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.

MVBrandt wrote:That is a very appropriate analogy. What's more, the Dizzy Bat competition WOULD BE VERY COMPETITIVE, because it would be comprised of a bunch of very competitive people, BUT it would not be competitively EVALUATIVE, which is the problem with Throne of Skulls.

It actually harms ALL gamer types b/c it doesn't evaluate anything ... it just has a bunch of people competing against each other. You really can't put any stock in who they give the prizes to at the end, even if the event itself is made competitive by the uniform caliber of the participants. Bunches of hardcore competitive 40k players participating in dizzy bat will be hardcore competitive dizzy bat, but it's still dizzy bat ... so a lot of them may not even bother attending.

Not every event has to be "evaluative". If I get an enjoyable weekend of playing five games against the cream of the crop (top players, top painters) in Vegas, I'm getting most of the things I want out of an event. I'm not in it for prizes. And while I like a "real" competitive event too, I don't get angry or disgusted by a lesser event. I'm surprised that Dash isn't interested, given his stated preferences. He's repeatedly and firmly expressed that he doesn't play for prizes; he plays to meet and face players who can beat him/give him a challenge. And this event seems to have a high likelihood of offering that.

Thanks, Mike. I think we are largely on the same page.

I, too, would prefer an actual "final", rather than what we're getting from the current ToS format. I don't think it's awful, but there's too high a chance of a winner who doesn't have the record they should.

Here ya go…

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/340851.page

Polonius wrote:

vhwolf wrote:So does every system. So do dice. I used data from 4 years of tournaments and come up with similar results. The truth is anyone can try to game any tournament system so does this mean that none should be played??

I think that building a system that creates the possiblity of a result that most people would find unsatisfactory is inherently flawed. Creating a system where the actions of others (best opponent votes, other players from the same codex) have a huge impact on a player's score also limits the extent to which each player controls their own destiny.

Ian Sturrock wrote:Precisely -- the system as outlined violates the Perceivable Consequence tool. Gamers hate that, because they instinctively recognise it as poor design.

http://www.ludism.org/gamedesign/PerceivableConsequences

Mannahnin wrote: I'm surprised that Dash isn't interested, given his stated preferences. He's repeatedly and firmly expressed that he doesn't play for prizes; he plays to meet and face players who can beat him/give him a challenge. And this event seems to have a high likelihood of offering that.

Just got my email as well. Looking forward to it, actually. Two of my team mates also have tickets, so we're looking good so far for the team competition.

Targetawg, while I share much of your sentiment, I have to disagree about the idea that there is any one format that has "been defining this season."

There have been a variety of formats on the circuit this season. Some with soft scores factored in with battle, some not. Some with battle points, a few strict win/loss. Some events awarded the top 2 Overall slots tickets, some the top Overall and Best General. Etc.

When there has been a fair amount of variation in the events feeding into the final, I don't think one can legitimately be upset that the final doesn't match any one of those feeder events. And it IS their event. They made no comments and may have had no particular plans about the format of the event when they made the arrangement to award tickets. I know a lot of folks got really excited about it and amped up, but it is GW we're talking about; there's never been any reasonable expectation that they would run the event any particular way.

That being said, I do still agree (as I've stated repeatedly) that this format has some problems and could be substantially better and more satisfying than it presently is.

I like that meals are included, which is a cool throwback to the first one I ever attended, back in 2001.

The 2 for 1 drink specials in the (apparently attached to the hall) lounge also sound good.

Email him your name and the name of the event at which you won your ticket.

I already have plans for drinking with Ed and Mikhaila. This is going to be more epic than the last time I went drinking with a GW GT organizer, which was Dave Taylor in 2007, IIRC. (not counting awesome drinking with Mikhaila last year, of course).