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.

I have been asked to bring and potentially play the ringer army for a local tournament. I was wondering whether I should bring and attempt to play a tournament level list or just bring any ole list and play it easy. Just for the record, I'm not the toughest opponent but can usually place in the middle of the pack.

What is the general DakkaDakka take on ringer armies in tournaments?

It depends on the situation. Will you be filling in as a normal competitor, meaning if you win will you play other winners and so on? If so, bring a moderately competitive army. If you will be playing against a newb in the first round and then against whoever is in last place going forward (how we do it in my area) then I would bring a less competitive list.

Seems like a really good way to handle things Gardeth

Tournaments remain a competitive environment - being placed against a ringer army shouldn't be a free pass. Bring a competitive army, and act as if you were any other participant.

GCMandrake wrote:Tournaments remain a competitive environment - being placed against a ringer army shouldn't be a free pass. Bring a competitive army, and act as if you were any other participant.

I totally agree, but at the same time, I have seen far to many ringer armies that mearly serve to further punish the person in last. If you are playing the last place person (to avoid giving them a bye), bring a softer army but still play it to its fullest. I have had to ringer a few times and still won most of my games, but its a better experience for those you play when they don't just get their face smashed in again.

For the slaughter, our policy on the ringer army is that if you lose to it, you get a minor win, tie or defeat it, you get a major win. I prefer a softer army for the ringer, but even if its a punch you in the face list people at least don't eat a loss from playing it under that system.

Additional question...will you have any other duties you need to time shate with? Rules judge? score sheet gathering?

Back in the day when I was one man banding the local to where I was at the time tourney scene, I used my Deathwing or Grey Knights lists. The small model count dramtically cut down on the time I needed to play the game and allowed me to gather scores at the end of rounds to keep the event moving. Ideally, the ringer player would be doing just that and not any other duties, but many times the ideal is not reachable.

I say bring a solid list, nothing OTT but a good competitive list and just play to tie. Make the player earn his victory.

As a ringer, I've wailed on armies or players that I've deemed overpowered or cheesy. They still get a win, but lose their confidence.

I think ringers should be just that. Hard as Nails!!! That is what a ringer is, after all. A pro that enters into a non pro environment. Or something to that effect. In gambling the ringer is not a soft win. It usually is a bad bad thing to have to face the ringer, as someone is betting a fortune on them, probally means they are going to be very solid. I say make the ringer as hard as humanly possible!! Let the ringer play as if it was a real tournament for them. Let them get into finals. Simply remove them from the game after, all places shift up. Helps even the playing field and the ringer cant win. In a RTT getting handed a soft ringer after losing your first round puts you right back into contention. Why? Cause you got smashed first game? Makes no sense to me. If you got beat you should play another player that got beat. If you crawl out of the hole...good, you deserved it. Not casue you played a soft ringer. Just my 2 cents anyway...

QFT.

Balls to the wall.

For a RTT or something similarly official I agree. But for the smaller local tournies, especially ones with a high newb content I'd like to see some softer armies (for the sake of not discouraging people from playing in events).

By the way, what is the point of the ringer army?

Point of a ringer is to fill a gap. If you have 17 players, the ringer bumps it up to 18. Nice and even. That way no byes.

Ringers can also be meant to take a specific player out of contention. Say 9 russes vs footslogging eldar for example. The 2nd way is very rare. I had it happen to me after winning something like 5 tournaments in a row. I was placed against, at the time, the nastiest list in the game. The Imp guard armored company. I got put against it first round, it was not a random draw. Crushed it. Then got owned in the last game and did not place by another player. Does not always work the way it is expected.

I like having the ringer player playing his usual tournament list. PLay hard, get ranked, don't necessarily play the last place player. Then, remove ringer from contention. Makes the games fair and continues to pit equal opponents against equal opponents.

I've seen it both ways. Ringer plays a competitive army, can't win any prizes. I've also seen the ringer been a battleforce type army and just play the newer players to help them learn the game better.

Be a dick and field 1 HQ + 2 Troops with no upgrades.

PapaNurgle wrote:
I like having the ringer player playing his usual tournament list. PLay hard, get ranked, don't necessarily play the last place player. Then, remove ringer from contention. Makes the games fair and continues to pit equal opponents against equal opponents.

I don't get this at all. If that's how you want the ringer to play, why call it a ringer, why not call it a reserve player - someone who is showing up to help, and willing to play if they need to, but willing to sit out if they're not needed.

If the ringer is playing their usual list, and playing it where they'd normally be ranked if they were in the tournament, what separates them from a tournament participant?

* disclaimer - I'll be attending the tournament that SparkeyG's ringering.

Well redbeard if it was a TRUE ringer, It would be someone that won ard boys with a nasty list playing in a small local RTT. The definition as it is used in our hobby is bad. It should be called reserve player, as you said, in the cases of miniature games. A ringer is meant to dominate everyone. So the word ringer is a poor choice IMHO. I still think they should play as normal and try to win the whole thing. Then just remove them from the rankings and bump those behind the ringer one spot. Simple done. No extra problems for the organizer. Too hard to be fair any other way. More head ache for the TO if he has to make decisions regarding the ringer each round. Bad MoJo on that one.

Who gives a moose tit what you call it? It's the list played by the judge/staff to keep byes out of the picture. Who gives two squirts what you call it in any other event, this is a frackin warhammer website, so you should know what they are talking about.

I can't see too many people returning to an event and paying an entrance fee just to get curb stomped by the "judges" army such that the "judge" comes in first.

In this case, the OP should just ask the TO what he wants the ringer to be and plan accordingly. Personally, if I'm taking time out of my day to maybe or maybe not play is pretty damn lame. Just show up and play, no need to fill in.

Double lash & 9 oblits Rawr

Shotgun- Did someone miss their coffee this morning? Perhaps quit smoking recently? No need to be so angry and negative...Anyway.

What something is named IS important. It lets all those know what you are dealing with. If I fight a ringer, I expect it to be good. If I fight a guy filling in, I do not expect the hardest game. As this is about competition, it DOES matter who and how they play. It makes if difference to everyone playing that day. You could win or lose the entire tourny based on what function of the ringer is. The ringer should not be played by a judge. Mostly it is not. It is often an employee being a stand in. Don't be so quick to dismiss Shotgun, it is not that cut and dry. Hence the conversation.

Maybe its the con man in me, but I thought a ringer was there to bring an unfair advantage on some unsuspecting and generally honest fellow.

If you're going as a genuine ringer, bring something hideously competitive. Hobnail boots and brass knuckles to the end.
If you're going to fill a slot you might as well bring something that will be fun to play, not necessarily a pushover.

In my experiences as the 'ringer', I get asked to come in and bash a particular player's face in. The player in question is a bit of a dick and he's soemthing of a king of the roost - no one else really can beat him. He's been bad for the local tourney scene, so the manager started asking me to come in and play. I normally get ranked against him first round, *usually* win, and then go for a long lunch. When I get back I'm usually paired against the bottom of the charts and take the time to play 'learning' games with my opponents where we discuss our moves, why we're doing what we're doing, and discuss list selection. My record against him is 5-1, and the result has been that he gets downranked in the tourney. I asked the manager about it (I find it somewhat ethically questionable) - and he said that he's tired of the same player winning every tourney. After the last time I got asked (a few months ago) I indicated that I didn't really agree with what he was asking me to do, and so he changed the scoring system so that he just gets murdered on comp, sports, and painting. Hasn't won a tournament since, and has stopped playing in them.

So, with that background in mind, I'd make a solid all-comers list and play a competitive game - aim to make it so that the players find the games against you challenging, and if you happen to be playing a newb, take the time during the game (***IF THEY ARE INTERESTED***) in discussing strategy and tactics, and what works for you and why.

niceas wrote:In my experiences as the 'ringer', I get asked to come in and bash a particular player's face in. The player in question is a bit of a dick and he's soemthing of a king of the roost - no one else really can beat him. He's been bad for the local tourney scene, so the manager started asking me to come in and play. I normally get ranked against him first round, *usually* win, and then go for a long lunch. When I get back I'm usually paired against the bottom of the charts and take the time to play 'learning' games with my opponents where we discuss our moves, why we're doing what we're doing, and discuss list selection. My record against him is 5-1, and the result has been that he gets downranked in the tourney. I asked the manager about it (I find it somewhat ethically questionable) - and he said that he's tired of the same player winning every tourney. After the last time I got asked (a few months ago) I indicated that I didn't really agree with what he was asking me to do, and so he changed the scoring system so that he just gets murdered on comp, sports, and painting. Hasn't won a tournament since, and has stopped playing in them.

I think that both of these are somewhat questionable. Rigging a tournament so that a specific player cannot win is unfair. If the guy is a dick, the manager should call him on it and explicitly uninvite him. Being a dick is not acceptable just because he's not winning the tournament. I think the manager's solution (having you specifically play this guy, and then changing the scoring to lock him out) is a poor one. I'm happy to see that you stopped participating in it. What if the guy wasn't a dick, but still won all the time? Would he still be bad for the tournament scene?

Whatever happened to getting other players to improve their game, rather than screwing the good player with alternate scoring systerms?

Redbeard wrote:Rigging a tournament so that a specific player cannot win is unfair.

It's not rigged. If it were rigged, then he'd be playing against a handicap list with uneven points values or special rules. The player in question just has to play a hard game up front, no different than other systems that use Comp rankings or some other non-random method to determine initial pairings.

Similarly, reweighting scores to include Sports and Comp as important rather than trivial is fair. All players are equally rated for Sports and Comp, so there's no rigging there. Rigging Sports and Comp would be for someone to override his scores to take him out of the win, and that didn't appear to happen, either.

But you're right that the easiest and best thing would have been for the owner to grow a pair and simply tell the guy that he won't be welcome if he doesn't shape up.

Redbeard wrote:What if the guy wasn't a dick, but still won all the time? Would he still be bad for the tournament scene?

If the guy was winning fair & square, then it's no problem AFAIC.

Thanks for all the input. I will be used in the unlikely situation if we end up w/ an odd number of players. I'm working w/ the TO to make a smooth tourney, as I oddly have more fun running the tourney than participating in it.

I am deciding between a Mech UM list or an Adeptus Arbites list. The AA list would be more fun to play against for those at the bottom of the bracket but the UM list would more in line w/ what I would bring to a tourney....

Ringer armies should be as basic as possible. Not bland, but very much a "typical army." The classic ringer is probably a couple of tactical squads, a captain w/ command squad, a dread, a predator, a landraider w/ some terminators, and a landspeeder. Basically the sort of list that will enable the ringer player to actually compete, but nothing that really is heavily stacked in one area.

For what it's worth, in Australia we call this the "Gumby" army rather than the Ringer.

Typically the gumby army should be low powered as it will be playing the lowest rank player each round.

When I had to play as the 'ringer' it wasn't so people didn't get a bye (simply because I was an employee of the store), it was so no person who paid moeny to be in a tournament was forced to sit around for 2+ hours while everybody else played and had a good time. I never played hard-as-nails lists ( don't write those up anyhow), but I always played to win. Being a fair veteran I tried to make sure it was a game win or lose, and if the person in last place was real new I would teach them whatever I could.