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.

Guitardian wrote: @frazzled

Oh please, we've all been on a playground before. It's not as if hearing that word that fat smelly guy in the gamer store changed your life. playgrounds happen. I dont think it should be worth a point.... oh yeah, bud... thanks for calling me immature. I take it as a compliment.

Correction.
Playgrounds happened. Although my father in law has the record in strung together profanity I'm no slouch. However, its not generally appropriate for a tourney. Bathing is. I've run into gamers who smell worse than the homeless people here.

Frazzled wrote:

Correction.
Playgrounds happened. Although my father in law has the record in strung together profanity I'm no slouch. However, its not generally appropriate for a tourney. Bathing is. I've run into gamers who smell worse than the homeless people here.

I'm actually a song-writer and amateur performer; I've got an album of parodies with a million+ downloads - I've decided to turn my musical talents to 40k. Soon, there will be a thread in General Discussion where I post my songs as I record them for people to listen and laugh.

http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/CurzonDax/Romance_in_Eve.mp3

That's a parody of Breakfast at Tiffanys that I made a couple years ago about Eve Online. I sing better now (promise) and have decided to convert this to Warhammer 40k and my first song will be about stinky gamers. Here's a sneak preview:

Stinky Gamer
You say
Your mom did laundry yesterday
Then how did that food stain say?
You got it there last Saturday

You say
You brush and floss for tournaments
But you need a box of breath mints
I gag whenever you talk to me.

And I said
What about
a sign on the store
No shirt no shoes no
Shower no Service
And I think we would all
Appreciate your help
to stop being such a
Stinky Gamer!

Blackmoor wrote:

That is my main complaint about sportsmanship. If you are a decent guy, playing a good game of 40k, why should you score a lot less than a guy who is good at schmoozing?

You can work on your paint scores and your comp, but should you have to work on your stand up routine to get a good sports score?

Both players should get 10 for sportsmanship. Sportsmanship should be entirely a system of minuses. No one should care if the game was the best game someone played, or the worst. People should only care if people:

tried to cheat
were specifically rude or abusive
played slowly on purpose
did specific other things to make your miserable that are not game related (which would need to be specifically explained to the judges and preferably the opponent before you are able to dock points)
smelled bad (just kidding)

when sportsmanship is full of things like "this game was ok, this game was AWESOME" and they treat them as different scores, it is inherently unfair and can never be fair, it is too subjective and adds too much room for chipmunking

That does NOT mean that sportsmanship scores are bad. It means scores that differentiate "the game was ok" from "the game was GREAT" are bad. None of that has ANYTHING to do with ANY reasonable definition of sportsmanship. It's an extension of the idea of sportsmanship beyond what is necessary or correct.

When a game isn't judged or refereed directly, something needs to happen to keep the more obnoxious players in line, in my opinion. You obviously have a different experience from that, but I think it is important to keep the idea of sportsmanship scores separate from some of the non-sportsmanship scoring that goes on in the guise of sportsmanship. This just clouds the discussion because people are then arguing different things. Are the typical sportsmanship checklists at a GW run tournament terrible? Yes. Is sportsmanship scoring that only worries about good sportsmanship good? Probably.

Sportsmanship scores will never be fair.

They are subjective and arbitrary.

That is my whole argument against them.

If someone could design a system that is not subjective and arbitrary, then I could go along with it.

You can't, so I don't and anyone wanting to be fair shouldn't go along with sportsmanship either.

If someone could design a system that is not subjective and arbitrary, then I could go along with it.

You can't, so I don't and anyone wanting to be fair shouldn't go along with sportsmanship either.

But how else can we keep our feelings from being hurt by the WAAC boogeymen?

Danny Internets wrote:

If someone could design a system that is not subjective and arbitrary, then I could go along with it.

You can't, so I don't and anyone wanting to be fair shouldn't go along with sportsmanship either.

But how else can we keep our feelings from being hurt by the WAAC boogeymen?

Of course! How could I forget?

I would rather play against a jerk than to play in a system that is subjective and arbitrary.

I'm pretty sure sportsman ship scores exist because of all the 'sperging nerds ITT.

the_trooper wrote:I'm pretty sure sportsman ship scores exist because of all the 'sperging nerds ITT.

And I am pretty sure that every tournament that uses sportsmanship scores are not fair.

Irony huh? The scoring system that is intended to encourage friendly games ends up being abused by competative shysters looking to eek out that extra point by any means they can.

If a player is unsporting and there is scoring for sportsmanship then they deserve to lose some points. It's no one's fault other than the player if they give a high score to someone that was unsporting.

G

The problem is, what is unsporting is increadibly subjective.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Blackmoor wrote:

That is my main complaint about sportsmanship. If you are a decent guy, playing a good game of 40k, why should you score a lot less than a guy who is good at schmoozing?

You can work on your paint scores and your comp, but should you have to work on your stand up routine to get a good sports score?

I've only been to a couple of events with sportsmanship (never GT level) and each time, I feel like I have to smile the whole game, let things slide, let little rules violations go unchallenged, grin while my opponent moves 7" on 6" moves....all because I don't want to get tanked for sportsmanship.

Like this analogy or don't: I'm a West Point graduate, and to my dying day, the phrase, "A cadet shall not lie, cheat, steal, nor tolerate those who do" will be ingrained in my head.

Sportsmanship scores at tournaments are like enforced tolerance of shenanigans.

Sportsmanship scores at tournaments are in no way meant for you to tolerate any form of unfair play. By letting that sort of stuff slide you are, by definition, not being a good sportsman. Sportsmanship is comprised of playing fair, being courteous, winning / losing gracefully, etc. If you let someone take extra movement without pointing it out, you're a bad sport. If you try to play fair whilst conducting yourself in a polite and courteous fashion, you're a good sport.

I've already accepted your position that people can tank your score (your in a general sense, not directed specifically at you). However, that is not an excuse to let cheating slide as, I've said before, that is bad sportsmanship. Sadly, there's nothing you can do about someone being petty enough to lie and cheat on your sportsmanship. If they're the type to do that, they're probably already trying to cheat you in game, so why let them get away with it?

To be completely honest, and to reiterate what I stated in an earlier post, I would not mind one bit if a tournment didn't have a sportsmanship score, but I do prefer that a tournament has one. I'm mainly just trying to argue the merits of sportsmanlike conduct in a general sense. I hope (a bit naive, I supposed) that people can act in a respectful manner to one another, at least when it comes to a game of plastic and metal soldiers.

If TOs would just make sure they have good judges/refs and enough coverage with them, there is no need for sports scores imo.

But judges are mostly just volunteers or people getting paid store wages plus the cost of the trip. It's not like high incentive to really care that much about getting in other people's arguements.

@zomro's post... I think if you forget a movement or some other thing and have to ask "wait I forgot, can I just do this real quick?" before your fire phase, or actually any move taken out of sequence that has absolutely no effect on the other player... that's not bad sportsmanship. Consider this: I have a farseer with "guide"... I move... then I cast on his own squad which he was with at the beginning of the turn? How does that affects the other guy's decisions... if not at all.. then a good sport wouldn't make a big deal about it because it really didn't matter. The anal rules lawyer might be a jerk about it because he knows it's throwing off your intention just by doing something slightly out of sequence, not allowing you to cast your spell or whatever. That's just anal seeming to me. Everybody makes mistakes during a game, little forgetful bits here and there - but as long as it doesn't effect an opponent decision, or give you an unfair advantage, I think nitpicking like that just makes everyone around know you're an ass for making a big deal about it.

Maelstrom808 wrote:If TOs would just make sure they have good judges/refs and enough coverage with them, there is no need for sports scores imo.

How many judges do you think would be needed?

Would they need to know the rules well, as well as being sensible, diplomatic people?

How much would they be paid?

Kilkrazy wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:If TOs would just make sure they have good judges/refs and enough coverage with them, there is no need for sports scores imo.

How many judges do you think would be needed?
Personally I think 1 per 3 games in progress would be ideal, assuming the tables were not too spread out. This is also assuming they are actually watching the games instead of chatting with friends and only paying attention when called.

Would they need to know the rules well, as well as being sensible, diplomatic people?
Of course. It wouldn't make much sense to put someone in that position if they couldn't properly fulfill the duties required.

How much would they be paid?
It depends on the size, purpose, duration, and ability of the tournament itself. At the local level it would most likely have to be a volunteer basis, whereas if you had a larger tournament with sponserer support you could provide some decent compensation. Also there are alternatives to straight monetary compensation. Store credit and such could be worked out as well.

Most judges are not getting paid.... Unless you meant under hte tables.

G

Maelstrom808 wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Maelstrom808 wrote:If TOs would just make sure they have good judges/refs and enough coverage with them, there is no need for sports scores imo.

How many judges do you think would be needed?
Personally I think 1 per 3 games in progress would be ideal, assuming the tables were not too spread out. This is also assuming they are actually watching the games instead of chatting with friends and only paying attention when called.

Would they need to know the rules well, as well as being sensible, diplomatic people?
Of course. It wouldn't make much sense to put someone in that position if they couldn't properly fulfill the duties required.

How much would they be paid?
It depends on the size, purpose, duration, and ability of the tournament itself. At the local level it would most likely have to be a volunteer basis, whereas if you had a larger tournament with sponserer support you could provide some decent compensation. Also there are alternatives to straight monetary compensation. Store credit and such could be worked out as well.

Adepticon's 40k Championship has 240 players this year. 40 full-time referees, plus the staff running the event, huh?

They should award big belt just like pro wrestling. Diamond Dallas Paige FTW!!!

when I learned to game, it was just a buncha guys with some figs, having fun after class once in a while playing with toys. I think the 'winner' category in general, and all the trappings associated with tournament ranks kind of ruin that vibe. Worrying about it in the first place sort of ruins the intent of such a score. I'll just stay with my fun basement table games and say "just entering a tournament makes you a competition oriented mind, and therefore not someone I want to play with..."

Adepticon's 40k Championship has 240 players this year. 40 full-time referees, plus the staff running the event, huh?

In a word...yes.

imweasel wrote:

the_trooper wrote:I'm pretty sure sportsman ship scores exist because of all the 'sperging nerds ITT.

And I am pretty sure that every tournament that uses sportsmanship scores are not fair.

Eh, I've never really had any problems with it. Comp can get a little funny but sportsmanship is pretty clear.

I use tournaments as a way for motivation to paint and get 3 games in during a day. It's also a great way to see who is worth playing during normal 40k nights.

I've won quite a few sportsmanship prizes as well as won tournaments in battle points.

Green Blow Fly wrote:If a player is unsporting and there is scoring for sportsmanship then they deserve to lose some points. It's no one's fault other than the player if they give a high score to someone that was unsporting.

G

Yet some people wrongly think that sportsmanship scores are somehow 'fair' and 'necessary'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_trooper wrote:Comp can get a little funny but sportsmanship is pretty clear.

Huh?

Both are subjective and arbitrary.

How is that 'pretty clear'?

There's nothing necessary about a game, and 'fair' is subjective. If I throw a frisbee and you catch it and throw it back that's playing a game. If you are a bad sport you don't throw it back or throw it high over my head just so you can say you 'won'. Isn't that the same kind of arguement for something like a sportsmanship score? The guy who doesn't throw the frisbee back is a dick and nobody wants to play with him again, where the guy that plays along with the GAME gets awarded by other people recognizing that and therefore wanting to play with him again, based on his reputation as a 'good' sport.

Wait a second, let's just get this straight.

You v.s. TFG

Without comp
1. You play a tournament-ranked game with a WAAC guy.
2. The guy cheats, you lose.
3. You get an unfairly lost match on your record and move on to the next round.

With Comp
1. You play a tournament-ranked game with a WAAC guy.
2. The guy cheats, you lose.
3. You mark him down on soft-scores.
4. The guy wants to win, so he marks you down on soft-scores.
5. You get an unfairly lost match and low sportsmanship on your record and move onto the next round.

In both cases, the player gets the short end of the stick, but in the comp one, he gets hurt worse.

Let's change it so the player has balls and sticks up for himself, shall we?

Without comp
1. You play a tournament-ranked game with a WAAC guy.
2. The guy cheats, you call him on it, you win or lose, fairly. (Or he's booted)
3. You get a fairly lost/won match on your record and move on to the next round.

With Comp
1. You play a tournament-ranked game with a WAAC guy.
2. The guy cheats, you call him on it, you win or lose, fairly. (Or he's booted)
3. You mark him down on soft-scores.
4. The guy wants to win, so he marks you down on soft-scores.
5. You get a fairly lost/won match and low sportsmanship on your record and move onto the next round.

In all of these, sportsmanship scores are abused. If you get WAAC players at the tournament, they will view the scores as part of the game and play to win on them by marking everyone down. The best option out of these is for the player to have balls and confront the opponent in-game as opposed to afterwards.

imweasel wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:If a player is unsporting and there is scoring for sportsmanship then they deserve to lose some points. It's no one's fault other than the player if they give a high score to someone that was unsporting.

G

Yet some people wrongly think that sportsmanship scores are somehow 'fair' and 'necessary'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_trooper wrote:Comp can get a little funny but sportsmanship is pretty clear.

Huh?

Both are subjective and arbitrary.

How is that 'pretty clear'?

It requires honesty but so does putting down the correct score on the sheets while submitting it.

Why bother going to tournaments anyway? Your opponent could be sleeping with one of the judges.

Green Blow Fly wrote:They should award big belt just like pro wrestling. Diamond Dallas Paige FTW!!!

The Boulder knows how to put the hurt in the dirt!

While I agree that sportsmanship scoring is often overly arbitrary, and it is hard to find a good method to actually score sportsmanship because of it, I can offer a good reason to score sportsmanship, based on well-researched psychological theory.

Current behavioral psychology tells us that positive reinforcement of wanted behavior is effective at increasing the frequency of the wanted behavior. Punishment of unwanted behavior, while it can be effective, is not nearly as effective as reinforcing the wanted behavior. Also, punishments can often simply increase hiding of the unwanted behavior, rather than actually decreasing the frequency of the behavior. Therefore, sportsmanship scores can be used as a way to increase the behaviors that you want. It is also interesting to note that given this theory, it does not particularly matter if the person who wins best sportsmanship was actually the "best sportsman." As long as the people who played in the tournament can observe that sporting behavior was rewarded, it is more likely to increase their sporting behavior in the future.

I do not think that sportsmanship scores should *ever* be tied into an overall ranking, or determine the winner of the tournament in any way. Therefore, sportsmanship should be its own prize. This also reduces the incentive of the WAAC gamer to tank his opponent's scores, and increases the incentive to score your opponent accurately.

willydstyle wrote:I do not think that sportsmanship scores should *ever* be tied into an overall ranking, or determine the winner of the tournament in any way. Therefore, sportsmanship should be its own prize. This also reduces the incentive of the WAAC gamer to tank his opponent's scores, and increases the incentive to score your opponent accurately.

I would be ok with a sportsmanship, army comp, paint scores as long as it's not tied into anything but prizes for those specifically.

It still doesn't stop TFG from screwing anyone over.

How does that figure into the 'current behavioral psychology' approach.

Because the TFG has little incentive to screw someone over, and that screwing over has less impact on the tournament overall.

Granted getting people used to scoring their opponents accurately will probably require enough reeducation that it will be too complicated to be worth it...