Ghengis Con 40k Tournament

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.

**thehod**

Lets get back on topic though.

The TO apologized and the player who got wronged basically said he was over the tournament and all they wanted to do was raise awareness of what happened.

p.s. in before the lock.

**Lorek**

Thread LOCKED!!!

Ha, fooled you. As you were.

**JD21290**

i know thats all they want to do, but in doing so im sure it will start off another pointless witch hunt.
someone will say a comment for fun, it will snowball (as it allways does)

**Frazzled**

I'm sorry, is there anyone with the TO's side here? mayhaps I missed that post, but what I am reading is one sided in the extreme.

If it occurred as stated, why didn't the player just call it a day and split, with his comrades diong likewise in solidarity? This seems...strange.

**JD21290**

tell me about it frazz.
this is what i have been trying to say all along, but the second i say that kenny may have done something to deserve it, the idea is dismissed.

im sure something must have been done to cause such drastic actions to be taken.

**Bunker**

Frazzled wrote: This seems...strange.

We have a winner!

Something doesn't add up.

**JD21290**

you mean something along the lines of the starting of it all?

**Bunker**

JD21290 wrote:you mean something along the lines of the starting of it all?

I'm not sure what I mean, to be honest.

What doesn't make sense to me is that there seems like a rather large jump from the "I don't like this particular army because I believe it is overpowered" line of thinking to "I'm going to do everything I can to make this player's tournament as difficult as possible". Something must have happened to go from one to the other. It might have even been the fact that the WC have a reputation amongst the community, who knows. But it didn't go from one to the other without there being a step in the middle.

I also, as stated above by other posters, don't understand why the player in question didn't just request his entry back and bow out of the tournament. If it is bad enough to post about and try to muster a public lynching of the TO, was it not bad enough to just bow out in the first place? I understand the mentality of "Well eff you, if you're going to try and stack the deck against me I'm going to win your tournament just to throw it back in your face" because that is exactly what I would have done, but there has to be a certain point where you call it a day in the interest of not making the tournament all about you.

All I'm saying is that there is something missing to this story, on both sides. Something had to have set the TO off, and it wasn't just army selection/player reputation.

**JD21290**

bunker, thats pretty much what i said

sorry for the way i put that post.

but yes, it does not make sense how it went from 1 to the other that quickly.
there must have been something said or done at the time (or possibly even previous to this)

**dietrich**

It may have simply been the army list, since there were no other Nob Biker lists (allegedly). I'd like to know if there were other 'power builds' or not.

I still think the TO showed really poor form. If it's a legal army list, that's the only thing you can ask a player to bring. But, if something did set the TO off, then that's a different story.

This is the endless debate on soft scores and how much affect they should have on the final score.

**Frazzled**

JD21290 wrote:you mean something along the lines of the starting of it all?

Well, in the beginning there was darkness and void...

**JD21290**

Well, in the beginning there was darkness and void...

now your showing your age mate

**Frazzled**

dietrich wrote:It may have simply been the army list, since there were no other Nob Biker lists (allegedly). I'd like to know if there were other 'power builds' or not.

I still think the TO showed really poor form. If it's a legal army list, that's the only thing you can ask a player to bring. But, if something did set the TO off, then that's a different story.

This is the endless debate on soft scores and how much affect they should have on the final score.

This is my point. I've been a tourney organizer in the past and never had this kind of hostility come up (at all). Whats the other side here? Are we really saying some guy showed up with army with a bunch of orks on bikes and the TO just started flinging poo at him? Er, ok.

**JD21290**

very nice way of putting it frazz

but yes, something must have been done to trigger the TO's rash decision.

**Warmaster**

I'm trying to figure out here why all of you are thinking I'm attacking the TO?

Also I would like to point out the fact that I started this thread and I am not a member of WC. I started it because I thought the other post was a bit unfair in how it presented what went down.

There are two "big" (and I mean that relatively) tournaments in colorado each year Tacticon and Genghis con. Each gets about 50-60 players. Rob, the TO organizes both tournaments every year and has done so for about the last 5-6 years. He arranges the prize support, finds terrain, works with a few other people to come up with missions, takes feedback, etc. Both tournaments are billed as "comp friendly" which is why there is composition points on the score cards.

But I know for a fact that last year when someone won with a tri-lith list (under fourth) he caught merry hell for it. And people were still complaining about it at Genghis this year. It's a very frustrating catch 22, people say they want comp and they want theme, but no one will mark someone down for it at a game. And then when one of those lists wins people complain. So what are you as the TO supposed to do?

**Frazzled**

Respectifully I don't see how your post is different than the Nob player. Its not a different perspective.

Your initial post looks like a post restating an attack on the TO. Mayhaps its written poorly.

**Neconilis**

Frazzled wrote:Respectifully I don't see how your post is different than the Nob player. Its not a different perspective.

Your initial post looks like a post restating an attack on the TO. Mayhaps its written poorly.

For what it's worth I didn't read it that way at all Warmaster. I thought you put the facts as you knew them out there and it had a far less biased tone.

**Bunker**

Warmaster wrote:I'm trying to figure out here why all of you are thinking I'm attacking the TO?

I don't recall saying that.

someone won with a tri-lith list

lol. Nothing to say here, just lol.

but no one will mark someone down for it at a game.

Then that's their own fault.

And then when one of those lists wins people complain.

Sucks to be them then. I've said it before and I'll say it again:

If you don't like someone's list because you consider it cheesy (but seriously, at what is considered a "major" tournament, you shouldn't be complaining about cheese), mark them down in comp for it. If you aren't even willing to do that, then don't go to tournament and go back to Beer and Pretzels-hammer

**Frazzled**

I reaffirm my post on this. I'm not seeing anyone reflect the TO's side or a less biased viewpoint. Unelss the TO suddenly fell off his meds there's something missing.

**Warmaster**

Neconilis wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Respectifully I don't see how your post is different than the Nob player. Its not a different perspective.

Your initial post looks like a post restating an attack on the TO. Mayhaps its written poorly.

For what it's worth I didn't read it that way at all Warmaster. I thought you put the facts as you knew them out there and it had a far less biased tone.

Hmm. Yeah I was trying to be as impartial about it as possible. The fact of the matter is that the TO is one of my best friends so I was attempting to be as impartial as possible. It's tough to do when you know both of the people involved with the issue.

I would sum the whole thing up this way. The TO over-reacted and apologized for it but it still was not a happy day for the nob player. What keeps running through my head is the flak he would have caught if the nob biker player had won. It goes back to the root of the problem you are trying to run a composition event what good is composition if someone who takes the brutal list wins overall. That goes back to the players not wanting to vote someone "down" for whateve reason. Because you know them, or you just don't want to be that person, etc.

And to be honest I really do not think that a nob biker list is themed or fluffy at all. Don't get me wrong it was a VERY nicely painted army, everything was converted and it looked good on the table. But it in no way shape or form fits into the fluff for orks. That's my personal viewpoint not anyone elses.

**Frazzled**

Why did the TO over-react? What was the issue?

**Le Grognard**

Been following this one from the last thread. You say the TO over-reacted and then apologized. Fine. But, somewhere it said that the Player and the TO were friends to begin with so my whole take goes something like this:

Player: Dude, I'm gonna bring my Nob Biker list to your tourney and totally wreck it.

TO: Dude, if you do I'm totally going to wreck your tournament experience.

Player: Dude, no way, my list ain't against the rules.

TO: Dude, totally way, It's my tourney, and I don't want it wrecked.

Player: Dude, step off, I am so going to wreck the tournament with my list.

And so on and so on and it all came to a head on tournament day.

(this is all tounge and cheek, don't take it personally, boyos!)

**Frazzled**

Dude your synopsis may be right on the money.

**dietrich**

Warmaster wrote:What keeps running through my head is the flak he would have caught if the nob biker player had won. It goes back to the root of the problem you are trying to run a composition event what good is composition if someone who takes the brutal list wins overall. That goes back to the players not wanting to vote someone "down" for whateve reason. Because you know them, or you just don't want to be that person, etc.

The root of the problem is soft scores. There's basically three formats, the 'checklist' variety that Adepticon uses; the 'grade on a 1 to 10 scale' that GW has traditionally used, and the 'rank your opponents at the end' variety. My order of preference is: rank, checklist, grade. I think grading is the worst, because some people will give 10's as default, some give 5's, some give 8's, etc.

And, the players can't have it both ways, they either don't care that people show up with brutal lists, or they need to give realistic soft scores.

I would suggest that the tourney run a checklist format. Comp could be as simple as:

(3 pts) This list is a balanced force.
(0 pts) This list isn't balanced, but it's also not designed for maximum carnage.
(-3 pts) This list is a power gamers wetdream.

The other option is to have everyone turn in their army lists and the TO give a comp score.

**Centurian99**

dietrich wrote:
The root of the problem is soft scores. There's basically three formats, the 'checklist' variety that Adepticon uses; the 'grade on a 1 to 10 scale' that GW has traditionally used, and the 'rank your opponents at the end' variety. My order of preference is: rank, checklist, grade. I think grading is the worst, because some people will give 10's as default, some give 5's, some give 8's, etc.

To be precise, AdeptiCon (the 40K events, at least - can't speak to Fantasy) does not judge or score composition. It scores theme, which is an entirely different ball of wax.

Comp scoring is so utterly subjective, arbitrary, and impossible to create any kind of standard that applies across multiple codexes.

People like to rag on the INAT for "changing the game" as if people everywhere agreed that the rules are meant to be applied in a certain fashion.

Comp is an even more heavy-handed attempt to change the game, with the additional benefit of giving its creators the ability to feel self-righteous.

Here's the thing. You're running a tournament, and don't want players to have to worry about Nob Bikers? Easy enough...announce ahead of time that the Nob Bikers list is disallowed. Of course, then the question becomes, why aren't you also banning 45 lootas, and 24 bloodcrushers, Shrike and 30 TH/SS Terminators, or any other fricking combo that players whine about.

If you're running a tournament and want to disallow anything, go right ahead. But at least try to be fair bout what you're doing.

IMNSHO, Comp scoring is silly anyways, and a sure sign of both laziness and bias on the part of the tournament organizer.

By the way, what's with all this hate of the WC? I've met some of them multiple times over the past few years, and while some come across agressively in person (well, I've been told I do as well), I can honestly say that the games I've played against members of the WC have been some of the most fun and challenging games I've played, win or lose. They play hard, push the boundaries, but they're utterly fair in doing so. Can't complain about that, especially since mostly I'm facing them on the top tables at GT's or AdeptiCon.

**Warmaster**

I unfortunately don't have a copy of the sheet so I can't spit it out verbatum. But there are two questions.

One question was about theme, something like

Was the army built to a theme or is it a classic example of a force that would be used for an army of it's type.

The other question was about comp

Did the player build the army without using abusive combo's, rules bending, sort a thing

It would be nice to have the text to back up what exactly they said. Hopefully you can get the general gist of it.

So the question would be would you mark one or both of those for a nob biker list?

**dietrich**

Centurian99 wrote:To be precise, AdeptiCon (the 40K events, at least - can't speak to Fantasy) does not judge or score composition. It scores theme, which is an entirely different ball of wax.

Didn't say Adepticon does score comp, but that they use the 'checklist' format for their soft scores (Theme, Appearance, and Sportmanship, iirc).

**Warmaster**

@Centurian99

None of those other combo's showed up to the tournament. But there is a fine line most definitely. Because does taking 6 dreds count, what about 6 ironclads, or if not that, what about 6 ironclads all in pods. Cheese is almost always in the eye of the beholder.

And don't get me started on theme

. I don't see how you can't say that theme is subjective as well.

I'm also not sure about the WC hating. There are several members in Colorado and I always have good games when playing against them. I have met a few others that I didn't like as much, but you can't knock a whole group for 1 or two people.

I don't see how you can call a tournament organizer as being lazy or biased when the players themselves are the ones that want the comp scoring.

**Janthkin**

Centurian99 wrote:
dietrich wrote:
The root of the problem is soft scores. There's basically three formats, the 'checklist' variety that Adepticon uses; the 'grade on a 1 to 10 scale' that GW has traditionally used, and the 'rank your opponents at the end' variety. My order of preference is: rank, checklist, grade. I think grading is the worst, because some people will give 10's as default, some give 5's, some give 8's, etc.

To be precise, AdeptiCon (the 40K events, at least - can't speak to Fantasy) does not judge or score composition. It scores theme, which is an entirely different ball of wax.

Actually, comp is scored during the team tournament, by your opponents, on a very simple pass-fail scale:

Team Tournament Rules wrote:Army Composition

Score Description
3 Our opponents' armies were a representation of a competitive tournament force.
0 Our opponents' armies were abusive and totally over the top. We needed a full bottle of Listerine after the game to rinse the bad taste out of our mouths…

Comp scoring is so utterly subjective, arbitrary, and impossible to create any kind of standard that applies across multiple codexes.

People like to rag on the INAT for "changing the game" as if people everywhere agreed that the rules are meant to be applied in a certain fashion.

Comp is an even more heavy-handed attempt to change the game, with the additional benefit of giving its creators the ability to feel self-righteous.

Here's the thing. You're running a tournament, and don't want players to have to worry about Nob Bikers? Easy enough...announce ahead of time that the Nob Bikers list is disallowed. Of course, then the question becomes, why aren't you also banning 45 lootas, and 24 bloodcrushers, Shrike and 30 TH/SS Terminators, or any other fricking combo that players whine about.

If you're running a tournament and want to disallow anything, go right ahead. But at least try to be fair bout what you're doing.

IMNSHO, Comp scoring is silly anyways, and a sure sign of both laziness and bias on the part of the tournament organizer.

By the way, what's with all this hate of the WC? I've met some of them multiple times over the past few years, and while some come across agressively in person (well, I've been told I do as well), I can honestly say that the games I've played against members of the WC have been some of the most fun and challenging games I've played, win or lose. They play hard, push the boundaries, but they're utterly fair in doing so. Can't complain about that, especially since mostly I'm facing them on the top tables at GT's or AdeptiCon.

Theme scoring is fairly subjective, too. For the TT, it has been reduced to a checklist, which helps with *consistency* of application of a subjective standard. I find it granular enough not to be annoying.

Team Tournament Rules wrote:
Individual Army Contributions (7 possible points per Team Member)
Army is visually tied to the overall theme of the Team. 1 point
Army details (basing, banners, unit markings, etc.) reinforce the overall theme of the Team. 2 points
Army unit selections have been made with overall theme of Team in mind. 1 point
Army would logically ally with all other Team Member's forces in the 40K universe, OR works within the scope of the theme being presented. 3 points

Overall Clarity/Judge's Discretion (check all that apply)
Team Theme is immediately understandable when viewing all four individual forces together. 5 points
Judge's discretionary points. This is a representation of one of the top 5% of Themes present at the tournament. 1-2 points

Depth of Theme (choose one)
No depth. Team has four different armies with no discernable Theme. 0 points
Minor depth. Allied armies make sense in the 40K universe, but no additional effort has been made to link the forces beyond the standard alliances. 1-2 points
Major depth. Army theme is fluid and easily recognized/explained. Examples might include allied forces at the Battle for Armageddon, Ultramarines Scout Company, etc. 3-4 points
Extreme depth. Army is specifically and undeniably thematic. All four armies have been modeled in accordance with the intended theme. Examples might include a pre-Heresy force in dropods that have dropped behind Loyalist line to cut off their retreat. 5 points

Display Base (choose one)
No display base presented. 0 points
The Army is presented on individual or unifying display bases that reinforce the overall theme of the Team. 3 points
The Army is presented on a highly artistic and involved unifying display base that reinforces the overall theme of the Team. 5 points

**Centurian99**

Warmaster wrote:@Centurian99

None of those other combo's showed up to the tournament. But there is a fine line most definitely. Because does taking 6 dreds count, what about 6 ironclads, or if not that, what about 6 ironclads all in pods. Cheese is almost always in the eye of the beholder.

Yep. Or heck, what about 180 Boyz, in a 1250 point game?

Warmaster wrote:
And don't get me started on theme . I don't see how you can't say that theme is subjective as well.

Oh, theme is ridiculously subjective as well. So are any soft scores. But it's at least openly so. Comp has the veneer of objectivity that makes people think its fair. Give me any comp scoring guideline, and I will create an army list that follows its rules and gains maximum points, while making opponents whine and omplain.

Warmaster wrote:
I don't see how you can call a tournament organizer as being lazy or biased when the players themselves are the ones that want the comp scoring.

Because what you're trying to do with Comp scoring is prevent "abusive" combos. Any comp guidelines you come up with to try and deal with those units/combos are going to screw some other army, while allowing other abusive combinations. If you really want to prevent that, you have to come up with a list of disallowed or penalized combinations specific to each codex...you simply can't make a blanket "one-size-fits-all" guideline that's fair or can't be broken.

And if you do that...now who's changing the and making "AdeptiCon 40K" or "Ghengis Con 40K" since you're essentially re-writing each codex?

Screw comp.