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.

Kirasu wrote:Legions just got its confirmation this morning also that 'ard boyz is cancelled.. Along with Showcase we were the 2 stores that did semi-finals in PA

Not to derail the thread, but would you mind expanding upon your Legions confirmation bit? (Perhaps a new thread if there is substantial information?)

yakface wrote:
Just have longer round times to compensate and by god use some basic missions so as to help the game end more quickly.

My #1 and 2 gripe about WHF Ard Boyz. 2.5hrs is not enough time. If you are playing Ogres vs WE with a minimum number of models out there then getting it done in time is doable. But throw some horde armies out (Skaven, Empire, etc.) and having to pick-up/remove 100's of models takes time. Now throw in funky scenarios (Dawn Attack, etc) that junk up deployment and again, you are racing against the clock.

3k pts is my favorite pts level to play. It just seems that all cylinders are finally firing at that pts level. Oh well.

At least Throne of Skulls is close by this year (Memphis).

I'd like to see GW replace the farce that was 'Ard Boyz with something more akin to the old Grand Tournaments honestly.

bring back the 'soft scores', but do it properly and not completely upto the player. For example, when it comes to painting, have a strict yes/no list that's posted well ahead of time. Astronomi-con has an excellent list like this and even 'basic' table top quality nets you a good score.
('Basic' = can you basecoat your model neatly, slap a wash or two onto it, add a little bit of drybrushing/minor highlighting and then finish up with a neatly based model! So, something Necrons can do in a day! )

For something like sportsmanship, again, check list it. Was your opponent fair, (ie: were they not abusing loopholes or crying RAW every other phase?) You get a point. Were you able to work out rules questions in a respectful manner? Get another point. Did your opponent complete their turn in a timely fashion without undo procrastinating? Another point. Would you voluntarily play your opponent again? Another point.
Leave things like 'did you find your opponent's army to be fluffy/representative of their race' and other highly opinionated options like 'was the army cheesy' out of it. Imho, sportsmanship at tournies should be about being a pleasent and fun opponent and discouraging d-bag attitudes like insisting on RAW abuses to give you an advantage or else being a TFG. Use the sportsmanship score as the first tie-breaker and it should hopefully encourage people to not act like some WAAC's sad panda.

If they want a composition score, well, not really sure because 40k currently doesn't lend itself to a fair system that wouldn't favour one group of armies over another. For now I think comp should simply be left out of it or else a pure +3-4 bonus pts for not simply taking a boring spam list that copy-pastes 4+ identicle units.

Keep the battle points as 50-60% of the overall score, and you're still giving the slight advantage to the top generals.

Let the overall winner advance, along with the top 3 battle points scorers. Hopefully that way no one can argue that the 'snob'ish painter who sucks at playing advanced' because only the 'overall hobby champion' gets that pass, the other spots are exactly as the old 'ard boyz qualifyers.

Just my personal opinion.

Experiment 626 wrote:I'd like to see GW replace the farce that was 'Ard Boyz with something more akin to the old Grand Tournaments honestly.

bring back the 'soft scores', but do it properly and not completely upto the player. For example, when it comes to painting, have a strict yes/no list that's posted well ahead of time. Astronomi-con has an excellent list like this and even 'basic' table top quality nets you a good score.
('Basic' = can you basecoat your model neatly, slap a wash or two onto it, add a little bit of drybrushing/minor highlighting and then finish up with a neatly based model! So, something Necrons can do in a day! )

For something like sportsmanship, again, check list it. Was your opponent fair, (ie: were they not abusing loopholes or crying RAW every other phase?) You get a point. Were you able to work out rules questions in a respectful manner? Get another point. Did your opponent complete their turn in a timely fashion without undo procrastinating? Another point. Would you voluntarily play your opponent again? Another point.
Leave things like 'did you find your opponent's army to be fluffy/representative of their race' and other highly opinionated options like 'was the army cheesy' out of it. Imho, sportsmanship at tournies should be about being a pleasent and fun opponent and discouraging d-bag attitudes like insisting on RAW abuses to give you an advantage or else being a TFG. Use the sportsmanship score as the first tie-breaker and it should hopefully encourage people to not act like some WAAC's sad panda.

If they want a composition score, well, not really sure because 40k currently doesn't lend itself to a fair system that wouldn't favour one group of armies over another. For now I think comp should simply be left out of it or else a pure +3-4 bonus pts for not simply taking a boring spam list that copy-pastes 4+ identicle units.

Keep the battle points as 50-60% of the overall score, and you're still giving the slight advantage to the top generals.

Let the overall winner advance, along with the top 3 battle points scorers. Hopefully that way no one can argue that the 'snob'ish painter who sucks at playing advanced' because only the 'overall hobby champion' gets that pass, the other spots are exactly as the old 'ard boyz qualifyers.

Just my personal opinion.

Nearly saw something like this. The person who almost won renn man at the Indy GT went 4 and 2. He was above nearly all of the 5 and 1 players due to his painting score. In a competitive environment Ide like to see the top general win. They have a painting award for a reason. Not everyone out here is an artist. Personally my favorite part of the hobby is modeling. I cant paint to save my life though. With your system I would have to go undefeated and then get some favorable scores just to win a competitive tournament. You are starting to see more and more tournaments won by soft scores. I have actually been knocked out of the top 3 before by soft scores.

Eldanar wrote:
I don't think I ever played fewer than 5 rounds in any 'Ard Boyz tournament.

I'll readily concede that there all kinds of issues with the missions, the play time, and the lack of paint (particularly in the qualifying round, but usually not in the semis). But it was also a breath of fresh air to not have to worry about soft scores, or the crap that surrounds them. And actually, there are not very many tournaments left that do not rely on soft scoring to one degree or another. Also, the problems, and the challenges they presented, were also part of what made this tournament so interesting.

Soft scores are fine in and by themselves. I agree with you, that most tournaments have had them in one form or another for years, but the shenanigans that surround them were never as pronounced or as obvious a problem as they appear to be now (I'll also concede that there appears to be a little push back to get this a little more under control, but it is still there). It is when they become retaliatory due to someone losing a game and getting their feelings hurt; or when there is a gentleman's agreement to artifically inflate/deflate scores, that they become a problem. They realistically only matter to people who typically finish high in battle points to begin with; but when they are tied to shenanigans, rather than being accurate reflections based on objective criteria, then they more or less make the final standings meaningless, particularly when only a few points seperate 1 from 10.

But again, you seem to be implying that somehow there were more tournaments with no or less soft scores in the past then there are now, when this is not the case (at least not in the US). There are now far more tournaments being run that do not utilize soft scores or separate them out into a different category than ever before.

The Adepticon Championship, the NOVA Open, the Bay Area Open, the tournament run by the 11th Company, and lots and lots of smaller RTTs which are following in the footsteps of this and doing the same.

So the loss of 'ard boyz is not a loss for events with no soft scores...that movement is still growing at a very rapid pace. The only thing the death of 'ard boyz brings down is a tournament that was terribly designed, in that it is way too many points for the time given and the missions were poorly designed to represent the 'hardcore' event that it was supposed to be.

And the fact that you always got to turn 5 on all your games simply means you got to turn 5 on all your games. Trust me, not everyone else did.

There are better tournament scenes out there that will satisfy the WAAC players. We can all agree on that.

With GW promoting more art into the hobby over the past two years, it seems logical that GW might return to the ole' GT style. Personally I loved the early 2000's White Dwarfs with all the GT winners, their armies in pictures, and maybe a supportive battle report in addition to the gaming & paint articles and a new release battle report. It promoted a great, all-around fun atmosphere about the store and our hobby and less on a cut-throat competitive edge.

Then again GW logic is put a campfire out with their face.

Tomb King wrote:
Nearly saw something like this. The person who almost won renn man at the Indy GT went 4 and 2. He was above nearly all of the 5 and 1 players due to his painting score. In a competitive environment Ide like to see the top general win. They have a painting award for a reason. Not everyone out here is an artist. Personally my favorite part of the hobby is modeling. I cant paint to save my life though. With your system I would have to go undefeated and then get some favorable scores just to win a competitive tournament. You are starting to see more and more tournaments won by soft scores. I have actually been knocked out of the top 3 before by soft scores.

First of all, the whole point of having a 'renaissance man' award is that it is supposed to be awarded to the best overall hobbyist as opposed to the tournament champion who is the guy with the best record. That term 'renaissance man' was coined by (I believe) the NOVA Open which does exactly that (has a tournament champion decided purely by W/L and then a renn man going to the guy with the best all around gaming and hobby scores).

And again, you are acting as if there are more tournaments going over to using soft scores, when the reverse is actually true.

Finally, people continually misuse the term 'competitive'. Any event where people are using the same rules is by its nature competitive. A beauty pageant can be highly competitive, for example. What you're trying to say is that a tournament that includes soft scores to determine a winner does a poor job of evaluating who was the best player, and that is true. But in the past, that wasn't the goal of those tournaments (to evaluate who the best player was), it was to evaluate who was the best overall hobbyist (which included painting, gaming and sportsmanship). And yes, those events were still 'competitive'...everyone had access to the same rules, everyone had access to the same paints and the same ability to be nice to other people...they just weren't very good at being evaluative of who was the best gamer (which is what you're trying to say).

Tomb King wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:

Spoiler:

I'd like to see GW replace the farce that was 'Ard Boyz with something more akin to the old Grand Tournaments honestly.

bring back the 'soft scores', but do it properly and not completely upto the player. For example, when it comes to painting, have a strict yes/no list that's posted well ahead of time. Astronomi-con has an excellent list like this and even 'basic' table top quality nets you a good score.
('Basic' = can you basecoat your model neatly, slap a wash or two onto it, add a little bit of drybrushing/minor highlighting and then finish up with a neatly based model! So, something Necrons can do in a day! )

For something like sportsmanship, again, check list it. Was your opponent fair, (ie: were they not abusing loopholes or crying RAW every other phase?) You get a point. Were you able to work out rules questions in a respectful manner? Get another point. Did your opponent complete their turn in a timely fashion without undo procrastinating? Another point. Would you voluntarily play your opponent again? Another point.
Leave things like 'did you find your opponent's army to be fluffy/representative of their race' and other highly opinionated options like 'was the army cheesy' out of it. Imho, sportsmanship at tournies should be about being a pleasent and fun opponent and discouraging d-bag attitudes like insisting on RAW abuses to give you an advantage or else being a TFG. Use the sportsmanship score as the first tie-breaker and it should hopefully encourage people to not act like some WAAC's sad panda.

If they want a composition score, well, not really sure because 40k currently doesn't lend itself to a fair system that wouldn't favour one group of armies over another. For now I think comp should simply be left out of it or else a pure +3-4 bonus pts for not simply taking a boring spam list that copy-pastes 4+ identicle units.

Keep the battle points as 50-60% of the overall score, and you're still giving the slight advantage to the top generals.

Let the overall winner advance, along with the top 3 battle points scorers. Hopefully that way no one can argue that the 'snob'ish painter who sucks at playing advanced' because only the 'overall hobby champion' gets that pass, the other spots are exactly as the old 'ard boyz qualifyers.

Just my personal opinion.

Nearly saw something like this. The person who almost won renn man at the Indy GT went 4 and 2. He was above nearly all of the 5 and 1 players due to his painting score. In a competitive environment Ide like to see the top general win. They have a painting award for a reason. Not everyone out here is an artist. Personally my favorite part of the hobby is modeling. I cant paint to save my life though. With your system I would have to go undefeated and then get some favorable scores just to win a competitive tournament. You are starting to see more and more tournaments won by soft scores. I have actually been knocked out of the top 3 before by soft scores.

I've never understood the criticism of an overall award/scoring like this. The guy that paints well and wins games should win the overall award. If you aren't cut out to compete in the overall, then focus on the parts that fit your particular interests, whether it be best general or appearance.

winterman wrote:I've never understood the criticism of an overall award/scoring like this. The guy that paints well and wins games should win the overall award. If you aren't cut out to compete in the overall, then focus on the parts that fit your particular interests, whether it be best general or appearance.

Assuming he actually paints his models, and doesn't get them painted by someone else.

I like the idea of separate prizes for separate categories - best general, best painted, best sportsman, maybe best overall - it gives people who enjoy different parts of the hobby the ability to succeed in their chosen area.

The issue isn't soft scores as 'ard boys has some of the harshest COMP I have ever seen built-in to a mission objective.

The issue for people is this is literally the only larger tourney event which doesn't require minimum appearance scores which a group of gamers who don't paint and are basically banned from all other events can finally attend. for casual gamers who maybe do one or two tourneys a year, this was the one you could play with that half-assed army or WIP army or whatever due to the no paint.

My beef with 'ard boyz was the uncompetitive missions, the uncompetitive point value, only 3 games in a room often more than 16 players which means you can't have a clear winner... The sea of unenforced WYSYWIG grey garbage is just the doo-doo icing on a garbage-flavoured cake.

I'm an old fart (I go back to the first US GT in '97), and from my perspective the tourney scene has definitely moved toward the competitive side over the years. The earliest GTs had judge-based comp. Later, they moved to a quantitative comp system. IIRC, after that they moved toward a vaguer, player-judged "theme" category, before finally doing away with comp altogether. Just one example.

While I'm mainly talking about GW GTs, keep in mind that the (relatively few) indy events back then also took a lot of their cues from the GW GT system. And it's only been since GW shut down their GTs that the indy scene (supported by GW) really exploded with a lot of different ideas and approaches. The elimination of 'Ard Boyz may indicate some backpedaling toward the hobby side, but overall we're still looking at a fairly sizable shift toward more competitive-based play. The MechaniCon is a more hobby-oriented tourney, but with no comp our event would probably have been considered hard-as-nails competitive back in '97.

Personally, I'm a strong proponent of tournament circuit diversity that gives players the ability to pick the events that work for them.

dont mean to sound stupid but 'ard boyz as in armoured boyz?

dakkadakka brad wrote:dont mean to sound stupid but 'ard boyz as in armoured boyz?

'ard boyz is the big, games workshop sponsored tournament, if I'm not mistaken.

(Hard Boys, the Orks who have 5+ armor saves is the name it's taken from, yea.)

Having to paint an entire army just to play in the tournament is just plain stupid to me. If i want to enter a tournament but can't finish painting, I either have to rush the paint job, making it look like crap or i don't get to play. That is just not right in my mind. Soft scores are needed. But painting shouldn't be apart of that. Neither should sportsmen ship. Ever beat some one and they just want to put you down? I have had great games and been hit for sportsmanship because the other person lost. They need to refine soft scores to an unbiased level. Did you bring all the choices? Did you bring multiples of the same units. Are all the units geared the same. Break down the army list for soft scores, and have this play a part in the final out come. Then have other awards for something like the best gamer, Adding to this painting and the like.

Personally i loved 'ard boyz, all the power gamers forced me to become a better player. Does this mean i have to become a power gamer? No, when i played eldar i brought the dumbest things i could. Like swooping hawks. 'Ard boyz was/is the only big name tournament that i don't have to drive about 2 hours to play in. And lets not forget, I don't have to go to a convention to play in it. I like the local seen. I like seeing what people play, but only come around for bigger tournaments. When 'Ard boyz is gone, there won't be much reason for alot of people to buy more than 2k points worth of any army. And the idea that GW is using 'ard boyz to sell people more models and make more money, is just an out right stupid idea. Just because 'Ard boyz is coming around doesn't mean they make more money. Chances are they lose money because of people going through ebay. "Yes i know some one must of had to buy the models in the first place, But when they bought the models changes this. A model bought three years ago was cheaper than a model bought yesterday." Being glad 'Ard boyz is gone just because you hated the power gamers, Doesn't mean 'Ard boyz is at fault. There will always be those people power gaming. And if your group are the people who do so. THEN ITS YOUR GROUP! not just because of a tournament. You need to figure out who in your group is fun to play and who isn't. Doesn't take long. Play a game with one. Was it fun, Yes, cool. No, try again. If the answer is still no. THEN DON'T PLAY THEM. Don't blame a good fun tournament on people around you being a power gamer. And don't blame it because you choose to play them. If 'Ard boyz is in fact being cancelled, It will be a sad day for those of us who like to play the game. and not just win the game. 'Ard boyz was a large tournament, with three rounds, THAT WAS FREE TO PLAY IN.

The people who are glad to see 'Ard boyz go, are the power gamers who failed. The rest of us are either the people who want to win, are power gamers, or people who know how to deal with power gamers and just love to play the game. Its a sad day to read so many people who are glad to see this tournament end. You didn't have to enter it if you didn't like it. You didn't have to play against the people who where going to enter with the cheese lists. YOU GOT TO CHOOSE, You people need to come down off your high horse, and get over your selves. The tournament was for people trying to be the best. Thats how they got people to enter it. Now if you where trying to be the best why wouldn't you use anything else but the best? Its a common sense thing. It really is. Talking down on a tournament because of one issue or another is just the way things happen, Not every tournament can go on with out its faults. But we as the gamers look past this so that the tournaments can go on.

Every year, 'Ard boyz brings the gamers together, Its the talk of the town, so to speak, for a month. Every one gearing up for 'Ard boyz. Now we lost it. And you people are happy for it. maybe around you guys the power gamers didn't care about you. But around where i live. We wanted to send as many people as possible from our group to the finals. We would drive to as many different places as we could to try and make it. We would all help each other out. planning and working with each other to improve our lists. If you haven't figured things out yet. THAT IS A COMMUNITY! friends playing a game and having fun.

Its sad times to hear so many people happy that we lost something in the community.

PapaPiggy wrote:We wanted to send as many people as possible from our group to the finals. We would drive to as many different places as we could to try and make it. We would all help each other out. planning and working with each other to improve our lists. If you haven't figured things out yet. THAT IS A COMMUNITY! friends playing a game and having fun.

Its sad times to hear so many people happy that we lost something in the community.

IE: being a big cheater. Many people who play one location Saturday and as soon as they lose, they stop playing, drop the tourney and drive elsewhere Sunday. Then some players drive to multiple locations to report on which has the weakest competition and best chances for winning. That is cheating and garbage. That doesn't prove you are best, just that you can cheat more to reach the next level and grab prize swag. Which is why tone and quality of 'ard boyz is such a turn off as there is really minimal skill and minimal test of 'the best player' found. People would do things like stack the competition, throw games to friends, game at locations with weak TOs to exploit rules and other horrible things to 'make it to the next round'.

The quality of players, the skill of players is shown much better by the multiday events with true rankings like Adepticon and NOVA. Better events, better players, real respect for who places, balanced missions, and a real representation of the community as a whole.

We already have much better events in the Indy tourney world and events that better suit the players tastes as almost no one actually strives for 'ard boyz format (except the non-painters). So I am glad it is gone and just about anything that fill the hole will be better. I am sure most good TOs have already planned to fill that month with their own tourney by now considering they heard 'ard boyz was cancelled. And I bet every one of those events will be better than what would have existed.

nkelsch wrote:

PapaPiggy wrote:We wanted to send as many people as possible from our group to the finals. We would drive to as many different places as we could to try and make it. ...

IE: being a big cheater. Many people who play one location Saturday and as soon as they lose, they stop playing, drop the tourney and drive elsewhere Sunday. Then some players drive to multiple locations to report on which has the weakest competition and best chances for winning. That is cheating and garbage.

How about reading his post before you accuse someone of cheating. If you have say 9 people and they all want a chance to play each other at the finals..then you have to split up and go to different tourneys. Only 3 people can advance from any single location. And since when did Ard Boyz play on 2 consecutive days?

Thanks for your input, I am sure we are all better because of it.

PapaPiggy wrote:Having to paint an entire army just to play in the tournament is just plain stupid to me. If i want to enter a tournament but can't finish painting, I either have to rush the paint job, making it look like crap or i don't get to play. That is just not right in my mind. Soft scores are needed. But painting shouldn't be apart of that. Neither should sportsmen ship. Ever beat some one and they just want to put you down? I have had great games and been hit for sportsmanship because the other person lost. They need to refine soft scores to an unbiased level. Did you bring all the choices? Did you bring multiples of the same units. Are all the units geared the same. Break down the army list for soft scores, and have this play a part in the final out come. Then have other awards for something like the best gamer, Adding to this painting and the like.

Personally i loved 'ard boyz, all the power gamers forced me to become a better player. Does this mean i have to become a power gamer? No, when i played eldar i brought the dumbest things i could. Like swooping hawks. 'Ard boyz was/is the only big name tournament that i don't have to drive about 2 hours to play in. And lets not forget, I don't have to go to a convention to play in it. I like the local seen. I like seeing what people play, but only come around for bigger tournaments. When 'Ard boyz is gone, there won't be much reason for alot of people to buy more than 2k points worth of any army. And the idea that GW is using 'ard boyz to sell people more models and make more money, is just an out right stupid idea. Just because 'Ard boyz is coming around doesn't mean they make more money. Chances are they lose money because of people going through ebay. "Yes i know some one must of had to buy the models in the first place, But when they bought the models changes this. A model bought three years ago was cheaper than a model bought yesterday." Being glad 'Ard boyz is gone just because you hated the power gamers, Doesn't mean 'Ard boyz is at fault. There will always be those people power gaming. And if your group are the people who do so. THEN ITS YOUR GROUP! not just because of a tournament. You need to figure out who in your group is fun to play and who isn't. Doesn't take long. Play a game with one. Was it fun, Yes, cool. No, try again. If the answer is still no. THEN DON'T PLAY THEM. Don't blame a good fun tournament on people around you being a power gamer. And don't blame it because you choose to play them. If 'Ard boyz is in fact being cancelled, It will be a sad day for those of us who like to play the game. and not just win the game. 'Ard boyz was a large tournament, with three rounds, THAT WAS FREE TO PLAY IN.

The people who are glad to see 'Ard boyz go, are the power gamers who failed. The rest of us are either the people who want to win, are power gamers, or people who know how to deal with power gamers and just love to play the game. Its a sad day to read so many people who are glad to see this tournament end. You didn't have to enter it if you didn't like it. You didn't have to play against the people who where going to enter with the cheese lists. YOU GOT TO CHOOSE, You people need to come down off your high horse, and get over your selves. The tournament was for people trying to be the best. Thats how they got people to enter it. Now if you where trying to be the best why wouldn't you use anything else but the best? Its a common sense thing. It really is. Talking down on a tournament because of one issue or another is just the way things happen, Not every tournament can go on with out its faults. But we as the gamers look past this so that the tournaments can go on.

Every year, 'Ard boyz brings the gamers together, Its the talk of the town, so to speak, for a month. Every one gearing up for 'Ard boyz. Now we lost it. And you people are happy for it. maybe around you guys the power gamers didn't care about you. But around where i live. We wanted to send as many people as possible from our group to the finals. We would drive to as many different places as we could to try and make it. We would all help each other out. planning and working with each other to improve our lists. If you haven't figured things out yet. THAT IS A COMMUNITY! friends playing a game and having fun.

Its sad times to hear so many people happy that we lost something in the community.

I like your post here. Whether we like it or not ard boyz was good for at least individual gaming groups. People would work together to get ready for it and prepare for future rounds. After the first round me and a few guys I normally dont have a chance to get games with practiced together for the next round. The tournament encouraged local people to stop being a hermit(yes im pointing to you sir paints a lot ). I like big games too because you can bring all those units you never have space for in smaller more contemporary list. Around here ard boyz will be missed... even if some haven't realized it yet...

nkelsch wrote:

PapaPiggy wrote:We wanted to send as many people as possible from our group to the finals. We would drive to as many different places as we could to try and make it. We would all help each other out. planning and working with each other to improve our lists. If you haven't figured things out yet. THAT IS A COMMUNITY! friends playing a game and having fun.

Its sad times to hear so many people happy that we lost something in the community.

IE: being a big cheater. Many people who play one location Saturday and as soon as they lose, they stop playing, drop the tourney and drive elsewhere Sunday. Then some players drive to multiple locations to report on which has the weakest competition and best chances for winning. That is cheating and garbage. That doesn't prove you are best, just that you can cheat more to reach the next level and grab prize swag. Which is why tone and quality of 'ard boyz is such a turn off as there is really minimal skill and minimal test of 'the best player' found. People would do things like stack the competition, throw games to friends, game at locations with weak TOs to exploit rules and other horrible things to 'make it to the next round'.

The quality of players, the skill of players is shown much better by the multiday events with true rankings like Adepticon and NOVA. Better events, better players, real respect for who places, balanced missions, and a real representation of the community as a whole.

We already have much better events in the Indy tourney world and events that better suit the players tastes as almost no one actually strives for 'ard boyz format (except the non-painters). So I am glad it is gone and just about anything that fill the hole will be better. I am sure most good TOs have already planned to fill that month with their own tourney by now considering they heard 'ard boyz was cancelled. And I bet every one of those events will be better than what would have existed.

Did you even read his post? What I got out of it was that the gaming group he is a part of would split up and go to play in as many different locations as possible so that they might have a better chance of meeting each other in later rounds, or at least not have to eliminate each other early. I'm assuming just as much or more than you are from the post, but I'm not jumping to the conclusion and calling somebody a cheater. I'm not sure what it is about this thread that has your panties in such a knot, but perhaps you should step away from it for awhile before you start throwing accusations like that around.

Tomb King wrote:
Nearly saw something like this. The person who almost won renn man at the Indy GT went 4 and 2. He was above nearly all of the 5 and 1 players due to his painting score. In a competitive environment Ide like to see the top general win. They have a painting award for a reason. Not everyone out here is an artist. Personally my favorite part of the hobby is modeling. I cant paint to save my life though. With your system I would have to go undefeated and then get some favorable scores just to win a competitive tournament. You are starting to see more and more tournaments won by soft scores. I have actually been knocked out of the top 3 before by soft scores.

Hence why the gaming score should be at least 50-60% of the overall score.

If you give actual gameplay 60% of the overall score, that means you could even go so far as to say that painting is only 15%, sportsmanship is 15% and comp is a measly 10%. That's still giving the advantage to the hardcore 'gamers' as compared to the 'painters playing for fun'. (and if you do away with comp altogether, then it's even simpler as painting & sports are 20% each)
At the qualifying rounds, the Overall Champion, ie: the guy who best expemlifies the enitre hobby gets to advance, and the top 3 generalship score also advance! So sure, you might lose out the overall title to a guy who won one less game but has an 'armies on parade' worthy force, but if you're in the top 3 scorers on battle points, you still go on anyways.

Semi-finals? Have an overall, and again the top 2 or 3 battle points scores advancing to the finals. GW is trying to promote then entire hobby, not just 1 part of it. 'Ard Boyz has done a wonderfull job of pissing off alot of people who don't want to play 100% 'uber filthfests and who resent seeing nothing but walls of half-built grey plastic across the table from them.
And by the time you reach the finals? Pretty much everyone is a damn good player because those first round overall winners who won by virtue of their painting abilities likely won't squeek by as the competition gets harder and harder.

It would honestly be nice to see a return to a system built along the older style GT's that exemplified the entire hobby.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Tomb King wrote:
Nearly saw something like this. The person who almost won renn man at the Indy GT went 4 and 2. He was above nearly all of the 5 and 1 players due to his painting score. In a competitive environment Ide like to see the top general win. They have a painting award for a reason. Not everyone out here is an artist. Personally my favorite part of the hobby is modeling. I cant paint to save my life though. With your system I would have to go undefeated and then get some favorable scores just to win a competitive tournament. You are starting to see more and more tournaments won by soft scores. I have actually been knocked out of the top 3 before by soft scores.

Hence why the gaming score should be at least 50-60% of the overall score.

If you give actual gameplay 60% of the overall score, that means you could even go so far as to say that painting is only 15%, sportsmanship is 15% and comp is a measly 10%. That's still giving the advantage to the hardcore 'gamers' as compared to the 'painters playing for fun'. (and if you do away with comp altogether, then it's even simpler as painting & sports are 20% each)
At the qualifying rounds, the Overall Champion, ie: the guy who best expemlifies the enitre hobby gets to advance, and the top 3 generalship score also advance! So sure, you might lose out the overall title to a guy who won one less game but has an 'armies on parade' worthy force, but if you're in the top 3 scorers on battle points, you still go on anyways.

Semi-finals? Have an overall, and again the top 2 or 3 battle points scores advancing to the finals. GW is trying to promote then entire hobby, not just 1 part of it. 'Ard Boyz has done a wonderfull job of pissing off alot of people who don't want to play 100% 'uber filthfests and who resent seeing nothing but walls of half-built grey plastic across the table from them.
And by the time you reach the finals? Pretty much everyone is a damn good player because those first round overall winners who won by virtue of their painting abilities likely won't squeek by as the competition gets harder and harder.

It would honestly be nice to see a return to a system built along the older style GT's that exemplified the entire hobby.

My biggest issue with this is people having there armies painted for them. Should he still win the best hobbyist? A good amount of gamers that go to GT's comission there armies for painting. Personally I cant paint my vampires in time for adepticon so I had to comission someone to help paint some of them for me. If I win the best hobbyist award I would seriously give it away to a guy that painted his. If I won best general then bug off I made it through the hurt locker and won it fair and square.

helium42 wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

PapaPiggy wrote:We wanted to send as many people as possible from our group to the finals. We would drive to as many different places as we could to try and make it. We would all help each other out. planning and working with each other to improve our lists. If you haven't figured things out yet. THAT IS A COMMUNITY! friends playing a game and having fun.

Its sad times to hear so many people happy that we lost something in the community.

IE: being a big cheater. Many people who play one location Saturday and as soon as they lose, they stop playing, drop the tourney and drive elsewhere Sunday. Then some players drive to multiple locations to report on which has the weakest competition and best chances for winning. That is cheating and garbage. That doesn't prove you are best, just that you can cheat more to reach the next level and grab prize swag. Which is why tone and quality of 'ard boyz is such a turn off as there is really minimal skill and minimal test of 'the best player' found. People would do things like stack the competition, throw games to friends, game at locations with weak TOs to exploit rules and other horrible things to 'make it to the next round'.

The quality of players, the skill of players is shown much better by the multiday events with true rankings like Adepticon and NOVA. Better events, better players, real respect for who places, balanced missions, and a real representation of the community as a whole.

We already have much better events in the Indy tourney world and events that better suit the players tastes as almost no one actually strives for 'ard boyz format (except the non-painters). So I am glad it is gone and just about anything that fill the hole will be better. I am sure most good TOs have already planned to fill that month with their own tourney by now considering they heard 'ard boyz was cancelled. And I bet every one of those events will be better than what would have existed.

Did you even read his post? What I got out of it was that the gaming group he is a part of would split up and go to play in as many different locations as possible so that they might have a better chance of meeting each other in later rounds, or at least not have to eliminate each other early. I'm assuming just as much or more than you are from the post, but I'm not jumping to the conclusion and calling somebody a cheater. I'm not sure what it is about this thread that has your panties in such a knot, but perhaps you should step away from it for awhile before you start throwing accusations like that around.

If they're all part of the same group and friends, what's so important about playing against each other at regionals? They play each other all the time, shouldn't you want to play people whose styles and tactics you don't have memorized and see regularly? That, to me, seems more challenging than playing the exact people at a tournament that you play all the time. Hell, I'd feel kind of robbed if I DID play someone I played regularly at a tourney because that's essentially a game I would have already played while practicing.

I can see what nkelsch is getting at, too. Spreading out your group to dominate and claim all the spots at all the local events smacks of attempting to control who goes to Regionals to give yourself the best chances for the second round. It's playing the system at worst and dickish at best because you're potentially robbing players at 2 other locations of the chance to make it past the first round.

I used to see the same thing happen in the magic circles all the time.

helium42 wrote:

Did you even read his post? What I got out of it was that the gaming group he is a part of would split up and go to play in as many different locations as possible so that they might have a better chance of meeting each other in later rounds, or at least not have to eliminate each other early. I'm assuming just as much or more than you are from the post, but I'm not jumping to the conclusion and calling somebody a cheater. I'm not sure what it is about this thread that has your panties in such a knot, but perhaps you should step away from it for awhile before you start throwing accusations like that around.

I did. Gaming the system to get more people than deserve it to the later rounds is one of the problems of 'ard boyz. People purposefully look for poorly run 'ard boyz with low attendance to increase their chances of winning and due to the totally inconsistent nature and organization of 'ardboyz, it works. It is dubious to operate in that fashion to try to 'win' by selecting areas with easier opponents or poor organization or bad organizers to increase your chance of reaching the finals, almost as if the first round doesn't matter and is a formality. It doesn't speak to the quality fo the event or the true competitive nature if people are able to do this. Even if they are not purposely cheating like many of the other people who do quit on Saturday and then play at a location which had their 'ard boyz on sunday, it is all around bad.

Why not get your 10 buddies and go to adpeticon or something and play some of the best people in the nation in a well-run event with real missions and a actually fair point value and have fun with your buddies all meeting up at the top tables with all your skill? Or do you need to find a 'ard boyz with 9 participants run by a dude at a model train store who knows nothing about GW games and has no judges enforcing rules to 'win' your way skillfully into the finals?

'Ardboyz was a total trainwreck mess and represented no skill. Anyone who was driving out of area to find easier opponents is what is wrong with tourneys in my opinion. Grow a sack and go to a national or regional indy event and get your skull caved in as there are some amazing players out there at these events that make 'ard boyz look like a joke.

PapaPiggy wrote:Having to paint an entire army just to play in the tournament is just plain stupid to me.

No one has ever forced a player paint an entire army instead of playing one that they've had for years and had ample time to paint. If they CHOOSE to bring the newest jump on the bandwagon army power build from the interwebz, they shouldn't complain about a minimum requirement that is likely known months ahead of time and predates their choice of army. If a player is so new to the hobby that they have truely had no time to paint an army, I'd suggest that tourny play isn't for them as it is NOT meant to be entry level play and ideally requires a firm grasp of the rules.

I am all for real competition at Tournaments. But let's not backslide to the GW tournaments of the old days.

Sportsmanship = stupidly subjective. In Example: I played a younger opponent in a tournament, and had to keep asking him to only move 6 inches, not sliding the tape measure and get 7-8 inches in a move. This netted me a 0 on sportsmanship because I wouldn't let him play the game his way. In Example: I pointed out that my opponent was not playing a rule correctly, he said his gaming club played it this way, I insisted we play by the rule from the rulebook and again got a 0 on sportsmanship. In a third Example: I played necrons and fired the big pie plate from the Monolith, I targeted his unit, Hit with the scatter dice, and proceeded to wound and kill the model under the center hole of the template. My opponent felt he could shift that wound to another model, I opposed this view, so he appealed to a Judge. The judge sided with me, and I again got a 0 for sportsmanship.

None of these were because I was a dick, or because I want to WAAC. I prefer to play the game by the commonly agreed upon rules. Now don't get me wrong, I've had great opponents and thoroughly enjoyed the games and gotten good sportsmanship scores. But to base a tournament score upon the input of the players means that some players can tank their opponents scores. I think any scores should only come from unbiased tournament judges/organizers. Although, I've seen tournaments where the organizers had given their local players the missions early, and gave them more complimentary painting scores, etc. So, there is no one perfect system, except win based point system. Non-subjective systems are where the WAAC crowd really congregates, but that is because that's the system where it's based upon player, not the player's biased opponent.

I think GW should completely distance themselves from competitive play. Their rules simply can't handle it well. If they did a total overhaul from the ground up then maybe, just maybe, things would be good enough for truly competitive play.

As it stands though, GW's rules are best thought of as a means of creating fiction on the table top. And if the mention of a narrative play section in that potentially leaked 6th ed rulebook, is any indication, GW knows this and will continue to emphasize non-serious play and de-emphasize competitive play.

Why would the two be incompatible ?

I'll miss it. O well. Won't lose any sleep, thats for sure.

nkelsch wrote:

helium42 wrote:

Did you even read his post? What I got out of it was that the gaming group he is a part of would split up and go to play in as many different locations as possible so that they might have a better chance of meeting each other in later rounds, or at least not have to eliminate each other early. I'm assuming just as much or more than you are from the post, but I'm not jumping to the conclusion and calling somebody a cheater. I'm not sure what it is about this thread that has your panties in such a knot, but perhaps you should step away from it for awhile before you start throwing accusations like that around.

I did. Gaming the system to get more people than deserve it to the later rounds is one of the problems of 'ard boyz. People purposefully look for poorly run 'ard boyz with low attendance to increase their chances of winning and due to the totally inconsistent nature and organization of 'ardboyz, it works. It is dubious to operate in that fashion to try to 'win' by selecting areas with easier opponents or poor organization or bad organizers to increase your chance of reaching the finals, almost as if the first round doesn't matter and is a formality. It doesn't speak to the quality fo the event or the true competitive nature if people are able to do this. Even if they are not purposely cheating like many of the other people who do quit on Saturday and then play at a location which had their 'ard boyz on sunday, it is all around bad.

Why not get your 10 buddies and go to adpeticon or something and play some of the best people in the nation in a well-run event with real missions and a actually fair point value and have fun with your buddies all meeting up at the top tables with all your skill? Or do you need to find a 'ard boyz with 9 participants run by a dude at a model train store who knows nothing about GW games and has no judges enforcing rules to 'win' your way skillfully into the finals?

'Ardboyz was a total trainwreck mess and represented no skill. Anyone who was driving out of area to find easier opponents is what is wrong with tourneys in my opinion. Grow a sack and go to a national or regional indy event and get your skull caved in as there are some amazing players out there at these events that make 'ard boyz look like a joke.

I don't see it as gaming the system. I see it as a group of friends who would rather spend their time beating other players and having a strong showing as a group in the finals. Correct me if I'm wrong but I wasn't aware that there was a system in place dictating where players play their first rounds at. The poster never mentioned anything about scouting out weaker opponents, as you suggest. He just said that the group splits up to go play at different venues.

helium42 wrote:

I don't see it as gaming the system. I see it as a group of friends who would rather spend their time beating other players and having a strong showing as a group in the finals. Correct me if I'm wrong but I wasn't aware that there was a system in place dictating where players play their first rounds at. The poster never mentioned anything about scouting out weaker opponents, as you suggest. He just said that the group splits up to go play at different venues.

Oh yes, I am sure he is the one innocent group of gamers who didn't do it for personal advantage when there were numerous reports of people doing just that. Regardless of their justification, it harmed the integrity of the event and made the finals worth less and the fact no one even knew results were posted shows how just little people cared or respected the 'ard boyz outcomes. Not admiting to dubious justifications doesn't make me not question his actions and motivations, especially when we have confirmed reports all over the nation along with my own experiences in watching particular players in action where people are doing dubious things sounding very similar to his postings.

The other indy events already have invitations where the winners of well-run regional tourneys get invited to events at larger tourneys where the best of the best can play each other. This happens by playing in organized events and winning, not avoiding the skilled players in your area and beating scrubs to get to the finals.

'ard boyz is dead and it is a good thing for everyone. I hope those groups of people devote their time to painting thier figures and making a strong team showing at adepticon or other events and then making it to the top tables by winning games, not avoiding hard opponents with exploitative lists in an unbalanced, uncompetitive event. I think they will find making top tables at a real event with balanced missions is a lot harder than driving to a place that sells RC cars 2-towns over.

nkelsch wrote:
'ard boyz is dead and it is a good thing for everyone.

You have no idea what you are talking about Troll. Granted, it's been a while since I posted at Dakka. From the outpouring of haters in just one thread..I'm surprised it is allowed to happen. Oh well...we can always vote with our clicks! Seeya!