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.

nkelsch wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:Now if we're talking about big tournaments people travel to, it's a different story. Those are like the "super bowl" of the game, and it should bring a higher standard. But as far as I know, we were talking about generic local tournaments, and any bs flag you care to display does not change my anecdotal evidence.

10 person tourneys? If there is not at least 16 people it is barley even club night. Maybe if it required painting you would draw people farther from the local area and have better attendance. If that excludes some locals, so be it.

Even if it 'works' for your tourney, it is not a recommendation that would do well for everyone. Frankly, well-run events almost all require painting. Most poorly run events allow unpainted. a TO unwilling or unable to spread the word or enforce basic standards shows the event will be run poorly which is why people avoid them for more than just the painting aspect. Sounds like your local area and events are going to be 'poorly run' because they cater to a small group of locals and everyone who plays there will feel like an outsider or run afoul of local rulings and people will have home-field advantages all which ruin the event.

If the tourney was well run, well advertised and required painting, you could get people to travel from farther away to attend it.

While I too have observed some correlation between players who don't paint and those who don't care much bout the game, and between events which don't require painting and events with TOs who don't really care or know how to run a good event, it's a long way from 100%. I don't think there's any need to tar all such players with such a nasty brush.

There's no need to be dismissive of Gyoken's group because it's small. While 10 people is not a big tournament, some places have small groups. I agree too, that requiring painting might motivate more people to attend events, but there are more constructive and friendly ways to offer that suggestion than to leap from there to intimating that their events are necessarily terrible events.

Only ever played a tourney once when I was 10 or 12. at the once GW shop in my local mall. But I was playing khorne back in that time. and it was a good turn out i remeber. It was all of tyranids/SM/Chaos ....players on a team but they did have to play agaist each other. It was like a campaign kinda fight. But it came down to me facing another chaos player....trying to keep this short but If he would have beat me chaos as a whole would have taken the planet. But I beat him my only win outta 5 games. And chaos lost the campaign becuase some eldar player won by one win point and eldar took the planet...lol


TL;DR: tourneys that are lax on the competitiveness is for me.

Mannahnin wrote:

While I too have observed some correlation between players who don't paint and those who don't care much bout the game, and between events which don't require painting and events with TOs who don't really care or know how to run a good event, it's a long way from 100%. I don't think there's any need to tar all such players with such a nasty brush.

There's no need to be dismissive of Gyoken's group because it's small. While 10 people is not a big tournament, some places have small groups. I agree too, that requiring painting might motivate more people to attend events, but there are more constructive and friendly ways to offer that suggestion than to leap from there to intimating that their events are necessarily terrible events.

exactly.. if its a small group, you could arrange a series of weekly painting days.

Its not exactly demanding to spray paint an army a base color, paint a few details, and glue some flock to a base. Looks SO MUCH NICER than playing unpainted.

Having competent judges that are willing to step into a game if they see something played wrong is something that I've been wanting to see recently.

#1: Paint scores. This brings out the best looking armies, seems to keep limit some of the power builds (because some people play what looks good to max scores), and makes for better spectacle.

#2 Location: You need to have lots of room and lots of A/C.

#3 Organization: Have all the handouts ready and keep things on schedule.

Mannahnin wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:Now if we're talking about big tournaments people travel to, it's a different story. Those are like the "super bowl" of the game, and it should bring a higher standard. But as far as I know, we were talking about generic local tournaments, and any bs flag you care to display does not change my anecdotal evidence.

10 person tourneys? If there is not at least 16 people it is barley even club night. Maybe if it required painting you would draw people farther from the local area and have better attendance. If that excludes some locals, so be it.

Even if it 'works' for your tourney, it is not a recommendation that would do well for everyone. Frankly, well-run events almost all require painting. Most poorly run events allow unpainted. a TO unwilling or unable to spread the word or enforce basic standards shows the event will be run poorly which is why people avoid them for more than just the painting aspect. Sounds like your local area and events are going to be 'poorly run' because they cater to a small group of locals and everyone who plays there will feel like an outsider or run afoul of local rulings and people will have home-field advantages all which ruin the event.

If the tourney was well run, well advertised and required painting, you could get people to travel from farther away to attend it.

While I too have observed some correlation between players who don't paint and those who don't care much bout the game, and between events which don't require painting and events with TOs who don't really care or know how to run a good event, it's a long way from 100%. I don't think there's any need to tar all such players with such a nasty brush.

There's no need to be dismissive of Gyoken's group because it's small. While 10 people is not a big tournament, some places have small groups. I agree too, that requiring painting might motivate more people to attend events, but there are more constructive and friendly ways to offer that suggestion than to leap from there to intimating that their events are necessarily terrible events.

But do you honestly expect any other tone from one of his posts? This is pretty much par for the course for nkelsch.

Good organisation. Start on time, lunch break enforced, and finish on time. Finishing late can mean people missing trains etc home - not good!

Part of the way we help this at Spiky is with timing the rounds with an on projector timer - no excuse about not knowing there was only 20min to go, there's a massive clock telling you that!

We provide food as well, because frankly there is nothing nearby - this means we can cut lunchs down when timing is tight, e.g. if food gets delayed in transit. We also have a (very reasonably priced) bar as part of the club, which definitely helps - especially doubles tournaments with the most recent side chalenge being "shot for every perils you roll"......

Painted armies requirement - if youre running an event of a decent size, make it a requirement. You have a MUCH nicer playing experience, a MUCH nicer day - after all i dont win anything, so cool opponents and awesome looking armies is the main draw for me - and its slightly less tiring than more grey / black plastic.

Back this up with good trophy support for painting and you can get people coming for that, giving you a nice range of competition.

Talking of trophies - i'm not actually a fan of "real" prizes. We dont really do those at Spiky (one exception - the bottom player at a team campaign weekend for 40k got Island of Blood - not a hint, honest!) as it seems to just be an avenue to sour things. Like when playing for money, playing for cash equivalents just seems to add an edge that I dont think the game needs. Not for everyone I know We've also tried to promote the painting side more, with 2 painting awards - one judges one players choice - to beef you pthe hobby side. Also looking at rewarding ALL short list painters in some way as well.

Avoid player scored comp - it just doesnt seem to work, from what i've seen. THumbs up / thumbs down, with judges / TOs actually talking about WHY you 've scored negatively / very positively, works quite well. LEts you spot the potential trouble early on, and have a quiet word / monitor the games more closely. That said, we get very few issues locally, or in fact at most UK tournaments I've been to in the last few years.

Terrain - do your best on this, and try to get a good mix on each table. Planet bowling balls is not good, but neither is 90% LOS blocking - the guidelines inthe rulebook is actually a very good standard to go by. Main issue with terrain is really finding a place to store it all - so think ahead on that one, it adds up quickly!

Missions - think about the balance in them, and how different armies play. Try to get friends to berak the missions - for example are they mathematically even possible? Classic example are the ball carrier missions (or variants) where sometimes not getting to it turn 1 means you cant actually win. Avoid those - one thing 5th ed basic missions are good at is the ability for you to pull a win or a draw out right up to the last couple of turns.

FAQs - start your own in a PUBLIC location, or use a published one, or just state GW only, judges decision on day if needed. Something to make it clear what to expect!

Comp - if you put any in, again try to break it. If you go the hard comp, thou shalt not route, makes sure you dont suddenly overpower another army - its VERY easy to do. Another route is soft comp, often used to punish spammy lists - i.e. 1 razorback is fine, 2 you suffer a small penalty, 3 a larger one, etc.

This one is easy, good banter.

I LOVE having a crack on with my opponent

also, fair play. Not a big fan of Meta-List, Rock/Paper/Scissor kinda things.

Anything run by WW40k, AUS

Seeing really nicely painted armies!!

For me, it is all about enjoying the experience.

I do believe in enforcing a painting rule, atleast if you want to be able to obtain shiny prizes. When I first started in Warhammer Fantasy (Last edition with Winds of Magic Cards), I went to a couple of GTs in Chicago and was allowed to play no problems, but they let it be known from the pre-registration that I was not able to win anything. I was ok with it, I was a teenager and had the disposable income. So I dont think painting should stop people from playing so much as it should disallow them from winning if they go 1st, 2nd, 3rd places.

Now, I also want to have fun whether or not I win or lose.

Prizes are nice, but since I generally build lists with models I want to field (not neccesarily mutually exclusing to battle performance) so I dont care if I win or not for prizes.

augustus5 wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Brother Gyoken wrote:Now if we're talking about big tournaments people travel to, it's a different story. Those are like the "super bowl" of the game, and it should bring a higher standard. But as far as I know, we were talking about generic local tournaments, and any bs flag you care to display does not change my anecdotal evidence.

10 person tourneys? If there is not at least 16 people it is barley even club night. Maybe if it required painting you would draw people farther from the local area and have better attendance. If that excludes some locals, so be it.

Even if it 'works' for your tourney, it is not a recommendation that would do well for everyone. Frankly, well-run events almost all require painting. Most poorly run events allow unpainted. a TO unwilling or unable to spread the word or enforce basic standards shows the event will be run poorly which is why people avoid them for more than just the painting aspect. Sounds like your local area and events are going to be 'poorly run' because they cater to a small group of locals and everyone who plays there will feel like an outsider or run afoul of local rulings and people will have home-field advantages all which ruin the event.

If the tourney was well run, well advertised and required painting, you could get people to travel from farther away to attend it.

While I too have observed some correlation between players who don't paint and those who don't care much bout the game, and between events which don't require painting and events with TOs who don't really care or know how to run a good event, it's a long way from 100%. I don't think there's any need to tar all such players with such a nasty brush.

There's no need to be dismissive of Gyoken's group because it's small. While 10 people is not a big tournament, some places have small groups. I agree too, that requiring painting might motivate more people to attend events, but there are more constructive and friendly ways to offer that suggestion than to leap from there to intimating that their events are necessarily terrible events.

But do you honestly expect any other tone from one of his posts? This is pretty much par for the course for nkelsch.

The game's ability to be played efficiently and quickly is directly related to appearance. If you do not require WYSIWYG and Painting, you burden players and harm the game.

Which is fine in friendly play... devastating in competitive play. If you can't easily distinguish squads due to squad markings or colors, you cannot easily distinguish wargear due to being a sea of grey and cannot distinguish models due to not being WYSIWYG, the game is no longer able to be played in a fair and competitive way. This makes it a poorly run event so I can easily say all events that allow unpainted or do not enforce WYSIWYG are poorly run as the game cannot be played quickly or fairly or competitively. It is little more than 'organized play' at that point.

For me its a mixed bag of things. I've only started playing at tournaments at my LGS, but plan on traveling to some in the future.

1) Clear rules, missions, scoring (what PDFs, FAQ's etc)
2) Missions posted somewhere beforehand
3) If there is an entry fee, some sort of prize support of equal or close to equal amount should be presented (and not just a winner takes all, best painted, general, sport etc).
4) Some sort of players choice award if there is prize support (voting for best sport, or a fan favorite for painting)
4) Painting not being a requirement...but highly suggested/supported.

For a large national tournament, GT, or something like Adepticon paining should be required as it is not just a tournament, but a display of the hobby.

For local tournaments, painting should not be required. In fact that's my largest problem with the Flames of War players at my LGS. I just got into flames a month ago, but can't play in a tournament because I don't have my army 100% painted and flocked??? I run tournaments for Fantasy, WM/Hoards at the store I have a painting scoring guide that is separate form the battle points but factors into best overall (I got it from a 40k tournament). Every player gets a copy, every player can see how their painting was scored. Why they can't just use it so newer players like me can learn the game I just don't understand. /rant

In the end large tournaments painting required, local small (less than 30 people) tournaments painting not required but highly recommended.

nkelsch wrote:

The game's ability to be played efficiently and quickly is directly related to appearance. If you do not require WYSIWYG and Painting, you burden players and harm the game.

Which is fine in friendly play... devastating in competitive play. If you can't easily distinguish squads due to squad markings or colors, you cannot easily distinguish wargear due to being a sea of grey and cannot distinguish models due to not being WYSIWYG, the game is no longer able to be played in a fair and competitive way. This makes it a poorly run event so I can easily say all events that allow unpainted or do not enforce WYSIWYG are poorly run as the game cannot be played quickly or fairly or competitively. It is little more than 'organized play' at that point.

Oh my God this derail is so stupid and I'm totally sick of it but the complete lack of logic in your comments compel me to keep answering you.

WYSIWYG is not painting. It's modeling to have the proper armaments so you can look at them and see what they have. Whatever colors (or lack thereof) they have are totally irrelevant. If you cannot distinguish shapes, then perhaps that is your problem and not your opponent's. Just like it's your problem if your brain shuts down and you're unable to figure out how to roll dice because there aren't 3 colors opposite you. Your inability to play does not make it a poorly run event, it makes you a sufferer of some sort of mental defect or block which is not the responsibility of myself or a TO to account for.

PS I have a friend that is R/G colorblind. As far as I know, playing against Blood Angels or Salamanders doesn't shut his brain off and make him unable to make decisions.

Edit: Just to be SUPERCLEAR neither I nor anyone posting in this thread have advocated a WYSIWYG-less wasteland for tournaments. WYSWYG is actually important to play and make decisions. WYSIWYG is NOT PAINTING

Brother Gyoken wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

The game's ability to be played efficiently and quickly is directly related to appearance. If you do not require WYSIWYG and Painting, you burden players and harm the game.

Which is fine in friendly play... devastating in competitive play. If you can't easily distinguish squads due to squad markings or colors, you cannot easily distinguish wargear due to being a sea of grey and cannot distinguish models due to not being WYSIWYG, the game is no longer able to be played in a fair and competitive way. This makes it a poorly run event so I can easily say all events that allow unpainted or do not enforce WYSIWYG are poorly run as the game cannot be played quickly or fairly or competitively. It is little more than 'organized play' at that point.

Oh my God this derail is so stupid and I'm totally sick of it but the complete lack of logic in your comments compel me to keep answering you.

WYSIWYG is not painting. It's modeling to have the proper armaments so you can look at them and see what they have. Whatever colors (or lack thereof) they have are totally irrelevant. If you cannot distinguish shapes, then perhaps that is your problem and not your opponent's. Just like it's your problem if your brain shuts down and you're unable to figure out how to roll dice because there aren't 3 colors opposite you. Your inability to play does not make it a poorly run event, it makes you a sufferer of some sort of mental defect or block which is not the responsibility of myself or a TO to account for.

PS I have a friend that is R/G colorblind. As far as I know, playing against Blood Angels or Salamanders doesn't shut his brain off and make him unable to make decisions.

Edit: Just to be SUPERCLEAR neither I nor anyone posting in this thread have advocated a WYSIWYG-less wasteland for tournaments. WYSWYG is actually important to play and make decisions. WYSIWYG is NOT PAINTING

Wrong. One of the many criticisms of 'ard boyz is where squads are indistinguishable and no one knows which models belong to which unit because there are no markings. Wounds become lost and muddled especially in CC. And visual cues help speed up decisions and make better decisions and help the game move along. Even if it is a 'minor' burden to you, it is still a burden in a competitive environment. There should be no unfair burdens.

I choose not to play in tourneys which have such burdens. If it was an untimed casual event then I am willing to accept the burden. I have met many people who agree with the need for appearance standards and it improves gameplay and not just for 'ooooh look at pretty models' reasons.

1. Organizers who know what they are doing.
2. Judges who know the rules.
3. Scoring fully explained prior to the tourney.
4. Bathed opponents.

I once ran a local tournament for a club I was in. I followed guidelines 1-3. I enforced 4 pretty easily by stating that I will deduct points if you stink. I was the sole judge of this. I am a fair person, and understand that people perspire but if you walked in the door smelling bad I was going to penalize you. It's a respect thing. Not all tourneys are held in wide open spaces.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

$pider wrote:1. Organizers who know what they are doing.
2. Judges who know the rules.
3. Scoring fully explained prior to the tourney.
4. Bathed opponents.

I once ran a local tournament for a club I was in. I followed guidelines 1-3. I enforced 4 pretty easily by stating that I will deduct points if you stink. I was the sole judge of this. I am a fair person, and understand that people perspire but if you walked in the door smelling bad I was going to penalize you. It's a respect thing. Not all tourneys are held in wide open spaces.

Yeah dude, what is up with this? It's certainly not everyone but some gamers just always stink...

nkelsch wrote:
Wrong. One of the many criticisms of 'ard boyz is where squads are indistinguishable and no one knows which models belong to which unit because there are no markings. Wounds become lost and muddled especially in CC. And visual cues help speed up decisions and make better decisions and help the game move along. Even if it is a 'minor' burden to you, it is still a burden in a competitive environment. There should be no unfair burdens.

I choose not to play in tourneys which have such burdens. If it was an untimed casual event then I am willing to accept the burden. I have met many people who agree with the need for appearance standards and it improves gameplay and not just for 'ooooh look at pretty models' reasons.

Zero evidence provided. All personal conjecture. Agree to disagree and pleased we're not in the same gaming group.

Hopefully what was polite enough!

Brother Gyoken wrote:

Zero evidence provided. All personal conjecture. Agree to disagree and pleased we're not in the same gaming group.

Hopefully what was polite enough!

Playing against unpainted Necrons with units intermixed for WBB purposes is quite annoying, and the best example that I can come up with from prior experience. Assaulting multiple units in that set-up became a huge headache for me. I can see the argument that painted units is WYSIWYG if they are painted or marked to differentiate themselves.

It's not bad enough to warrant a painting requirement for every tournament, but it certainly is a legitimate point for this thread, as it would be important to me in a tournament.

Someone brought up beer, which reminds me that I've had more fun at 21+ tournaments with drinking than open-to-everyone tournaments. I know there are some young-uns out there that can play with maturity and composure above their age, but overall I tend to have less fun at events that allow minors. It can become a little tiresome explaining what older edition models are to players who have only been in the hobby for a couple of years.

I thinkg wysiwyg is very important for tournament play. Painting not so much. I know quite a few people who simply hate painting, and their armies have not gone beyond a basic spray coat of primer. They just dont want to spend time doing it, and I see no reason why they should be excluded from play on these grounds.

Playing against unpainted Necrons with units intermixed for WBB purposes is quite annoying, and the best example that I can come up with from prior experience. Assaulting multiple units in that set-up became a huge headache for me. I can see the argument that painted units is WYSIWYG if they are painted or marked to differentiate themselves.

What you need to ask yourself is, would this have made a difference if they were painted? I cant see a blob of grey crons being harder to distinguish than a blob of metallic ones.

As he said in his post; some form of unit marking to facilitate distinguishing them is very useful, and commonly done by regular tournament players.

Painting really does make a difference in terms of speed and ease of recognition (I've had meltas and such hide on me in primed units many times over the years) , and particularly in the case of distinguishing similar units which are next to one another or intermingled in an assault, really is important. Especially in venues which don't have great lighting.

I played at least three times at tournaments just this Summer vs newer Space Wolf players who had not bothered to completely paint their army or get it completely WYSIWYG, and had to deal with not only facing an unattractive army, but one where meltas and/or combi-weapons were missing or just very hard to pick out due to poor/lack of painting. It's adding injury to insult to bring an un/partially painted army to a tournament with strangers and then to have it make even the game-playing experience more difficult and cumbersome for said strangers.

1)Fun
2)Good conversation in Break time
3)Having a fearsome "Final round" with a fellow low tier guy for last place
And 4) That I brought a Coca-Cola