Switch Theme:

On scoring for large scale tournaments...  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






on board Terminus Est

Taterhead this just proves that not everyone thinks the same way as you. Sweden uses a very strict comp system nationwide.

G

ALL HAIL SANGUINIUS! No one can beat my Wu Tang style!

http://greenblowfly.blogspot.com <- My 40k Blog! BA Tactics & Strategies!
 
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard




New York

If Sweden jumped off a bridge would you jump too?
   
Made in se
Helpful Sophotect






This is a patently false line of reasoning. Your same logic could be applied to Poker. Some rounds you get crappy cards, bad flops, etc... If your argument were true, we would see a random assortment of players at the top tables every year. However, there are players who consistently make it to the top tables.

The same is true of 40k (to a lesser degree-- unfortunately the lack of a national tournament structure makes it difficult to gauge). Good players can overcome cold dice, crap terrain, and playing in an unbalanced setting. Half of winning a tournament is designing a list that is flexible enough to deal with a variety of armies, a variety of scenarios, and a variety of terrain setups.

-------

Oh, and for everyone-- how difficult is it to trim your quote boxes? Really, it makes it easier to read and looks less crappy.


Poker and this are two entierly differnent things. In poker you can chose to play a hand or not, if you get a bad hand you just dont play it, you have more control over what you do. It would be like if you roled your to hit dice hidden and because they werent good enough you discard them and skip the entire turn, removing 2 - 3 models as a penalty for doing it.

Butt realy, they are two entierly different games and poker is alot about psychology to.

While i will agree whit you in some extents on your second part you still cant overcome crap dice. If you consistently role bad while your opponent roles statistical correct then hi is going to were you down and you cant do anything about it.
For reference i have won the the Swedish nationals in 40k back when it existed and when the comp wasn't what it is now, it has evolved a lot since then. Got a trophy thats in the closet some were.

And fore the quote boxes. I edited in the last part and it didnt work to have it outside of the qoute box even though there were no qoute signs aroud it. I might have don it wrong. If so i would like to know what i did wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Danny Internets wrote:If Sweden jumped off a bridge would you jump too?


That's a little uncalled for dont you think?

He inst stating that its a good thing or a bad thing, just that everyone dosent think alike and do the same thing...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/26 16:24:24


 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut




I have issue with comp judged by the opponent. I would rather see composition scores determined by a judge. It still allows for abuse, but at least that way your opponent can't decide to trash you on scores because you beat him.

With regards to scoring systems, etc, I would love to see a system set up where the prizes were set up equally - so a prize for best general, best painted, best sport. I realise that this isn't necessarily realistic - especially when you are dealing with a smaller player base - but I find that a lot of people will down-rank you based on how the game went, when that isn't necessarily justified.

Maybe set up a system where you have two pools - the "hard" pool, where there are prizes for the top 3 generals, and a "fun" pool where there are prizes for top three combined scores. Then finally have a couple of judges determine what the best painted army is across the whole board?
   
Made in us
Mutilatin' Mad Dok






Columbia, SC

Green Blow Fly wrote:Taterhead this just proves that not everyone thinks the same way as you. Sweden uses a very strict comp system nationwide.

G


??? Didn't address comp at all (much less the Swedish variety!). Post was about the (patently false) claim that cold dice and poor terrain were guaranteed to result in losses.

If you consistently role bad


That sounds very similar to poker... if you consistently draw poor hands, etc...

The fact of the matter, though, is that no one rolls consistently poorly (protestations and stand-out games notwithstanding). Sure, everyone gets bad rolls occasionally... but, unless you have (poorly) loaded dice, no one gets consistent bad rolls.




 
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Terminator with Lightning Claws




Montgomery, AL

Janthkin wrote:
jbunny wrote:So they dock you points if you don't convert any models? Really. that is as lame as it gets, but I have no desire to play in one of their tournaments.

The Adepticon scoring guidelines are both harsh and an ideal. Remember they're trying to pick "best appearance" out of 120 or so armies.

Last year, for the "Championship" (standard RTT format), max appearance was 40 (17% of total available points in the event). There were 148 participants; a single individual got a perfect 40 (he finished 59th overall). Most people fell comfortably in the 18-27 range, provided they brought a tournament-ready army; it mattered far more to your success in the tournament that you were able to pick up the tertiary objectives (10 pts/mission, no draws), than whether your army was full of conversions (4 pts total, if you had extreme conversions).


My point is why should I be penalized because my army is able to be fielded right out of the box and does not need to be converted?

On Dakka he was Eldanar. In our area, he was Lee. R.I.P., Lee Guthrie.  
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills






Manchester, NH

You're not being penalized. The best modelers and painters are being given the opportunity to earn extra points by displaying their skills, going above and beyond. People unwilling to do so can still get a good, respectable score, and win the event.

Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.

Maelstrom's Edge! 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





The Battle Barge Buffet Line

Mannahnin wrote:You're not being penalized. The best modelers and painters are being given the opportunity to earn extra points by displaying their skills, going above and beyond. People unwilling to do so can still get a good, respectable score, and win the event.


exactly. there are alo several people that posted "why CAN'T i take my favorite unit??" (my emphasis). you can and no one can stop you; you just don't get the bonus points for your army if other players find it particularly broken or overpowered.

We Munch for Macragge! FOR THE EMPRUH! Cheesesticks and Humus!
 
   
Made in us
Mutilatin' Mad Dok






Columbia, SC

But who determines what is broken or OP?

Can you identify any units in 40k that are OP right now?




 
   
Made in us
Devious Space Marine dedicated to Tzeentch




don_mondo wrote:Hmmm, you did notice that I include myself in the same category you've put yourself into, a fair-to-middling painter who would rather play than paint, right? Sorry that your local tournies don't have Best General, BUT!! the reason for going to a tourney is not to win a prize. Otherwise I wouldn't have gone to 18+ of the 20+ US/Canadian GTs I've been to. There were a couple times I went in thinking I had a decent chance to win something, but only a couple. Hell, I took an all-Scout Space Marine army once. I attended them knowing I wasn't gonna win anything. Yet, I went. Why? Cause it's FUN!!!! That's the point of going. A day of good gaming, hopefully against people you have never (or at least seldom) played against. And if I can do well also, that's a bonus.


There's a very big difference here though. I'm not saying I show up at a tournament expecting to win, or that I'm dissatisfied if I don't win a prize. BUT, not having an expectation of winning is a world away from not being allowed to win a prize. That's what I'm getting at. If I were to show up at a GT just wanting to do my best, get some good games in, and have fun with the day, but then somehow the stars align and I roll a 6 on every single die roll all day and win all rounds with max points, I would be pretty disappointed if I didn't get any recognition at all because someone else painted my army.

I'm making the 12-14ish hour drive up to Adepticon for an awesome weekend of gaming. I'm not expecting to walk away with any prizes. However, if I knew going in that there's no possible way I would even be in contention for any prize because of painting, I might reconsider investing the considerable time and expense.

And the biggest problem with DQing pro-painted armies is that it's basically an honesty tax. More unscrupulous people will simply claim that yes, they painted their own army. It would be hard to prove otherwise unless someone narc'ed on him.
   
Made in us
Blood Angel Terminator with Lightning Claws




Montgomery, AL

Mannahnin wrote:You're not being penalized. The best modelers and painters are being given the opportunity to earn extra points by displaying their skills, going above and beyond. People unwilling to do so can still get a good, respectable score, and win the event.


All things equal, would I get less points because I did not convert my models? If so then I got penalized.

On Dakka he was Eldanar. In our area, he was Lee. R.I.P., Lee Guthrie.  
   
Made in us
Devious Space Marine dedicated to Tzeentch




jbunny wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:You're not being penalized. The best modelers and painters are being given the opportunity to earn extra points by displaying their skills, going above and beyond. People unwilling to do so can still get a good, respectable score, and win the event.


All things equal, would I get less points because I did not convert my models? If so then I got penalized.


But if, as a lot of people are putting forth, Best Overall is the best total package hobbyist, then yes. If every other thing (like sports, battle points, etc) are equal, then the person who did conversions took the hobbying to an extra step. Which is very reasonable for an award that is supposed to find the best hobbyist. Because after all, your models were not ready to go out of the box. They came out of the box unassembled and attached to sprues. There was a degree of hobbying required already to get them modeled and painted. Some people just take it the extra step to do conversions too. Just like it takes some work to win a game, but some people also manage to get the minor little bonus victory points.

Now I'm just playing devil's advocate for a position where Overall doesn't place emphasis over playing vs. modeling vs. painting vs. sportsmanship. That's not the way it is a lot of times in my experience (and not the way I'd like it...I prefer the tournaments who have tie breakers based on things like results in the round than conversions or number of player's favorite votes, but I don't get a say). But you have to at least concede that from the point of view of finding the person in the room who is to be declared the best overall all around participant, they ought to weigh every aspect of the hobby. Not all with equal weight (as was pointed out, conversions were a very small percentage) but still taken into account. At the Adepticon tournament in question, there was even a quiz that tested knowledge of rules and codices, which factored into overall. The argument can be made that being familiar with the game's rules and components is part of being the all-around best there. And with 240 people participating in a 3-round tournament, any way to differentiate them is big, even with small tweaks.
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills






Manchester, NH

kartofelkopf wrote:But who determines what is broken or OP?


The organizers decide. Bearing in mind that not all scoring systems consider anything "broken", but that most recognize that some army lists are CLEARLY more powerful than others. One of the problems with Comp is that there are multiple different definitions thereof and purposes served by different people's takes on it.

jbunny wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:You're not being penalized. The best modelers and painters are being given the opportunity to earn extra points by displaying their skills, going above and beyond. People unwilling to do so can still get a good, respectable score, and win the event.


All things equal, would I get less points because I did not convert my models? If so then I got penalized.


If a Biathlete hits with fewer of his shots than one of his competitors, is he being penalized by not scoring as many points as they do? Or is the superior shot being rewarded?

As practiced in tournaments, Warhammer and 40k are usually games in which you receive points in multiple scoring categories. Now, in order to fairly reward great achievement in a given category, you often want to set a high bar for maximum points. Something very few people can legitimately expect to reach. We have people who win Golden Demons competing in these events. If painting is something we want to reward and appreciate, is it fair to limit their score to something that ANYONE can do?

As noted earlier, for Adepticon specifically, in a tournament with 150+ attending, you ALSO want each category of scoring to have space for differentiation, to limit the number of ties.


sirisaacnuton wrote:
don_mondo wrote:Hmmm, you did notice that I include myself in the same category you've put yourself into, a fair-to-middling painter who would rather play than paint, right? Sorry that your local tournies don't have Best General, BUT!! the reason for going to a tourney is not to win a prize. Otherwise I wouldn't have gone to 18+ of the 20+ US/Canadian GTs I've been to. There were a couple times I went in thinking I had a decent chance to win something, but only a couple. Hell, I took an all-Scout Space Marine army once. I attended them knowing I wasn't gonna win anything. Yet, I went. Why? Cause it's FUN!!!! That's the point of going. A day of good gaming, hopefully against people you have never (or at least seldom) played against. And if I can do well also, that's a bonus.


There's a very big difference here though. I'm not saying I show up at a tournament expecting to win, or that I'm dissatisfied if I don't win a prize. BUT, not having an expectation of winning is a world away from not being allowed to win a prize.

That's what I'm getting at. If I were to show up at a GT just wanting to do my best, get some good games in, and have fun with the day, but then somehow the stars align and I roll a 6 on every single die roll all day and win all rounds with max points, I would be pretty disappointed if I didn't get any recognition at all because someone else painted my army.

I'm making the 12-14ish hour drive up to Adepticon for an awesome weekend of gaming. I'm not expecting to walk away with any prizes. However, if I knew going in that there's no possible way I would even be in contention for any prize because of painting, I might reconsider investing the considerable time and expense.


If Canada or the US are always going to get the gold in Hockey, does that mean that other countries shouldn't bother to compete? When you step up to the big stage (a large GT or Adepticon), the competition is going to include a huge number of people, some of whom are extraordinarily good at one or more facets of the hobby. All of the folks I've ever met who've won a GT have been humble about it, and recognized that luck is always a factor, because at that size event, even if you put in the work and have the talent to get top scores in all categories, sometimes you'll tie a game, or a judge will reward someone else's paint scheme 1pt better, or in round 5 you'll get paired up againt your list's antithesis, or something else. You should/can never expect to win.



sirisaacnuton wrote:And the biggest problem with DQing pro-painted armies is that it's basically an honesty tax. More unscrupulous people will simply claim that yes, they painted their own army. It would be hard to prove otherwise unless someone narc'ed on him.


It’s happened. GTs have wound up having to take someone’s title away.

It’s a tough call, where to best draw the line so as to reward people who paint their own, but still allow people who get a nice pro-painted army (which is still going to be a nice thing to have at the event, and for their opponents to get to look at) to compete.

Right now the most common place to draw the line is to allow the person to score full points, but just be ineligible to win a prize of which painting is a facet. Usually including Overall. I know that this disappoints some folks, but I for one like the fact that most of the best players I know or have met at GTs, the guys who hope to win it all, are also guys who put in the brush work to get good at that too. I’m mostly a competitive gamer, and I know I never would have gotten as good at painting as I have if painting hadn’t been a requirement.

The vast majority of GTs I've attended also keep the painting score a small enough component of the total points that being a master painter isn't required in order to win. As Janthkin pointed out, even the maximum possible painting score at last year's Adepticon 40k Championship (basically an uber-3 round RT-style tournament) was only 17% of the total scorable points. And only one guy got that score. Most competitors were clustered within a roughly 9pt band. If most competitors are within that 9pt middle range, and picking up the TERTIARY objective for a SINGLE mission is worth 10pts, then clearly painting isn't all that important within the larger picture. I know the guy who won Overall in that tournament last year; he's a friend of mine. And his army looks okay, but certainly won't win any painting prizes.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2010/02/26 20:06:29


Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.

Maelstrom's Edge! 
   
Made in us
Evil man of Carn Dûm





Chicago, IL

jbunny wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:You're not being penalized. The best modelers and painters are being given the opportunity to earn extra points by displaying their skills, going above and beyond. People unwilling to do so can still get a good, respectable score, and win the event.


All things equal, would I get less points because I did not convert my models? If so then I got penalized.


Not you didn't. You got judged. All things shouldn't be equal. That is the point of an appearance scoring system.

Other people are rewarded with bonus points for effort above and beyond just taking models out of the box. Being 'docked' or 'penalized' implies points were subtracted from your overall score, that is not the case here.


   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard




New York

That's a little uncalled for dont you think?

He inst stating that its a good thing or a bad thing, just that everyone dosent think alike and do the same thing...


Ratchet down the sensitivity meter a few hundred notches. I think it's pretty obvious by the discussion so far that not everyone thinks alike.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/26 21:24:19


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Burbank CA

Danny Internets wrote:
That's a little uncalled for dont you think?

He inst stating that its a good thing or a bad thing, just that everyone dosent think alike and do the same thing...


Ratchet down the sensitivity meter a few hundred notches. I think it's pretty obvious by the discussion so far that not everyone thinks alike.


I think the problem is he doesn't get/know the "If X jumped off a bridge would you?" saying.

GTs aside, "normal" tournies should really be about winning. I mean, if the guy who placed overall wasn't even in the top tables and I came in second or third I would feel... cheated isn't the right word really, but I feel like the best player should win, not the best hobbyist (and I love painting and modelling). Now for some reason I can't even explain to myself I feel like GTs should include everything. /shrug

W/L/D 2011 record:

2000+ Deathwing: 1/0/0
Kabal of the Poisoned Tongue (WIP)

Long Long Ago, there were a man who tried to make his skills ultimate. Because of his bloody life, its no accident that he was involved in the troubles. 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills






Manchester, NH

At every GT I've ever attended the winner has been one of the guys with top Battle scores. The way Battles is usually made the lion's share of the points, and how the functional spread of the other scores often makes them less important, almost always ensures this.

Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.

Maelstrom's Edge! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Burbank CA

Well that's good. I don't know much about the GT scene really, I was jsut talking about tournaments in a more general sense.

W/L/D 2011 record:

2000+ Deathwing: 1/0/0
Kabal of the Poisoned Tongue (WIP)

Long Long Ago, there were a man who tried to make his skills ultimate. Because of his bloody life, its no accident that he was involved in the troubles. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






on board Terminus Est

Danny Internets wrote:If Sweden jumped off a bridge would you jump too?


nope, but I'd certainly push you off though¡

G

ALL HAIL SANGUINIUS! No one can beat my Wu Tang style!

http://greenblowfly.blogspot.com <- My 40k Blog! BA Tactics & Strategies!
 
   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer





Woodbridge, VA

Mannahnin wrote:At every GT I've ever attended the winner has been one of the guys with top Battle scores. The way Battles is usually made the lion's share of the points, and how the functional spread of the other scores often makes them less important, almost always ensures this.


And yet, it has happened. One of the early Baltimore GTs, they made the painting score possible points so high that a player with a non-winning record (2-2-2 IIRC) won overall, based on all the bonus points he was awarded for appearance. Don't get me wrong, it was a beautiful army. But did he deserve Overall? No.

Don "MONDO"
www.ironfistleague.com
Northern VA/Southern MD 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






on board Terminus Est

That's just your opinion though. The old GTs are still considered by many to be the best. The 2007 GW GT circuit actually awarded the army with best appearance the equivalent of 2+ massacres in battlepoints plus the same Ultramarine army won this award at every GW GT that year, winning best overall (3,wayvtie) in Vegas with two losses.

G

ALL HAIL SANGUINIUS! No one can beat my Wu Tang style!

http://greenblowfly.blogspot.com <- My 40k Blog! BA Tactics & Strategies!
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





don_mondo wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:At every GT I've ever attended the winner has been one of the guys with top Battle scores. The way Battles is usually made the lion's share of the points, and how the functional spread of the other scores often makes them less important, almost always ensures this.


And yet, it has happened. One of the early Baltimore GTs, they made the painting score possible points so high that a player with a non-winning record (2-2-2 IIRC) won overall, based on all the bonus points he was awarded for appearance. Don't get me wrong, it was a beautiful army. But did he deserve Overall? No.


It happened more than once that year. That was Year of the Painter when the top painted armies would score more painting points than the total amount of battle points. A true fiasco, there was no max points and paint judges were going crazy giving out points like candy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Green Blow Fly wrote:That's just your opinion though. The old GTs are still considered by many to be the best. The 2007 GW GT circuit actually awarded the army with best appearance the equivalent of 2+ massacres in battlepoints plus the same Ultramarine army won this award at every GW GT that year, winning best overall (3,wayvtie) in Vegas with two losses.

G


I think that anyone who thinks that a 2-2-2 record deserves best overall must be insane.

I think most people would feel a 2-2-2 record does not deserve Overall unless they think all soft scores combined should be worth more points that battle scores.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/27 21:22:55


"There's something out there and it ain't no man..... we're all gonna die" 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






on board Terminus Est

It used to not be all about hte WAAC.

G

ALL HAIL SANGUINIUS! No one can beat my Wu Tang style!

http://greenblowfly.blogspot.com <- My 40k Blog! BA Tactics & Strategies!
 
   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer





Woodbridge, VA

It's not about the WAAC, but how can you say someone is the best hobbiest (which uncludes playing the game) if they don't even win half their games or more. Sorry, taht was a fail on GWs part. That would be like me showing up with a half painted army but still winning the Best Painted award......

Basically, IF you're going to have an Overall, the winner should have to score at least average, if not better than average, in all categories, not ride one to the prize. That's the balancing act that we, as judges, have always had to work out. How many points to give per category so that it balances out? Which is why the general formula rates Battle Points so strongly and the combined soft scores for 50% or less. You can't weight them evenly, or you really do wind up running the risk of having a losing record winning the top spot.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/28 03:33:32


Don "MONDO"
www.ironfistleague.com
Northern VA/Southern MD 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tilter at Windmills






Manchester, NH

Yes, there was a year when the scoring was really out of whack. Actually, was that the same year in which your number of battle points was determined by your total vps scored, regardless of vps scored against you? People were just slaughtering one another, and BOTH were getting high battle points.

Adepticon 2015: Team Tourney Best Imperial Team- Team Ironguts, Adepticon 2014: Team Tourney 6th/120, Best Imperial Team- Cold Steel Mercs 2, 40k Championship Qualifier ~25/226
More 2010-2014 GT/Major RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 78-20-9 // SW: 8-1-2 (Golden Ticket with SW), BA: 29-9-4 6th Ed GT & RTT Record (W/L/D) -- CSM: 36-12-2 // BA: 11-4-1 // SW: 1-1-1
DT:70S++++G(FAQ)M++B++I+Pw40k99#+D+++A+++/sWD105R+++T(T)DM+++++
A better way to score Sportsmanship in tournaments
The 40K Rulebook & Codex FAQs. You should have these bookmarked if you play this game.
The Dakka Dakka Forum Rules You agreed to abide by these when you signed up.

Maelstrom's Edge! 
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard




New York

Green Blow Fly wrote:It used to not be all about hte WAAC.

G


And it still isn't. This is a perfect example of confusion between people who genuinely enjoy competition and people who will do anything to win. From my experience in a number of clubs on the East coast the former greatly outnumber the latter. People genuinely interested in competitive events play to win but aren't overly concerned with it, they simply care that tournament performance dictates the outcome of a tournament. It's a simple concept that is somehow lost on the Warhammer community, or at least on the tournament organizers.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/02/28 13:52:48


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






on board Terminus Est

It is the smaller group that often ruins it for everyone else.

G

ALL HAIL SANGUINIUS! No one can beat my Wu Tang style!

http://greenblowfly.blogspot.com <- My 40k Blog! BA Tactics & Strategies!
 
   
Made in fi
Mighty Chosen Warrior of Chaos






Espoo - Finland

From WHFB perspective, hard restrictions and pure armypoint handicaps have worked reasonably well in making a relatively neat tournament enviroment (in the troll wastes I live in, that is). The former is implemented so there would be some balance between the horribly unbalanced armybooks. It doesn't do too much in regards of people bringing fluffy/soft/hard/whatever lists into tournies, but I guess it's the name of the game here (no sportsmanship/comp scores, just battle and appearance).

Kinda funny to see 2600 pts worth of ogres struggling vs 2000 pts daemon army (and the point handicap is just a start for the daemons, there's extra restrictions too), but at least the fatties have a decent change there... I have a hard time figuring out no-comp 40k having as much trouble balancewise as the worst of vanilla whfb matchups, so in that sense 40k crowd has it easier nowadays. That's not to say that there isn't balance issues in 40k, altough I don't have good answers what to do to help out necrons for example, in order to bring them into the top tier army league.

...silence 
   
Made in us
Heroic Senior Officer





Woodbridge, VA

Bubbalicious wrote:
don_mondo wrote:
OR........... it ensures that a "soft" comp army wins because he never had to face a good army or player...........................

Yaaa..... Thats a great way of generelazing a whole group of people saying that "soft" comps armies are played by bad players...


Hmm, poorly phrased on my part, you're right. Not what I intended to say. How's this instead?

Or it's a 'soft' army played by a very good player who knows that by building a soft army, he'll have an easier time of it, as he will never have to face a 'hard' army and likely, not have to face any WAAC players.

Don "MONDO"
www.ironfistleague.com
Northern VA/Southern MD 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: