adds some value to it in some way?

I certainly wasn't saying a name means anything. I was, however, pointing out that the old UK 40k GTs were the best tournaments I've ever been to and that I was always satisfied. The new Throne of Skulls format alongside the indy GTs which except for 1-2 very large and very well put together ones are struggling to get past the glitches and problems that make tournaments less fun, and much less worth the money you have to put into them to attend.

If I had spent hard-earned money and loads of time to be where the OP is in the hobby, get to go to the ToS tournament, and then see how insanely stupid the rules were, it definitely would make me less interested in playing competitively.

Mr Mystery wrote:And another reason to avoid Tournaments.

Anyways

We all kinda said that the format was bad within 5 minutes of reading the write up.

Sad tho... Throne of skulls is a great name : (

@Zain

I agree, but Let's be honest... Look how GW Boned the fantasy hobby... I hear a lot of people dropping it... and not even interested in the game enough now to finish a tourny... They have no idea how to balance a game anymore... OR make a competitive event.

We'll need to take up the task by putting on good events independently... and possibly allow Non GW minis just to start making the point that they should pay attention

Proiteus wrote:I
All the non GW tournaments I have been to have had a advanced scoring system to avoid such problems, a good example is the one used at Open War which uses a 20pt system for each round depending on the difference of objectives held and kill pts: 10/10 Draw, 13/7 Minor Victory, 16/4 Major Victory, 20/0 Exterminatus!
Plus they’ve also used Victory Pts as a tie-breaker rather than favourite opponent votes!

The Open War scoring system is the old old GW UK GT system, which was abandoned after pressure from players. It looks nice of paper, but you can end up with silly situations where people with 6 wins finish behind people with four wins.

I quite like the ToS system, and my perception from a flicks across TWF and Warseer is that it hasn't been as badly recieved as you intimate. Certainly it's different, but at least attempts to recognise the fact that some codices are born more equal than others withoiut resorting to some kind of subjective comp. Of course the events team have never been particularly good at implementing good ideas, but if you are any good at implementing ideas then GW can't afford you. Anyway, I will be going to the January one in the hope of picking up another inexplicably awful trophy, so I can see it for myself (and then the Indy GT in March).

torgoch wrote:

Proiteus wrote:I
All the non GW tournaments I have been to have had a advanced scoring system to avoid such problems, a good example is the one used at Open War which uses a 20pt system for each round depending on the difference of objectives held and kill pts: 10/10 Draw, 13/7 Minor Victory, 16/4 Major Victory, 20/0 Exterminatus!
Plus they’ve also used Victory Pts as a tie-breaker rather than favourite opponent votes!

The Open War scoring system is the old old GW UK GT system, which was abandoned after pressure from players. It looks nice of paper, but you can end up with silly situations where people with 6 wins finish behind people with four wins.

I quite like the ToS system, and my perception from a flicks across TWF and Warseer is that it hasn't been as badly recieved as you intimate. Certainly it's different, but at least attempts to recognise the fact that some codices are born more equal than others withoiut resorting to some kind of subjective comp. Of course the events team have never been particularly good at implementing good ideas, but if you are any good at implementing ideas then GW can't afford you. Anyway, I will be going to the January one in the hope of picking up another inexplicably awful trophy, so I can see it for myself (and then the Indy GT in March).

Actually looking at the other threads it seems like a few people are complaining, most people liked the atmosphere, and whoever from GW was in charge of that one event just did not know what they were doing. They did not even use the printed rules, or common sense.
The main real complaints seem to be the random missions for each table, and this is probably a valid complaint. There seem to be some people who don't think that your win loss ratio was not used to determine pairings but other people say that it was. If they used the GW spreadsheet to do pairings I can say the formula is not working correctly so that might have caused it to be right for some and not right for others. Announcing the wrong winner was just the judges not realizing the software was not calculating correctly.

From reading the other forums it seems that the player who actually one was one of the best players around and won games, so I think the competitive player won overall. Some of the people think he was a WAAC player and others don't but that is what is said of most of the tournament winners especially where there is no paint and sportsmanship score.

So I think the lesson here is try it for yourself before you decide it is a bad thing, you might have fun.

Just learnt that a group of tournament players who have attended each GT has sent an email directly to Jervis about the scoring and matching problems.

They maybe hope yet, if not it's just another event GW has ruined.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Got a reply from the events team about the issues above...

The Throne of Skulls format is Games Workshop’s new way of running what used to be the Grand Tournament, but this has led to some confusion. The Throne of Skulls is designed as a fun weekend where players come together to enjoy playing games with new opponents and the camaraderie of the Event. It is not the same competitive event that the Grand Tournament used to be. Obviously, there are still winners and losers, but the event focuses on the enjoyment aspect rather than purely winning and the ranking of players (which, for example, is why we don’t want to record Victory Points from the games). The way your club runs tournaments sounds cool but I can tell you that we will be continuing to use the same format, all be-it with some minor tweaks to help the event run more smoothly.