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.

Does your area allow them?

If so, why? If not, why?

Do you think it's ok?

If so, why? If not, why?

why would you draw intentionally?
most events I go to, the winner wins all his games.

Well, if your in a smaller event you can easilly determine your matchups turn by turn.
By intentionally pulling a draw or minor victory you can place yourself at table 2 for the finals and avoid getting crushed (and dropped out of the money slots) by an uneven Army matchup.
Player 1 takes Best General with 3 massacres. You take Best Overall with 2 massacres and a minor. By staying off Table1 (and a bad matchup) you give yourself an opportunity to still finish on the podium.
This just happened to me. At an RTT I massacred my first opponent, Major Victory on my second, and ended up on the top table with the 1 Army that gives me fits (Trygon Spam + multiple Tervigons pooping out scoring units every turn...for some reason Tervies NEVER roll doubles when I face them). Took all my shooting and an assault by TH/SS Termies to drop 1 Trygon, but then the shooty Hive Guard were breaking transports while the other Trygons were in my face chewing up my Army. All the while he was settling multiple scoring units on every objective.
The resulting Massacre dropped me out of the running for Prize support. Had I pulled a Minor in Round 2 I would have faced a Gray Hunter Army that I routinely beat and placing me in the Best Overall slot.

I would say that person shouldn't be playing warhammer.

Yeah,my area allow them,and i think it's ok.

This sadly happens sometimes.

Essentially, if 2 friends meet in game1, then going for a draw might be a viable tactic to not go too high in swiss pairings.

Or, if people meet on the (or: a) toptable in the final round and have a situation were winning wouldn't improve the standing of the winner, while a draw would allow both to place, people can go for a draw.


Imho, these are strategies lile any other. Still, I detest the idea.

It's also a tactic to prevent a massacre on your part, both preventing yourself from falling in the rankings and preventing your opponent from climbing too high. However, the option doesn't usually present itself until mid-game, when you realise you could win, but it's risky to attempt it, and failing to pull it off would mean a massacre. Or you could camp on your objective, preventing the enemy from taking it. If you do, theres no chance you can win, but theres no chance your opponent can either.

It's dirty pool, but still allowed, IMO.

I see alot when you lose the first game and then massacre someone that also lost on game 2 and have an easier opponent on game 3 with a 1-1 going into it and also massacre that player. that gives you a 2-1 with high points, if the other went 3-0 with 3 minor victories than you could take first place overall by having more points with massacres and have easier opponents to get there.

In my area we use a 5 point scale and strength of schedule for tie breaks so the table 2 'swoop' just doesn't happen. Intentionally pulling a draw before the final game is pretty worthless.

Well, at my local tournements, the first three games are the three game types from the rulebook, but all have KP as tie breakers, and when it comes to Capture and Control most players tend to go for either a total wipe or a ''hold my own objective and kill as much as possible'' kinda thing.

So technically my area allows draws but, for the sake of the tournement, adds in extra objectives to break the ties.

This only happens when you use the massacre system I think. When the victor is determined by Win/Loss like Nova style I dont see why anyone would ever do this

Another simple way, dont allow draws (I dont think Ive made a mission that allows a draw on the primary win condition)

Yeah, but in NOVA, games have like, 3 victory conditions, right?

This is just a Local Tourney thats on once every few month.

I don't think you should have to use NOVA format for a local tourney, but if you want to it scales just fine; every mission is very straightforward, and uses tiered tiebreakers. Check out the packets on the novaopen.com site if you're of a mind.

You can also just use the basic book missions, and turn on the optional Victory Points rules in the back of the main rulebook to break ties.

We usually just play 3 tounement points for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a loss, then if in the end there are people with the same TP, we tally up Kill Points along the way, and use them to tie break

Do you meen two people deciding to draw each other together?
I have never scene people talk about intentional drawing, cause hey,
whats the point going to a tourney if you plan on having a draw!

Ooooooh, if you mean both people agreeing on a draw then no, we dont allow that, its simply no fun.

Independently playing for a draw is a viable tournament strategy.

Any collusion to produce a fixed result (win, loss or draw), however, should be illegal.

Remulus wrote: Do you meen two people deciding to draw each other together?
I have never scene people talk about intentional drawing, cause hey,
whats the point going to a tourney if you plan on having a draw!

Never played magic?

RatWolf wrote:We usually just play 3 tounement points for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a loss, then if in the end there are people with the same TP, we tally up Kill Points along the way, and use them to tie break

There's your problem.

Use CCG scoring. 3 for winning, 1 for losing, 0 for ties.

DarknessEternal wrote:

RatWolf wrote:We usually just play 3 tounement points for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a loss, then if in the end there are people with the same TP, we tally up Kill Points along the way, and use them to tie break

There's your problem.

Use CCG scoring. 3 for winning, 1 for losing, 0 for ties.

I think you meant 1 for ties and 0 for losing.

Im not the TO, im just a worm in a gladiatorial arena

There nothing wrong with playing to draw i.e. just avoid defeat, it really just depends on what your goals are. Not sure why this would be a problem, but I have heard of the American aversion to a draw in sport so is this something similar?

But if as one poster suggested two opponents agreeing to draw then this is match fixing and really should be dealt with a per all other types of cheating.

There was a match in a Football World cup 30 odd years ago where the two leading nations found out that they would both progress to the next round if they didn't lose in their last match (from a pool for 4) after the earlier result from the other game. They also happened to be playing one another and the result was a farce as both teams just sort of passed the ball about never actually trying to score a goal. FIFA changed their rules after that (all final round matches played at the same time) so as to avoid such antics.

imweasel wrote:

DarknessEternal wrote:

RatWolf wrote:We usually just play 3 tounement points for a win, 2 for a draw, 1 for a loss, then if in the end there are people with the same TP, we tally up Kill Points along the way, and use them to tie break

There's your problem.

Use CCG scoring. 3 for winning, 1 for losing, 0 for ties.

I think you meant 1 for ties and 0 for losing.

Nope. 0 for ties, 1 for losing.

There's no incentive to tie, intentionally or otherwise.

notprop wrote:There nothing wrong with playing to draw i.e. just avoid defeat, it really just depends on what your goals are. Not sure why this would be a problem, but I have heard of the American aversion to a draw in sport so is this something similar?

But if as one poster suggested two opponents agreeing to draw then this is match fixing and really should be dealt with a per all other types of cheating.

There was a match in a Football World cup 30 odd years ago where the two leading nations found out that they would both progress to the next round if they didn't lose in their last match (from a pool for 4) after the earlier result from the other game. They also happened to be playing one another and the result was a farce as both teams just sort of passed the ball about never actually trying to score a goal. FIFA changed their rules after that (all final round matches played at the same time) so as to avoid such antics.

The thread is about intetionally drawing to affect your place in the standings so you end up with ostensibly easier competition. It's a risky strategy but can have great results - more often than not the 2nd and 3rd placed players at an event have had a much easier schedule as they're able to club seals most of the way through whilst the winner is often on the top tables for the majority of his games.

Wasn't that match between the old West Germany and Austria?

The thread doesn't say exactly what it is about, so I offered a couple of perspectives.

Re the game I can’t for the life of me remember what match it was and googling Football draws and the like just threw up too much.

It does sound like the sort of thing that those perfidious Gerries might get up to though.

It happens, but IMO the winner of a tournament should be the best player with the best army. If you are this person then why would you need to sneak in the back door?

From another angle, the winners of our local tournies almost all go 3-0-0 on massacres, perhaps 1 major or minor victory.

DarknessEternal wrote:Nope. 0 for ties, 1 for losing.

There's no incentive to tie, intentionally or otherwise.

What ccg gives you a point for losing? Magic sure doesn't...

imweasel, could you clarify what you meant with the OP?

I.e., are you referring to "collusion", where two players agree to an outcome (in this case, a draw) before a game, and many have already expressed that this is considered cheating.

Or, are you referring to playing for a draw as a private strategy of the individual. In this case, of course it should be allowed, and is a viable (if quite risky) strategy.

For myself, I always play for the best outcome I can- if things are going really badly, I'll pull out all the stops to go for a draw (in fantasy this usually just means preserving VPs). I've seen others kind of give up the ghost and allow their opponent to steamroll them and get max points... but even if I'm losing terribly, I consider it an obligation to preserve as many points as I can.

I've seen people refer to allowing others to get the massacre, or being offered the massacre by their opponent, and I think that's terrible sportsmanship to the other players involved in the tournament, having to earn their massacres, if you could in fact have prevented it. I'm not sure if that kind of action is what this thread is about, though... or just the personal strategy of the player, which can be whatever they think will serve them best overall.

He's talking about agreeing to a Draw with your opponent. It's allowed in some games.

In the situation where two opponents have agreed pre-game to draw, do they actually bother to play the game?

This is reprehensible behaviour in my opinion and as I say should be censured in all games.

Although I can understand the goals behind such an agreement, I'm actually a little shocked that this would be allowed to go on in a tournament setting where presumably prizes are available.