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 like battle points. If my opponent beats me I feel like I'm cheating if I win solely because I'm a better painter than him or someone didn't like his list & docked him sportsmanship.

I actually dropped from 5th to 7th out of 32 in a tournament because my opponents LR didn't have LOS from his lascannons to my hammerhead (Pillars were blocking perfectly) & so I told him he could not shoot it & when he went to the TO the TO agreed with me, I saw what he wrote (2/10 sportsmanship) I'm sorry I play by the rules.

That said I don't completely discredit painting & sportsmanship I just feel they should be 100% separate.

Optain 1.

Since there is so much more to the game than just winning a match.

Voted battle points, with the following asterisk:

I would prefer there be three prize-brackets: victory, painting, and sportsmanship (scored using the Yakface method, obviously).

The sportsman prizes should be the best, followed by victory, then painting.

I think that helps set the "right" incentives for everyone to have a fair, fun tourney.

Im going to a tournie soon though!

option 1, since Im very good at painting.

I see it in pure strategy. Is it cool if you got an awesome paintjob? Sure! Am I going to be pissed if your army isn't painted? No. I just want a fun battle. And hearing you mutter F*** you and other such callous statements only fills me up with laughter.

Option one is my favorite, but really like any combination that includes heavy scoring for painting.

I just like playing with and against painted armies more.

I voted for BP, sportsmanship and painting. My reasoning behind that is because of how I run RTTs. My scoreing system is slightly different from the norm.

60/20/20
Battle points nough said that's always the same the mission tells you how to earn them and how many you get.

Painting - I use a check list system, it's purely based on effort, let's face it not everyone paints at the same level or detail. So basically did they base the models? Primed? Army theme? etc. Each player at the event does get to vote for their favorite painted armies and I use those votes to break ties.

Sportsmanship - Everyone starts the day with full sportsmanship, don't make me take the points away from you. I'm a very active TO I'm moving around the tournament area taking pictures and listening to all the talk. Basically a check list as well. Opponent on time? Has all their materials? offered a copy of their list? during games watching language? not whinning? and a simple check yes or no after each game, did you enjoy your game? Again players will vote for their favorite opponent of the day and whom ever got the most votes will be used as tie breaker.

not saying my way is perfect and you guys are more than welcome to use it or shred it but my local community seems to like it. i will admit though i have a very few people that are "the win is all that matters" players that think the game should be about scoring max vps and wrecking their opponents.

I think that tournaments should be a showcase for tactical prowess, painting, and ability to build a usable army. Battle/victory/kill points are obvious. Painting is a part of this hobby, and showing up with a poor attempt at painting, or none at all, shows no commitment to the hobby. Composition is also key. Taking a whole lot of razorbacks is fine, but it is all too common to shoehorn as many as possible into armies that wouldn't use them is beyond me. I actually think the Fantasy composition scoring is pretty interesting and should be looked at more.

I've never played in a tournament, and don't really have an interest.

Straight up battle points...if I get a massacre every game then I should be in first. Had a tournament where this happened and my painting score was low (new unpainted army) and thus I ended up with second overall...total bull. I don't like to base my model so I get penalised? So what if my army is copy and paste? It gets results. Now granted I try not to act like a duesch so I don't mind sportsmanship.

Painting scores only, the list composition and game itself are irrelevant.

If it's codex-legal then there is no need for comp. I've never ran an army yet that was out of step with my codex and never felt a need to. That being said no one should be punished for putting all of their units in drop pods (when applicable), or running all termies (when applicable). You shouldn't be punished for having the forethought to put together a winning list for a game. No one is going to pull punches during list building when victory is on the line.

Painting should be separate from battle points, and thus not factor into overall scores.Now do I think painting is important? Yes, of course it is. I love when I complete a piece of my own, or even seeing someone else's work. It's inspiring to see great time and effort breathed into every last detail. Just the same, it means nothing to me in an actual game, and it shouldn't mean anything to any of you, either.

Sportsmanship should not be scored at all. I have rarely seen an event where something went so bad on this front that it devastated a game, but it can happen. In the event someone pitches a fit, or gets out of control angry/sad/slowed, TOs should just quickly asses the situation and remove/disqualify the offender.

While I would like everybody to show up to a tournament with a painted force, play fairly and have fun.

For painting: I would like these points to be pass/fail with everyone getting the same points except for 1-3 people being the top 3 painted armies decided on by the players or TO (everyone votes for the top 3 and by round 2/3 they announce the winners)

For sportsmenship, there should be two questions: a) would you play the opponent again? b) did you enjoy the game? If you respond to no, explain.

Composition should only be looked at to ensure the army is a legal army. If it is not a legal army, the player cannot participate. It is up to the player to bring in the Errata that shows their army is legal, not the TO's.

Battle Points should be decided based on the mission as per usual. In my area each mission gives battle points for: a primary mission, secondary mission, and tertiary objectives for a max of 20 points. There are usually ways to get bonus points as well. +1 for killing an HQ or +1 for killing something specific (the highest point enemy Elite, FA, or HS unit) or +1 for getting 1 or more units in the enemy's deployment zone.

Usually the points are weighted to 70-75% battle points with painting taking the next chunk out and sportsmenship being third. Usually it is there to correct someone who is being a (an overly used word for penis). In the last couple of years, painting seems to be the only issue people have but the points for painting are usually 10 point (three colors).

Monster Rain wrote:Option one is my favorite, but really like any combination that includes heavy scoring for painting.

I just like playing with and against painted armies more.

this.

I prefer tourni that use the Battlepoint, comp, painting and sportsmanship meathod. Why. Because none of the codex are balanced and the game is not meant to be a competative tournament system. Painting is part of the hobby aspect, sportsmanship helps to keep things nice, and comp hopefully limits the likelyhood that everyone who shows up will be playing either mech gaurd, DE venom spam, decent of angels or wolf spam. Its nice to see other builds out there being played.

Lots of people are very passionat about this. this is only my opinion and is based on the last 6 years of playing in tournis.

Not a tourney hog, so while I have no experience of these things, I'd go for Battle Points and painting.

Sportsmanship is based purely if you and the other player hit it off. If you have personalities that naturally conflict, but aren't actually bad in themselves, you get too opinion-based bullsh*t going on. Of course if the other player is a true idiot that is truly unpleasant to play with, that's your opinion too. But just because he is burdened with that unpleasant set of traits doesn't mean he's any less of a wargamer.

I'm not sure what composition is referring to; either a balanced/non cheese army, or a 'fluffy' army. In the former point, whether he's cheesing or not is irrelevant if his list and tactics are legal. It may be disgusting, but it's legal. You bring out your best to tournaments.
In the latter case, I may concede it depending on the circumstances, as there are so many homebrew chapters without verifiable backgrounds and lists that are made without any backgrounds in mind... If it's something like 'write a short paragraph about your force' or then everyone could have a go, unlike the scenario where some players have fluffy Raven Guard Shryke lists, and other have fluffy Ork Speed Klans lists or Warlock/Guardian heavy Ulthwe lists and so on, but in the end it's all subjective and depends on taste. They are too variable in my opinion, while victory/battle points are not, and painting is much less so.

Then again, it depends how seriously you want to take your toy-soldier battle-marathons...

Just battle points. Painting is a good thing, don't allow non-painted minis at all, and there should be a reward for having a well painted army, but it should be a seperate competition. Composition is already handled by the FOC, anything else after that is arbitrary and usually to the detriment of certain codecies (As an SoB player I have about 1 good option for each org slot, and all my elites are a waste). Sportsmanship is just politics, if you want to keep d-baggery to a minimum kick people out straight up for being a-holes.

GW would do well to follow the example of WotC. WotC's DCI is an excellent moderative body for M:tG, and it handles sportsmanship related issues in a fair manner. It also provides an excellent ranking system, and the web interfaces for TOs and judges makes the whole thing easy, it even does pairings.