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.

But since he is not a member of your group, it should not matter in the context of this discussion. I just wanted to be honest about that and confirm your assessment. And I am far from alone in my view of Cliff, as you already know or you wouldn't be driving home the point that he is not involved in your GT on any level. Anyhow, the history of Cliff's schenanigans at Strategicon Events could fill its own thread....

Couple of general questions:
Are you guys planning on using the special terrain types in the new rules or sticking to generic pieces?

Are the round 3-5 pairings being done on strictly battle points or overall points? There was some confusion about this at the 40k side last year.

How heavily are you weighing display boards in your paint judging this year?

Phazael wrote:.Couple of general questions:
Are you guys planning on using the special terrain types in the new rules or sticking to generic pieces?

Are the round 3-5 pairings being done on strictly battle points or overall points? There was some confusion about this at the 40k side last year.

How heavily are you weighing display boards in your paint judging this year?

There may be a few special terrain types, but I suspect will be limited to 1 per table max...we reserve the right to setup a few kooky tables and lots of basic table. Honestly I hate the new terrain rules...I'd use the 6th Ed terrain rules if I could get away with it

Rounds 1&2 are pre-matched by judged comp
Round 3 is based upon round 1 battle and judged comp
Round 4 is based upon round 1-3 battle points
Round 5 is based upon round 1-4 battle points

Display boards are still worth 1-3 points, as always. 1 point is for having a display board...not simply a tray.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The confusion in matchups is due to people making an assumption that a Swiss style pairing system is used. We do not do Swiss pairing...never have.

We match up by points, plus making sure that no one plays the same person twice (duh!). So things get shifted a bit here or there.

We also had a few situations where suddenly the opponent did not show up, and just matched up people together, rather than redoing all the pairings.

Though I think that it was the Swiss pairing that got most people confused.

Bottomline, don't think you can plan on who you are gonna play...seems like I saw a lot of that going on.

I see a first round matchup of Q and Cliff. It would be fun to watch. ;-) Both have said they are coming.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Phazael wrote:Couple things:
Also, no one likes being told what they have to take, so telling the forest spirit wood elf guy that he MUST take 4 fort points of stuff in his army because this one scenario might be used is going to turn people away.

This is taking a scenario right out of the book and adjusting it to try to make it playable in a tournament setting. Nobody wants their game to end on turn 2, even if you are the one who wins. Fort 4 means a general and 2 standards. I don't think it is out of line to say take 2 standards in any army, so that this game actually works. It is obviously an intent of GW, by making it a basic scenario in the book. Other tournaments are trying to play them right out of the book, and this is the one that appears to be getting the most pushback, so we're attempting to find a way to adjust it. Will it work? Maybe not. Will it be played? Maybe not. If having to standards in your army is just too much of an adjustment to handle, which I have not actually heard from anyone who actually has that issue, then maybe reconsider your outlook on life. It's not like I'm asking you to trade armies with your opponent. (Please read that last as a light hearted jab...I traded armies with my opponent at that SCS, and had a fun game...but it was pretty out there to do in a tournament)

I am rescinding my resignation.

The BSB 2011 tournament organizers, including myself, have been working hard these last couple of weeks to finalize all of the tournament rules. The primary focus has been clarity, but a few changes have been implemented. Failures in communication amongst the organizers was the cause of many problems. Failures in communication with possible participants, primarily stemming from confusion from our site was a major problem. For this, we sincerely apologize. The site is not up-to-date in reflecting clarifications and rule tweaks recently adopted, but will be soon.

Due to the nature of webposting, we ask that players allow time for the site to be completely updated before reacting to any information that may be on site.

While we have always encouraged player feedback, it is important to note that clarification requests should be initiated on the Pacific Marauder Broadside Bash 2011 forum.

For myself, please know that discussions advocating for changes to the Warhammer 40,000 tournament rules, awards, scenarios, FAQs and any other adjudication will only be addressed via email. Please keep in mind that the design of the tournament is the prerogative of the tournament organizers, and there is no obligation to accept any requests pertaining to changes of the tournament’s organization.

Personally, I wish to extend an invitation to all players that enjoy the Warhammer 40k game and universe, all that it has to offer, and who wish to enjoy and share in our little slice of that very large cake at BSB 2011.

Espa wrote:I am rescinding my resignation.


Personally, I wish to extend an invitation to all players that enjoy the Warhammer 40k game and universe, all that it has to offer, and who wish to enjoy and share in our little slice of that very large cake at BSB 2011.

Disingenuous much!!!

Don’t you understand? We don’t want you to come. Please don’t. Stop threatening not to come, just don’t come. Go enjoy another event in the circuit.

This one is ours. Please, go away and let it go.

Insult a slice of the gaming community by telling them not to turn up you have the audacity to post this - I suggest you look up the word "hypocritical" in the dictionary because I have a feeling your picture is right next to it.

Shame on the organizers for letting you back in.

edit to include quote.

To be fair, I really don't see someone telling people who are threatening not to come to a tournament because they don't like the format that they can take it or leave it is all that out of line.

Welcome back Jason, glad to have you back! Its a bitch to run a tournament, and we get a lot of bitching. However we do it for the community, we do it because we want to see all the cool armies taking the field of battle, we do it for our love of the game.

I had a really long post written out. But I think I can condense it and to hell with the high road this time around since I, personally, am not a hypocrit.

I'm not attending due to Jason being brought back. I hope he enjoys playing the missions he designs just like he did last year (yes, the mission designer played in the event). I'm going to actively encourage my friends and fellow gamers to not attend. I can't and won't attend a tournament who endorse having someone on their staff after they insult multiple members of our community. While I was willing to be civil and nice as long as Jason wasn't a member of the staff but unfortunately the guys running this event just showed how they truly feel about members of the community that don't play toy soldiers the way they do.

I want this to be very clear. I am not attending due to Jason being involved. Not because of the structure of the event as I've got a killer counts-as Deathwatch Army I'm working on for this year's bigger, more painting/sports oriented events that I can't wait to attend.

It might be too late, but please, everyone, be sure to discuss this matter as calmly and as professionally (?) as possible.

This thread is skirting the edge as it is...

I thought I'd done a pretty good job actually Alpharius Especially since I was one of the ones directly insulted by the person now back in charge of the 40k event.

Just ran a tournament using 3 of the WHFB scenarios:

Book of Grudges
Breakthrough
Hearken Back to the Days of Yore.

Feedback I gathered was completely positive* No one claimed any VPs via the breakthrough rule, but that had more to do with 3 of the armies being gunline-esque.

The battle point modifiers were pretty good, the only wierd one people mentioned, was in the book of grudges, getting +1 battle point for losing your general to the enemies could actually benefit you more than the extra 200 for you killing his. Other than that, they were all well accepted.

I ended up playing in the tournament also (needed more people, I did end up winning...but I just donated my prize support by buying terrain for the shop.) and agree with the rest of them. The scenarios weren't too shabby, only complaint I had, was the Harken Back was almost *too* generic, maybe use one of the special deployments for it?

*I originally wanted to do Magic vacuum, but after a lot of backlash of people not wanting it, I had to change it.

Hulksmash wrote:I'm not attending due to Jason being brought back. I hope he enjoys playing the missions he designs just like he did last year (yes, the mission designer played in the event).

Hulk, I am very sorry to hear that. However I fully understand your position. You will be missed :(

I'm going to actively encourage my friends and fellow gamers to not attend.

This part of course makes me very angry, and disappointed. I'll keep any additional thoughts and comments to myself. :(

Why would you be disappointed? Someone who felt the need to insult other people the way he did shows the appearance of not being an impartial judge.

skyth wrote:Why would you be disappointed? Someone who felt the need to insult other people the way he did shows the appearance of not being an impartial judge.

I am disappointed that Hulk is choose not to participate, and worse is going to actively campaign against us.

I'm genuinely sorry that you are angry Kurt. But the thing is that you have shown what you think of players like myself (a vast majority of the players I come into contact with) by allowing Jason to be part of this event again. Why would I in anyway shape or form encourage my friends and fellow gamers to attend an event that takes this stance? You can be angry but it was brought on by your staffer who you've allowed back in after he insulted me personally and a lot of hobbyists in general. Smart thing to do would have been to say either thanks but no thanks if he asked to come back or to have just done the scenarios yourself. That isn't the direction you took.

Feel free to pm me your thoughts and comments. Contrary to some people's belief I don't get offended easily I'm willing to talk about it via pm if you like.

I've hoped to abstain from continuing in a conversation that I believe has only served to shed an unnecessary and imaginary division amongst players of 40k and the hobby at large.

I am especially cautious as my return as an organizer of BSB 2011 demands that I maintain a professional etiquette of impartiality, that I had earlier dismissed when for a short time I was no longer officially involved with BSB.

I did indeed play in BSB 2010 and did design the scenarios used in that tournament. I only volunteered to assist in this manner after several players, including yourself Hulksmash, demanded that the initial scenarios be removed then threatened to not attend. I did not desire this role, but felt that I should support the efforts of a group who have only volunteered considerable time and resources to maintain and expand the hobby so many of us enjoy. And they don't even ask for a 'thank you', but it has been long deserved.

I am not competing in BSB 2011, though I would love to ready my Thousand Sons for the tournament and join my friends in all of the great trappings that a beer and discussions of 40k brings after a few great games. Instead, I joined in assisting the aforementioned group of guys that have been giving their time and resources without demands of appreciation.

After my resigination, no one volunteered to take up the role. I'm sure we can appreciate why, as evidenced in various opinions offered in this thread. I offered to assist the new 40k coordinator, and honestly looked forward to playing in the tournament.

I decided to rescind my resignation after it became apparent that my departure would cause significant strain on those remaining organizers who are already daunted in each of his own respective roles.

We don't ask that you love us, not even thank us, but I think we can at least ask that you respect our efforts and not attempt to deride the work we've done and continue to do.

Our hobby is founded and maintained by the talents and efforts of thousands of fans. Let us acknowledge and appreciate at least that much, and respect that the pursuit of all of us should be to expand the hobby, not destroy it.

Again, with all sincerity.

Jason Nichols

Ok, soon after starting this thread in hopes of starting some excitement for the 2011 BSB, I’ve slowly watched it decline… Thus I have decided to stay away, until now.

@Jason, in my opinion after the comments you have made in this forum I don’t believe that you should have been reinstated as a Tournament Organizer. After you stepped down, you went on the offensive at Reece and Hulksmash and obviously you have some serious issues there that you need to deal with. In addition, you continuously use the term, “We” as if you are speaking for the entire group of Pacific Marauders. While you may be one of the organizers, I dare say that you do not speak for all of the Pacific Marauders.

Regardless, such animosity is NOT warranted in this thread, and I will request to Alpharius that this thread be closed.

Wolflord Patrick wrote:

Regardless, such animosity is NOT warranted in this thread, and I will request to Alpharius that this thread be closed.

No need to close the thread - no animosity being shown, if anything since the reinstatement of an obviously biased the TO it has been quite restrained. This thread should be kept open for further discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Espa wrote:I've hoped to abstain from continuing in a conversation that I believe has only served to shed an unnecessary and imaginary division amongst players of 40k and the hobby at large.

That you definitely inflamed.

We don't ask that you love us, not even thank us, but I think we can at least ask that you respect our efforts and not attempt to deride the work we've done and continue to do.

You position as organizer is quite untenable and the undoing of the good work is going to happen whilst you are organizer, the bad feeling by Hulksmash etc is brought on by yourself. He is quite difficult to offend - I think I have had a few attempts over the last year and failed miserably.

Let us acknowledge and appreciate at least that much, and respect that the pursuit of all of us should be to expand the hobby, not destroy it.

Amusing.

Jason, really? You get on a high horse now, after you threw a temper tantrum and insulted the community and told them not to come? You expect other people to all of a sudden respect you and your efforts after you told all of us to feth off?

And an imaginary division in the gaming community? You have to be kidding, you are the type of person who creates the VERY REAL divisions. You have been contradicting yourself and flat out making things up in this thread. You openly espouse the view that power gamers/WAAC gamers/competitive players are bad for the hobby and that you don't want to have anything to do with them and that you don't want them to come! Your hypocrisy is apparently limitless.

Our entire strife stems from the fact that I play competitively and that is why you wanted me to no longer participate in the campaign.

And since we're clearing the air, I know the other guys wanted me to stay because I spoke to each of them on an individual basis and they went out of their way assuring me that they had no part in the decision. There was no vote, no one else even knew what you were doing. You asked me to bring softer lists, I said sure, and then you flew off the handle and asked me to leave before I even had a chance to tone down my army. Joel called me after you posted that to once again assure me there was never any vote and that you had acted on your own because you had personal beef with me. (Sorry to Joel for throwing you under the bus man, I hope I didn't cause you any drama with Jason)

I never made a fuss about it or said anything because I didn't want to cause a scene. The bottom line is that you felt threatened by me and then made it seem like the group asked me to leave which was a lie.

You are very petty, immature and vindictive. I have tried to extend the olive branch to you twice to make peace and both times you have spit in my face for my efforts. Since you are unwilling to be a man about things and bury the hatchet I see no reason to play nice anymore.

5 out of the 7 missions you wrote are terrible. Absolutely terrible.

You don't know the rules of 5th edition.

You do not understand the metagame nor the reason why missions should be balanced and simple in order to promote fair play and fun for everyone. You don't even play 5th ed missions.

You are not qualified to write missions for a 5th ed tournament nor are you impartial in your views on the game and how it should be played.

You do not listen to other people's advice.

The scoring system as is allows only 20 battle points spread between winning all your games and losing all of them! That i half of what you get for painting!

There are more holes in this system than a block of swiss cheese.

After your temper tantrum and wild insults towards the community here, you should not have been allowed back into the event. Your hypocrisy and lies in this thread just further compound that point.

I am extremely sorry to the PacMads that all of this had to come out during a thread meant to promote their event and sincerely hope they have a great turnout. Again, to anyone considering going, please don't let this crap discourage you as that is not my intent.

Lastly, if someone needs to step up and write scenarios for the event, I will happily do so. Kurt, if you would like me to draft some missions that are fair and balanced for 5th edition then I will do so. If not, no worries and I wish you guys the best.

Jason, the best thing you can do is jut bow out of this thread. Every time you post you make things worse.

Again, sorry for the drama fest, i wanted to stay out of it but this is just too much.

fullheadofhair wrote:

You position as organizer is quite untenable and the undoing of the good work is going to happen whilst you are organizer, the bad feeling by Hulksmash etc is brought on by yourself. He is quite difficult to offend - I think I have had a few attempts over the last year and failed miserably.

This made me laugh. And I'm generally very, very hard to work up. I'm not even really worked up now so much as disappointed honestly. I mean I'm worked up enough to encourage others to avoid this event due to the way they are treating people who have attended every year they've been around till this year. But I'm not burning hot angry. It just isn't in me to get that angry over toy soldiers or anything related to them

Heck Kurt. I'll offer to help you guys craft some missions. And I'll even not play in the event for having done it but will be willing to talk to the players I do know and bounce solid ideas off of them. All you guys had to do was ask. I realize I'm not a member of your club and that could put a strain on the idea.

But I truly think it's a good idea to push Jason out of this event and find someone else to do the scenarios. Even if it's out of your group. Naturally I wouldn't dream of insisting it be me or reece. It could be anyone. I just think it would be a good thing for your event as a whole. Jason's attitude has seriously impacted the event in a negative way. Most players that play in local events in the LA area I would say are avoiding it. The reason I would say that is currently prominant gamers from every FLGS that runs tournies have already bowed out and that is going to affect the tournament overall.

I don't want you guys to fail. Far from it. I just can't in good concience encourage my friends and fellow gamers to attend an event that allows someone like Jason to be in charge of any aspect of it. Which is unfortunate but true.

Now you've got my curiosity up MonsterRain What was that picture? Assuming it won't get the thread closed

Just trying to lighten the mood a bit, is all.

Hmm, with Brad not playing... and Reece being iffy... and Dave being iffy... maybe now is MY time!

I will earn a golden ticket to Vegas in both Fantasy AND 40K!

I have read this thread for a while and I don't understand why everybody is so upset about a game with little toy soldiers.

After spending some time thinking about it I believe that it comes down to this. We all seem to fall into one of two camps. The competitive camp, which consists of players that enjoy playing competitively, and the casual camp which consist of players who are not as competitive and like to play with more fun (fluff, narrative etc). There may also a third camp for players who are both competitive and casual.

Anyway it is this difference of opinion that is at the heart of this discussion. There are players who are very familiar with the tournament setting would like BSB to be similar to other tornaments. These players know the ins and outs of 5th edition competitive play and build competitive lists. They also expect their opponent to bring a competitive list because that is where they have fun. The casual player is more focused on having fun and narrative and fluff. Durring the torunament they may be creating stories as to why thier army is fighting these various opposing armies.

I think there is room for both kinds of players at the Broadside Bash. I would love to see everybody have a good time at the broadside bash. I want to go and have fun. For me half of the fun is hanging out with my friends and talking about my opponents and what cool armies they have, or what good conversion ideas they came up with. I admit I would be more classified as a casual player than a competitive player of 40k, but I don't mind playing against competitive players. I have been to 2 of the 3 previous Broadside Bash events and I have played against comptetive players who were a lot of fun to play against.

Anyway, I am stuck in the middle because I am friends with both Reece and Jason. There was not an official vote (with ballots and such) for Reece leaving our campaign, Jason talked to the players individually about Reece, and got their imput before asking Reece to leave. When he asked me I personally advocated for Reece to stay in our campaign. Like I said before I consider both Jason and Reece to be my friends and I hope we can all work together to make the BSB a great event.

I think it is cool that Broadside Bash will be different from the normal tournaments that everybody is used to. I like to travel, and when I travel I don't like to go and eat at the same kind of resturant each place I go. Imagine going to different destinations all over the world and always eating at Mc Donalds. That would not be very fun. Part of life is experiencing different kinds of places, philosophies and ideas. I think there is room for a tournament that is less competitive than other tournaments. I know that my opinion might not be taken as seriously since I am not a tournament player, however I hope everybody can have an open mind about the BSB tournament philosophy. We can think of it like going to another country and trying a different kind of food. You might like it, or you might not, but at least you tried it.

Well, it's nice to hear a reasonable voice amongst all of the anger.

The whole campaign thing is in the past and I should have let it stay dead but Jason tried to use it as a tool to take a swing at me so I swung back. Honestly the whole things is silly and no one else even cares.

You are right in that there is room for all types of ideas and gaming philosophies and that they are all valid. The BSB can be run however they TO's choose to run it.

The thing is though, no one wants to go into a situation where they lose because of a mission that while it may be fun in a non-tournament format, really is not suited for tournament play. Most of those missions can be broken quite easily.

Lastly, to reinstate an individual into a position of authority who told a large group of players that they were not welcome to come to the event is just plainly not wise unless the PacMads really do share that point of view.

But thanks for the level headed and thoughtful comments, I agree with what you are saying.

I think you might have missed where people like Reece and I were coming from overall AB. Though you said it very well and I appreciate the tone.

I don't mind BSB being a different kind of tournament. I don't mind the soft scores being closer to 50%-60% of the overall. Would I prefer it different because I'm better at playing than painting? Of course But I have played in this event for the last 3 years and had a decent time. What we want is balanced missions for the most part. The rest of it we can all deal with and have and generally have a good time. It's the missions which cut to the heart of it. Do they have to be the same as other tournaments? Nope. But I would prefer that they are balanced so that they dont' negatively impact an army from the get-go.

Example was last year those hold the objective and earn points missions were auto-lose for most mechdar. I played against 2 mechdar armies, on both those missions. And guess what. Both of my opponents commented that the mission hosed them and didn't have as good of a time as they could have. They still must have had a good time with me as I scored max sports + some votes but they knew the mission had just made it so they couldn't possibly pull out a win.

Even casual players want an even playing field. I am still building a cool army in my limited free time that is for softer tournies. I have a fully converted admech daemon army that I like to think looks pretty good and is a testament to the hobby. Even us "competitive" guys enjoy all aspects of the hobby.

My problem is that the missions hurt the hobby for some players. That has always been my stance since I first looked at them. It's not so "I can win!". It's because I don't want to stand across from another opponent who doesn't get a turn because I got his half of the army on the top of my turn or watch an eldar player concede turn 4 when he doesn't have any troops left because he kept trying grab points while I slowly outstripped him because marines are hard to push off objectives with standard mechdar.

It has nothing to do with being competitive. In all honesty competitive guys will outstrip (in BP's which is how most tournaments do their 3rd round seeding) the other guys in the first two rounds and will generally be playing each other for the last 3 games, sometimes 4 games. So what kind of army you bring doesn't matter. What matters is balanced fun missions that don't cause an auto-lose situation.

**Bah, Reece beat me to it but I think I said it well to so I'm gonna leave my awesome long post. I typed it dangit! **

Auditorium_Bunny wrote:After spending some time thinking about it I believe that it comes down to this. We all seem to fall into one of two camps. The competitive camp, which consists of players that enjoy playing competitively, and the casual camp which consist of players who are not as competitive and like to play with more fun (fluff, narrative etc).

I wish people wouldn't always say 'competetive' versus 'fun'.

It's effectively saying that competetive players aren't fun or having fun, which is patently false at best, and trolling at worst.

Granted, I did like the tone of the rest of the post, but it always chaffs my hide to constantly hear that comparison.

skyth wrote:

Auditorium_Bunny wrote:After spending some time thinking about it I believe that it comes down to this. We all seem to fall into one of two camps. The competitive camp, which consists of players that enjoy playing competitively, and the casual camp which consist of players who are not as competitive and like to play with more fun (fluff, narrative etc).

I wish people wouldn't always say 'competetive' versus 'fun'.

It's effectively saying that competetive players aren't fun or having fun, which is patently false at best, and trolling at worst.

There is a point where someone is being a bit too competitive to enjoy playing against though, right? I mean, we've all played "that fething guy".

Edit: I'm speaking in generalities. I'm not implying that any of these guys in this thread are TFG.

Excellent adjustment MonsterRain. Though I'm pretty sure we don't think you'd mean it that way