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.

Danny Internets wrote:All sportsmanship scoring does is push TFG behavior from the foreground to the background, and only in the best case scenarios.

I know what you're attempting to say, but I translate it as bringing TFG behavior to the foreground (Sports/Comp) rather than the background (non-Sports/Comp).

Without Sports/Comp, TFG is just a single, somewhat annoying game. I say this assuming that you as a player and the TO as a judge have balls and do not allow cheating.

With Sports/Comp, TFG can ding your score all over the place, which takes it from 'annoying' to 'an annoying problem'.

What I meant by the foreground/background phrasing was that instead of risking losing points by being a jerk during a game (foreground), TFGs will wait until after the game where they can be a jerk more discretely by tanking soft scores after the game is over (background).

I agree 100% with your breakdown of tournaments with comp/sports to ones without.

Good TOs and a scoring system like I suggested can mitigate TGF chipmunking. It's not like no one doesn't know who the TFGs are going into an event. Grow a pair.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Good TOs and a scoring system like I suggested can mitigate TGF chipmunking. It's not like no one doesn't know who the TFGs are going into an event. Grow a pair.

G

Please explain how your system mitigates TFG chipmunking. You dodged the question the first time. Simply repeating that your system works doesn't make it true.

3+ if it's your most favorite game... You should rarely ever see that score. If someone is handing it out like candy you know something is up.

0 points for a typical game, So basically only a very small % of players should score any poi ts.

-3 points if your opponent was a TFG. if you see people handing out a lot of -3s the last round again you know something is up.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Here is one we used yesterday:

+5 - One of my best games ever! Opponent was awesome.
0 - Average game.
-5 - Horrible game; would not play this person again.

If you scored anyone +5 or -5 you had to explain why to the judge.

G

So wait a minute...

I could score someone +4 or -4 and not explain myself?

WTF kind of system is that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Danny Internets wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Good TOs and a scoring system like I suggested can mitigate TGF chipmunking. It's not like no one doesn't know who the TFGs are going into an event. Grow a pair.

G

Please explain how your system mitigates TFG chipmunking. You dodged the question the first time. Simply repeating that your system works doesn't make it true.

That's all GBF has been doing this whole thread.

Okay so now everyone knows that you are slowed. Lead paint will do that.

G

imweasel wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Here is one we used yesterday:

+5 - One of my best games ever! Opponent was awesome.
0 - Average game.
-5 - Horrible game; would not play this person again.

If you scored anyone +5 or -5 you had to explain why to the judge.

G

So wait a minute...

I could score someone +4 or -4 and not explain myself?

WTF kind of system is that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Danny Internets wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Good TOs and a scoring system like I suggested can mitigate TGF chipmunking. It's not like no one doesn't know who the TFGs are going into an event. Grow a pair.

G

Please explain how your system mitigates TFG chipmunking. You dodged the question the first time. Simply repeating that your system works doesn't make it true.

That's all GBF has been doing this whole thread.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Okay so now everyone knows that you are slowed. Lead paint will do that.

G

So you are saying that if I scored someone +4 or -4 that I would have to explain that?

Please, what were the rules again?

Hey thanks for validating what said.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Hey thanks for validating what said.

G

Ok. So now you change the rules and are being purposely obtuse. Epic fail.

Soft scores should be used for individual sportsmanship/painting/whatever awards only. If somehow multiple people end up with the same record and the same strength of schedule, they can be a last resort option for a tie breaker. That's it.

This whole "I want to reward the guy I had fun playing against" Carebear mentality is a bunch of BS. If you're at a tournament, it's meant to be a competition. The victor should be determined purely through win/loss record and strength of schedule, rather than by whether or not he gave you a reach around as he railed you. If it was a pleasant game, buy him a beer afterwards and nominate him for the sportsmanship award , but a person's demeanor should have nothing to do with whether they win best general or not. I've yet to see anyone get a gold medal at the Olympics for just being a great guy.

I also think some people's definition of TFG is a bit warped. If he insists you follow the rules to the letter, well, you should be doing that in the first place. If he's cheating, don't bother arguing with him, and just call over the TO and have him thrown out. If he's just generally a dick, take comfort in the fact that you never have to talk or play with him again. Or better yet, crush him and drink deeply of his tears of sorrow and nerdrage. If you simply can't handle rudeness, well, with internet shopping even applying to groceries these days, you don't have to ever leave your mom's basement. The real world is obviously not for you.

Please explain. If I'm running a tournament of 240 people, how do I get enough manpower to check every score and go and have a nice heart-to-heart chat with the chipmunkers? Ideally, I'd have a judge on every table, watching the game hawk-eyed. But that's impractical.

Green Blow Fly wrote:3+ if it's your most favorite game... You should rarely ever see that score. If someone is handing it out like candy you know something is up.

0 points for a typical game, So basically only a very small % of players should score any poi ts.

-3 points if your opponent was a TFG. if you see people handing out a lot of -3s the last round again you know something is up.

G

So your grand strategy is basically to use a rating scale or checklist and then just hope that the judges can sort things out without providing any method for them to do so. This is exactly what every tournament already does and it is exactly why they are all flawed, as the huge attention garnered by this thread demonstrates.

Like in my story earlier about our local TO, analyzing the scores lets you easily identify when the system is experiencing a widespread problem, but it does jack squat to fix it. Just because you know lots of people are chipmunking doesn't mean you can differentiate between those who are and those who may have legitimately had issues with their opponents in later rounds.

Modquisition on.

There has already been one suspension related to this thread. lets all remember Dakka Rule #1 or further suspensions will be enforced.

Ah! Doxie spin! Hope she didn't hurl on that nice equipment.

imweasel wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:Hey thanks for validating what said.

G

Ok. So now you change the rules and are being purposely obtuse. Epic fail.

Wow, GBF's idea isn't that complicated.

There are exactly three options for, say, Sportsmanship:

Awesome!!!! = +5 points
Average = 0 points
Le Suckfest! = -5 points

Those are the only options. There is no way to give the +4 or -4 that was asked about in an earlier post.

The definition for the highest and lowest points totals would be such that they should only be given out in a VERY small percentage of cases. They had to be, literally, one of the absolute best or worst opponents to play against in your entire life.

A TO would only have to skim through the scores given to and by players to see if a lot of +/-5 scores were given out. If one person were giving out several of these scores, then that player probably isn't being honest and it needs to be addressed. If someone is getting or receiving a lot of these scores, then we know that this person is either the most awesome person to play against in the world, or the biggest TFG on the planet.

Now, I dunno how well this system would work in practice, but there isn't a way (under this type of system) to give someone a +/-4 (for example) to try to avoid closer scrutiny by the judges.

Don't need to skim. Most TOs wil put this on a spreadsheet. Easy to see and could even do a simple formula for such.

What about:
"was this game fun?" = 5 points
"did this game bore you?" = 0 points
"was the guy an a hole? just trying to WAAC" (subjective, have to ask 3rd parties) = -5 points

that simplifies things...

plus... you could add in....
"was the guy drunk?" +1 point
"did he bring his girlfriend?" -1 point
"does he smoke and go out for breaks between turns" (I do that all the time) -1 point
"does he smoke and offer to share some of the 'good' smoke between turns? (I do that too) +1 point
"does he stink?" -1 point

wow you could establish some official sh!t with all of these parameters....

I don't get why playing nice is even a needed requirement.

As long as your opponent plays by the rules it shouldn't matter what he is like to play.

Maybe some people think people who are overly fake nice at a tournament are just as annoying as people who don't care what you think about them.

If you want to play a fun game, play casual.

If you want to have fun because its a competition, then play in a competitive environment (a tournament).


Wow, what a concept.

Timmah wrote:I don't get why playing nice is even a needed requirement.

As long as your opponent plays by the rules it shouldn't matter what he is like to play.

Maybe some people think people who are overly fake nice at a tournament are just as annoying as people who don't care what you think about them.

If you want to play a fun game, play casual.

If you want to have fun because its a competition, then play in a competitive environment (a tournament).


Wow, what a concept.

But, man, I hate to say it, but even "real" sports have Sportsmanship rules.

In volleyball, if you yell an obscenity at a ref or an opponent (or even your own team mate or yourself), the referee is instructed by the rules to issue a yellow card. This can result in a loss of a point; this definitely can affect the outcome of a game.

In baseball, throwing at an opponent can get you kicked out of the game (whether you hit them or not).

In football, Unsportsmanlike Conduct (including such little things as excessive celebration) results in a 15 yard penalty.

In tennis, "racket abuse" is considered, among other things, to be "unsportsmanlike." This can be punished by a loss of a point, or eventually expulsion.

In basketball, unsportsmanlike conduct results in a technical foul and a free throw for the opponent.

The only difference between how real competitive sports and 40K tournaments address "Sportsmanship" is that real sports have a referee. I understand that having an impartial referee at every game in a 40K tournament is impractical, but is it really hard to just not be a D!ck to your opponent? Personally, that's all I ask of my opponent.

But, anyway, my point is that it's a big, fat myth to think that real, competitive games do not or should not have a sportsmanship element to them. 'Cuz they do, all over the world.

Timmah wrote:I don't get why playing nice is even a needed requirement.

As long as your opponent plays by the rules it shouldn't matter what he is like to play.

Maybe some people think people who are overly fake nice at a tournament are just as annoying as people who don't care what you think about them.

If you want to play a fun game, play casual.

If you want to have fun because its a competition, then play in a competitive environment (a tournament).


Wow, what a concept.

Others disagree. You're interpretation of why people go to tourneys is only ONE interpretation. There are multiple reasons.

Saldiven wrote:But, anyway, my point is that it's a big, fat myth to think that real, competitive games do not or should not have a sportsmanship element to them. 'Cuz they do, all over the world.

I'll agree with that... if you can see that in every example you've given, the official or referee is responsible for spotting and penalizing the infraction.

How many 15 yard penalties would there be in a game of football if the players were the ones throwing the flags?

To play games?

Actually those sports references are all rules. Following the rules =! sportsmanship though.

Note, in my original post I said as long as you follow the rules.

And plenty of people agree with me frazzled. (check the poll)

The rules are obviously flawed though and everyone knows it. They weren't meant for chess-tourney style exactness. People who blatantly take advantage of rules flukes are obviously not good 'sporty' people... bickering about stuff, generally would lose you points in my book, if I am being easy-going and granting you benefit of the doubt about all the nitpickings you may bring up. Besides I get a +1 to this score for only playing against kids while drunk...

You know, I keep hearing this about the rules but don't think I have ever had a problem with them. The ones that are usually broken deal with obscure units that no one uses anyways.

Blatantly taking advantage of rules flukes? How do you know that they are a fluke. One person's fluke is another person's 'how the game is played'.

The only issue with rules is if they play it one way when it's against them, and another way when it's against thier opponent.

Three months ago playing with a Deffrolla ramming a vehicle would have made you a WAAC powergaming jerk in about 50% of the gaming circles of the Dakka membership if those polls were at all accurate.

Now it's the norm. "Rules flukes" tend to be declared at the discretion of the least-powerful-interpretation crowd. Looking at how Deffrollas, Lash of Submission, and Jaws of the World Wolf GW's FAQ record tends to lean toward the more powerful interpretation.

But, anyway, my point is that it's a big, fat myth to think that real, competitive games do not or should not have a sportsmanship element to them. 'Cuz they do, all over the world.

As Shep already pointed out, what you're equating to sportsmanship is actually part of the rules in professional sports. When a penalty/personal foul is committed, it is not up to the players to self-police, but rather the event judge or referee.

Sportsmanship in gaming is generally a social issue and should be dealt with socially. Exclude knobends, be nice to nice people, and eject cheaters if you catch them. Know your rules, stand up for yourself, and abide by judge rulings if they have to be made.
It's not that hard.

Sports and Comp scores are what I refer to as exclusionary scores. In a lot of cases, they are included with the intent to exclude people who play differently.