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.

Hey folks!

A fellow Dakkaite (Che-Veto) has challenged me to 2,000 point game of 40k with $1,000 stakes per person; with the announced intent to shut me up as a braggart. I've accepted the challenge, with the conditions that the money from both parties be transferred to a neutral and trusted third party (I've suggested Mike Brandt, who runs the Nova Open GT, or Mike Clark - who runs the SVDM GT amongst other things). The other condition is that our game be judged and observed from start to end by a neutral and respected third party.

I'm looking for any critique or better ideas for the stake-holder, and for suggestions on someone who might be universally accepted as someone to whom people would refer to as "Yep, they're the perfect person to rule on /overwatch a game."

Thanks!

Well, for one thing you should post a battle report of this on Dakka - whoever wins, it will make for an entertaining read!

Oh wow, when did this change to a thousand dollar game? Last I had talked to him it was a battleforce. This is still, non-the-less exciting!


As for actual help, I've got none to offer really. '>...>

/Popcorn. You could always just whip them out and measure them....

Will this throwdown be taking place at a particular venue or event?

I see and how is the terrain, scenery, wind, sunshine, rules arguments and so on going to be solved? 40k is not a game that should be played for money.

I wish I had $1,000, let alone $1,000 to bet on a 40k game. A battle report is, obviously, a massive must but as to actual help...I can't really offer any I'm afraid.

/grabs alcohol and popcorn.

L. Wrex

Yeah, no kidding. This'll be good.

Personally, I wouldn't settle for a single neutral party, I'd go for a neutral COUNCIL. Team of 5 or so refs, with one randomly determined to be the head ref at the start of the game (has final say in any disputes that arise/veto ability over any potentially questionable decisions).

As much as people may think you're overconfident putting a grand on a match just to show they may or mat not be better than you is even worse... i hope you beat this guy and take his money.

How about E-Peen Escrow Service?

What's with this 40k for money gimmick? It's coming up a lot,lately.

This.

Phototoxin wrote:I see and how is the terrain, scenery, wind, sunshine, rules arguments and so on going to be solved? 40k is not a game that should be played for money.

And then this.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Personally, I wouldn't settle for a single neutral party, I'd go for a neutral COUNCIL. Team of 5 or so refs, with one randomly determined to be the head ref at the start of the game (has final say in any disputes that arise/veto ability over any potentially questionable decisions).

I have mixed feelings about this idea, but if you guys have the money to burn then have fun. Though I can't imagine this game will be fun for anyone with that much money at stake.

Wheres the game being played?

@chaos0xomega: A council of judges is a bit much to try arranging for a single 40k game, especially concerning time spent.

@Phototoxin: Did you see in my OP where I'm asking for suggestions for what is basically a dedicated TO for the game? TO sets up the table, and overwatches the entire game beginning to end, answering any disputes or rules questions. I'm looking for suggestions on who might foot the bill. I'd think that the same guys I already mentioned (Mike Clark or Mike Brandt) would fit the bill, and there are a bunch of 40k players that I'd think would do fine, but it has to be someone who isn't likely to be accused of favoritism WHILE ALSO having a proven ability to successfully moderate / TO / judge a game.

@Monster Rain: I'd never think to challenge someone for serious money to a game. I'll toss out a battleforce box as bait if I think someone has something valuable to learn, or as incentive to get a game with someone. This wasn't my idea, it was his.

@Gornall: I'm not sure where the throwdown will be; Che-Veto hasn't weighed in. Either on Vassal, or in conjunction with a GT. (Example, my upcoming game against Grimwulfe during the Whiskey Challenge prior to the Nova Open).

This sounds boss. Give us a bomb-diggity battle rep, plx.

Also, perhaps both of you should warm up with some alcohol? Multiple games? Hell, I don't know. But this sounds good.

Should probably do it campaign style, make it more epic (and to iron out any bad luck streak).

I would advise against vassal. For such high stakes, a game should not be played on an unofficial approximation of the game.

I would also suggest you get a few people to take pictures and record the battle report for you.

As a fellow DE player, I hope you're not going to drink during THIS game.

for 1k dollars

Clearly a best of 3 is in order, No list changes between all 3 matches.

1 game from all 3 types of mission

all three deployment types should also be used. If you use dawn of war on your annihiliation match, then it shouldn't be available for the 2 objective type missions in the future.

Escrow? pay an attourney.

Judges... If not multiple judges (3 would be the sweet spot) then you'd need a judge who didn't know either of you.

With that much coinage on the line, I would think best 2 out of 3 matches would be advisable then there's no hard feelings other than the usual tactical misgivings.

Neutral 3rd party is probably the best that either of you could hope for with as much of the match predetermined and discussed before hand (i.e. rules interpretations that haven't already been official errata'd).

I agree with ph34r that you should not use vassal and go ahead and do the face to face thing.

Best of luck to both of you.

Dashofpepper wrote:@Monster Rain: I'd never think to challenge someone for serious money to a game. I'll toss out a battleforce box as bait if I think someone has something valuable to learn, or as incentive to get a game with someone. This wasn't my idea, it was his.

Whoever's idea it was, the 4 figure cash prize seems to come up a lot lately.

That's all I was saying.

May the best player win.

So who gets the money in the case of a draw?

Noisy_Marine wrote:So who gets the money in the case of a draw?

How could a draw come up?

Objectives*--> Kill Points--> Victory Points

*only first if using objectives

Dashofpepper wrote:Hey folks!

A fellow Dakkaite (Che-Veto) has challenged me to 2,000 point game of 40k with $1,000 stakes per person; with the announced intent to shut me up as a braggart. I've accepted the challenge, with the conditions that the money from both parties be transferred to a neutral and trusted third party (I've suggested Mike Brandt, who runs the Nova Open GT, or Mike Clark - who runs the SVDM GT amongst other things). The other condition is that our game be judged and observed from start to end by a neutral and respected third party.

I'm looking for any critique or better ideas for the stake-holder, and for suggestions on someone who might be universally accepted as someone to whom people would refer to as "Yep, they're the perfect person to rule on /overwatch a game."

Thanks!

The game terms are unagreed upon as of yet. Dash is getting ahead of himself, and quite frankly needs to talk out terms of the game before any monetary value is set.

Thank you Dash, for again making an ass of yourself.

Dashofpepper wrote:@chaos0xomega: A council of judges is a bit much to try arranging for a single 40k game, especially concerning time spent.

Unless you're made of money its not a bit much to try to arrange for a game of 40k where 2000 dollars is at stake.

Also seconding the 2 out of 3 suggestions.

Although I echo other posters sentiments that you shouldn't do this period. Its a game. A game. GAME.

Either way, whoever loses is gonna be sore after this

Instead of playing for money just have each player bring a rubber mallet, and they get to crush the other players figures as they are removed as casulties, since a 1000 bucks is around a average price for a goodsized army, besides smashing each others little army guys may be a goodway to work the machismo outta your systems......

And just to bring this into focus, 40k is a game where dice are involved, so if one player just has a off day and the dice gods hate him...well what next a rematch for 1500, or pink slips, or spouses.....where will the madness end.

But to go on record I really think this is taking a hobby pastime a little to far.

I’d have to echo the suggestions of playing in person (and not in vassel), having more than one judge and a best of 3 matches set up. This will definitely be required due to the extremity of the prize.

That being said, I won’t be surprised if this doesn’t go ahead given the nature of Che-Vito’s posts.

Che-Vito wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:Hey folks!

A fellow Dakkaite (Che-Veto) has challenged me to 2,000 point game of 40k with $1,000 stakes per person; with the announced intent to shut me up as a braggart. I've accepted the challenge, with the conditions that the money from both parties be transferred to a neutral and trusted third party (I've suggested Mike Brandt, who runs the Nova Open GT, or Mike Clark - who runs the SVDM GT amongst other things). The other condition is that our game be judged and observed from start to end by a neutral and respected third party.

I'm looking for any critique or better ideas for the stake-holder, and for suggestions on someone who might be universally accepted as someone to whom people would refer to as "Yep, they're the perfect person to rule on /overwatch a game."

Thanks!

The game terms are unagreed upon as of yet. Dash is getting ahead of himself, and quite frankly needs to talk out terms of the game before any monetary value is set.

Thank you Dash, for again making an ass of yourself.

As I've already said....your terms are acceptable. All of them. There's no negotations needing to take place about them. Since you have rejected my suggestions for neutral third parties (via PM) please put forth viable alternatives.


*EDIT* I would also encourage you to self-moderate yourself. I'm sure that if you continue to have to get moderation from Dakka's team, it wouldn't reflect well on your tenure here.

Can't you guys drop the winnings down abit? Say loser buys winner his favorate model (lmited to GW only kits)?

Meet at a store. Play. Loser runs over to the 40k section, buys winners chosen model.

Talk to store managment. Ask them to judge play'd game.

Post battle report on Dakka with pics.


Your both well know on dakka, braggin rights here is a pretty good reward to.

Soo'Vah'Cha wrote: Instead of playing for money just have each player bring a rubber mallet, and they get to crush the other players figures as they are removed as casulties, since a 1000 bucks is around a average price for a goodsized army, besides smashing each others little army guys may be a goodway to work the machismo outta your systems......

And just to bring this into focus, 40k is a game where dice are involved, so if one player just has a off day and the dice gods hate him...well what next a rematch for 1500, or pink slips, or spouses.....where will the madness end.

But to go on record I really think this is taking a hobby pastime a little to far.

Believing that dice have very much to do with your success in 40k is what differentiates a good player from a mediocre player. ><

candy.man wrote:I’d have to echo the suggestions of playing in person (and not in vassel), having more than one judge and a best of 3 matches set up. This will definitely be required due to the extremity of the prize.

This ^