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.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Exactly what I said in the recent 'Difference between casual and competative gamers".

A competative gamer creates a list in order to win a game.
A casual gamer creates a list in order to win a game but pretends he didn't.

I agreed with you right up until you said that.

Casual gamers dont do tournaments. (well, big ones). Those who say they are casual, and do, fit into your second category.
Real casuals (that includes me, at the moment) dont go to tourneys because they're about winning, and winning is secondary.
I play to have fun. This means, I dont want to have to keep playing against TFG just because I drew him as my opponent, I want to be able to trundle over to a friend and say "oi, get your army out, I want to table you again" and then have a nice friendly game. That said game may include cheese lists on both sides would be by us agreeing beforehand.

TLR: People who're poor-quality Compettitive players calling themselves Casual draw flak from tourney winners. The fact that you feed the troll makes you just as bad on t'internet, regardless of W/D/L record.

A comment on Luck.

I once played a guy in Bloodbowl. I creamed him, like 4-0 or something, yet our teams were about the same Rating. At the end of the game, he was complaining about his dice luck. I made the comment that, 'Complaining about your dice luck is saying that I'm a lousy coach. I put you in a position to have to make a lot of rolls to score, and you didn't.' Now, to some degree BB is probably more about Luck than 40k (because it relies upon more individual rolls), but the point is the same. A crafty opponent will put you in positions where you need good luck (or even just average luck) to win. And a crafty opponent will do what they can to minimize how much Luck can impact the game.

Like many have said, in a given area the skilled players constantly rise to the top. I go to numerous tournaments around my state and can generally tell who I am viaing for the top spot with. I have won alot of tournaments recently and how did I get there? I don't play the newest codex...I play the oldest dark eldar. I have been playing them almost none stop for 3 years now, over and over, constantly getting better, revising my list and tactics. I spent the first year and a half never getting better then 2nd or third but I paid attention to how I lost (and still managing to have a good time to!) So now that I am winning is it suddenly luck?!

It really cheeses me off that someone could just flip out a comment like that, after I have spent so much time and effort in getting to the skill level I am at today (as I am sure alot of other people are as well). The difference between a skilled player and an unskilled player goes beyond building the list and knowing what units to put where, its what that player does when the sh!t hits the fan. What do you do when your massive assault fails miserably and gets wiped out leaving you at a huge disadvantage? Do throw in the towel or do you keep going and look for another way to win? Those players that I consider skilled are those that can consistantly pull victory from the jaws of defeat.

Afrikan Blonde wrote:Judges should ask "why did you zero this person" but few have the balls to actually do it.

I must be one of the "lucky" ones. Not only have I been asked by a TO why I didn't give someone full sportsmanship points (on a 0-2 scale, I give a "1" for consistent 6.5" measurement or the like), and I've also had a TO allow opponents to review individual scoresheets, and as such players have approached me about the sportsmanship score I gave them. "Well... you see... when you constantly cursed at yourself for how the game was going, threw dice across the room, and walked away from the table on multiple occasions for several minutes at a time... that sort of factors in."

To the original topic, I will agree that perhaps a one-off tournament, with totally random pairings, imbalanced missions, fuzzy soft scores, and total strangers involved may not end up with the most skilled player on top. But I also must disagree that there is no indication of skill at all in tournaments.
I've played at the same FLGS for over three years now, and many of the locals there I faced constantly when there was a GW store in the local mall for a couple years before that. When I started gaming with this group, I didn't win very much. In fact, I spent about 6 months losing every game as I learned 40k (Fantasy was what drew me in at the time). I played in tournaments, got some lucky matchups, and placed in the top half sometimes. Today it's a different story. I've learned my lessons, and I've become a better player, and so have some of the others in our group. We still have a good time, and surprises do happen, but it's fairly consistent that the same group of players are 'in the money', so to say, in each tournament. I suppose it could be contributed to the matchups, or the army composition in general, but it doesn't seem to work out that way. I've matched another Ork army by at least 85% of my list in the tournament and shared 2/3 opponents with that list on the day, taken first and seen that army take last. In the eight 40k/Fantasy events we've held this year at our local store, there are exactly three participants that have been a part of more than one event and placed in at least one but less than four of those events, and almost all of us have brought different armies to some of those events than our "usual", so the rock-paper-scissors argument doesn't really work. Maybe I see atypical results, just as I was told in the "Orks are 3rd tier" threads, but around here, the skilled players come out on top.

Skill is a factor. The goobers who copy netlists and smash the local pubeless bunch are not the same as the guy who fine tunes his/her list and wins through experience. Eventually the goobers run into the kryptonite to their army and ebay the damn thing so they can run out and buy the next big thing, hence all the Nob Bikers and Lootas on Ebay atm. Luck enters into it, but a descent player knows how to minimize risk and take advantage of the shifts in luck when things are going their way. So basically, the skilled guys are the ones who know how to manage risk/luck and think outside the box.

It is all about minimizing reliance on luck.

Mistress of minis wrote:The TO over riding s sports score isnt an arbitrary thing- its watching the pattern of scoring. If someone has gotten 5/1/5 on sports- and happened to cream the guy in the 2nd game- and mentions to the TO "Bob was really pissy after he lost" it pretty obvious Bob is being a spiteful lil dick.

Really? And you are going to prove this how? Is it possible that the player actually was an ass to bob and bob scored it correctly? How about paint? Comp scores?

Like I said, it's arbitrary. It's arbitrary to 'up' a score. There are threads here where the tourney results were changed days later because of a judge's changes to 'soft scores'.

Mistress of minis wrote:Sportsmanship scoring is just a single element out of 3 or 4, if you want something else to whine about as a reason for losing- it makes a convenient excuse. Night as well whine about tourneys that score painting and how they arent fair because not everyone can paint well.

It's just not that. It's people that actually score well in painting that didn't paint a single model in their army. How are you going to be able to tell the diff? And how is that not against the 'spirit of the game'?

You can't. Might as well give someone full points if they wear a suit and a tie.

Mistress of minis wrote:What it boils down to- winning in the different tournament formats takes different skills in combination. Playing well is large factor in Ard Boyz, and in RTTs its a more rounded skillset. It seems pretty simple that if you dont like the tournament format for a given tourney, you're free to take your toy soldiers and go play somewhere else. And then whine about it online

Or even worse, listen to someone try to defend a very flawed tournament system online. Winning in different tournament formats does not necessarily take different skills in combination.

It means arbitrary decisions went your way that day. Despite how much of a good sport you were, how well you paint, in the end, it is up to someone else besides you to get the win.

That's fail. Epic fail.

imweasel wrote:

Mistress of minis wrote:What it boils down to- winning in the different tournament formats takes different skills in combination. Playing well is large factor in Ard Boyz, and in RTTs its a more rounded skillset. It seems pretty simple that if you dont like the tournament format for a given tourney, you're free to take your toy soldiers and go play somewhere else. And then whine about it online

Or even worse, listen to someone try to defend a very flawed tournament system online. Winning in different tournament formats does not necessarily take different skills in combination.

It means arbitrary decisions went your way that day. Despite how much of a good sport you were, how well you paint, in the end, it is up to someone else besides you to get the win.

That's fail. Epic fail.

Epic fail is whining online. If you have better ideas, run your own tournaments. Until then, work with whats in place or dont play if you're that worried about losing. Not once have I said the systems in place are perfect, or even good. But Im not going to expend the effort to constantly belittle something Im not prepared to improve. Ive been screwed over more than once by the system, I learn from it and move on.

You can play the 'what if' game about holes in tournament scoring all day long.

It doesnt change the fact- if you dont have skill, and do not score battle points along with any other factors- you wont win.

Mistresss: One can observe flaws without running their own tournaments. Getting over it doesn't fix it.

Player rated sports scores is too easy to game. Scoring paint with battle results is also stupid. If the tournament is about the game, battle scores are all that should matter. I am not saying players should never rate anything, but have a separate award for best painted, general, and best sportsman, don't lump them together. I have run tourneys like this and it's great for everyone. It rewards all aspects of the hobby without making one aspect subservient to another. So the best general knows he won purely based on gaming results. Best Painted knows his was purely on paint. And the Sportsman knows he wasn't getting bagged to improve standings. Best "Overall" using a composite just encourages messing with the system.

I also like PPs way of handling sportsmanship in it's tournament rules.

jmurph wrote:
I also like PPs way of handling sportsmanship in it's tournament rules.

Can you expand on this, for those of us who don't play PP games?

I quit going to RT Tournies for all the reasons the OP said. The last RTT I went to was Atlanta back in 2000, and it wasnt untill 3 months later that my group and I found how rigged the event was.

The event was to be a full weekend - 3 games a day, as well as a painting contest, admission was $70

The painting contest was a sham as they handed us a model (non 40k at that) and told us that we had until the next years RTT to paint it and bring it back, and it would be scored then.........

The in-game painting contest was also flawed as I lost (with a full painted SM army, not that hard to paint) to a SM army that was still 1/2 in primer.

And each of us was only allowed to play 2 games before we were told that there were too many players at the event and they didnt have room/time to let all of us play to the end. I myself tabled 1 player and had a Major Victory against the second, one of my teammates was undefeated in both of his as well.

I got an abysmal Sportsmanship score from a player that tried to assault from a moving Rino-rush, and then got tabled because his entire army was disembarked within range of my gunline after I informed him that he couldnt assault.....I was given a flat 0 for my efforts. I can only assume that this happend to many other people at the event as well.

My group drove 10 hours and spent close to $300 each for food, gas, hotel room, and entry..........to play 2 games and not even make it to the top 20, because we were told to go home.

We found out later that the local group that was hosting the RTT, not only won the event but had members in 8 of the top 10 slots.......two members being the Rino-rush kid who got tabled and the kid with the 1/2 primer army...........maby I am paranoid, but that sounds rigged to me.


As for Ard Boys.....I have looked at the way they run their events and it looks like it is MUCH better. They dont have many of the scoring rules that RT had....however 2 of my friends won qualifiers in their home town and are going to the local Semi-finals.........yet I beat both players on a regular basis with Sisters and Eldar......so maby the qualifiers arnt a good gauge of skill......we shall see what the Semi-finals looks like.

So out of the blue and two games into the tourney, you were asked to leave and did so peacefully without a refund? I find it hard to believe there isn't more to the story.

They said that there were too many people signed up for the RTT and that there were not enough tables/time to run all the games, so they were only going to keep the people with the best scores at that point in the day.......this was the first day and about 2 hours after the Painting scores.......I will see if the website that gave the results is still up....it was a group called Dogs of War (unrelated to the guy who posts on here) and they had every single one of their members in the final lineup......

It wasnt just my group that was told to leave.....there were close to 30 people told to go. I imagine that this doesnt happen at every RTT but the same ability to abuse the system is still there. I am sure this has happend before at other tournies.

We didnt get a full refund because we had already played a couple of games, but we still had over $200 in travel expenses that we lost out on......at least we got a chance to go to Dave And Busters for a few hours before we went home......lol

Definitely write up a full Battle report, with links and names.

Also, I'm assuming you got at least $50 of your $70 back, right?

JohnHwangDD wrote:Definitely write up a full Battle report, with links and names.

Also, I'm assuming you got at least $50 of your $70 back, right?

I am still looking for links, but it doesnt look like I am going to find the results......maby it was too long ago. What are the chances I am going to find a winner list of a RTT from 8 years ago.......

As for a full battle list....are you refering to the game I tabled a SM player, or to the whole tourney.........both memories are a bit fuzzy, I only remember critical points of the battle.

The same with my refund.... I dont remember how much I got back, I just remember I spent it later at Dave n Busters on food and a giant Mechwarrior pod-simulator they had.

Point is, a single group was able to abuse a game they were hosting to not only make a crap load of money but to also place their own people in winning slots by abusing the sportsmanship and painting scores.

I would love to hear from someone who runs large games like this to see just how much money they made off of us, there is no other reason to sell 80 reservations for a game that couldnt handle more than 40-50 players. Even if they gave back 1/2 money on refunds they would have made $1050.00 off the 30 of us that left.

Well, at least you got back some of your money.

And got to play in the MW pod.

DJ, that happens sometimes. I do hope you and everyone that got screwed like that let GW know about it. Its not much consolation, but they will pull the RTT support from obviously crooked/abysmally ran tournies.

Sadly, some clubs have ran things like this and it winds up being the 'good ole' boys that miraculously win everything. Thats not an issue with the tournament format or rules- its outright favoritism and cheating. And in many cases fraud when theres a large fee like the 70$ you only got a partial refund on. If theyre too stupid to count reservations- and then know they'll need tables for that many games- it sounds alot like a money grab.

Mistress of minis wrote:

imweasel wrote:

Mistress of minis wrote:What it boils down to- winning in the different tournament formats takes different skills in combination. Playing well is large factor in Ard Boyz, and in RTTs its a more rounded skillset. It seems pretty simple that if you dont like the tournament format for a given tourney, you're free to take your toy soldiers and go play somewhere else. And then whine about it online

Or even worse, listen to someone try to defend a very flawed tournament system online. Winning in different tournament formats does not necessarily take different skills in combination.

It means arbitrary decisions went your way that day. Despite how much of a good sport you were, how well you paint, in the end, it is up to someone else besides you to get the win.

That's fail. Epic fail.

Epic fail is whining online. If you have better ideas, run your own tournaments. Until then, work with whats in place or dont play if you're that worried about losing. Not once have I said the systems in place are perfect, or even good. But Im not going to expend the effort to constantly belittle something Im not prepared to improve. Ive been screwed over more than once by the system, I learn from it and move on.

You can play the 'what if' game about holes in tournament scoring all day long.

It doesnt change the fact- if you dont have skill, and do not score battle points along with any other factors- you wont win.

Epic fail is whining online? How about defending a system that is flawed online? I don't play and yet you accuse me of being afraid of losing even though it's a solution that you propose?

You apparently are willing to put forth the effort to defend these systems or at least tell people that's the way it is and stfu.

And what exactly did you actually learn by getting screwed by the system more than once? That it's just fine to get screwed more than once?

There is no need to play the 'what if' game about holes in tournament scoring. They exist. They happen. Yet all you can say is that's the way it is and to bad, live with it.

Amazing.

And for further proof, just look here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/251019.page

Even painting contests are rigged. At a gw event no less.

But I guess that's just to bad and folks should just live with it, eh?

Nobody_Holme wrote:I agreed with you right up until you said that.

Truth be told my comment is more there to raise discussion and draw ire than something I actually believe. Of course not all 'casual players' make lists and then pretend they aren't trying - most of them just play games. The problem lies when you get a 'casual' player going on about how they don't play to win and it's just about fun and blah blah blah - it's all nonsense.

Fact - No one plays to lose.
Fact - Everyone plays to win.
Fact - Anyone who says they don't play to win is either lying or deluded.
Fact - Playing to win does not = power gamer/WAAC, not matter what some of us here might like to claim (JHDD).

Does that mean that everyone makes killer lists designed to destroy the enemy, even in 'friendly' games? No. Of course not. But what was said on the previous page about casual gamers trying just as hard to win as tournament gamers is true. They're trying to win.

This is part of the reason I refuse to classify myself as a 'casual gamer'. There's too much of a 'holier than thou/my gak don't stink' attitude associated with the term 'casual gamer', as though that's somehow better than a tournament gamer (GW seems to think so, given that they consider tournament gamers to be a 'fringe group' that they don't cater to - all the while taking your money at 'Ard Boyz tournaments, fething hypocrites).

So I'm a 'gamer' - singular - I play competitively, casually, and most importantly to tell a story. I try to win my games, I don't bs about doing it 'just for fun'.

Mistress of minis wrote:DJ, that happens sometimes. I do hope you and everyone that got screwed like that let GW know about it. Its not much consolation, but they will pull the RTT support from obviously crooked/abysmally ran tournies.

Sadly, some clubs have ran things like this and it winds up being the 'good ole' boys that miraculously win everything. Thats not an issue with the tournament format or rules- its outright favoritism and cheating. And in many cases fraud when theres a large fee like the 70$ you only got a partial refund on. If theyre too stupid to count reservations- and then know they'll need tables for that many games- it sounds alot like a money grab.

We filed a complaint, but nothing came of it, we just quit going out of town for orginized events. 'Ard Boyz may be the thing to bring me back to the tournament scene, but I still have more fun on the local level.

A main point of my rant (sorry to drag this off topic) is that a well organized group was able to do all of this "by the rules" by scoring each other high and sabotaging other players. And from what I have seen, a lot of places charge $60+ for GT and RTT............Unless I know the group running the event I am now scared to go to any event that costs more than $10..........I can still have $10 worth of fun at a horrible event by trying new tactics on the fly and not caring about the points.......

Well, there's playing to win and there's throwing all other considerations to the wind to win.

I want to win when I play, especially at tournaments.

I will not stoop to being rude, attempting to exploit my opponents, cheating, or otherwise engaging in antisocial behavior in pursuit of winning. I won't call 5.9 inches 6.1 when my opponent wants to charge, and will not call 6.1 inches 5.9 on my turn either. I give my opponent the benefit of the doubt, and expect the same.

Wanting to win != Win at all costs.

imweasel wrote:

Mistress of minis wrote:

imweasel wrote:

Mistress of minis wrote:What it boils down to- winning in the different tournament formats takes different skills in combination. Playing well is large factor in Ard Boyz, and in RTTs its a more rounded skillset. It seems pretty simple that if you dont like the tournament format for a given tourney, you're free to take your toy soldiers and go play somewhere else. And then whine about it online

Or even worse, listen to someone try to defend a very flawed tournament system online. Winning in different tournament formats does not necessarily take different skills in combination.

It means arbitrary decisions went your way that day. Despite how much of a good sport you were, how well you paint, in the end, it is up to someone else besides you to get the win.

That's fail. Epic fail.

Epic fail is whining online. If you have better ideas, run your own tournaments. Until then, work with whats in place or dont play if you're that worried about losing. Not once have I said the systems in place are perfect, or even good. But Im not going to expend the effort to constantly belittle something Im not prepared to improve. Ive been screwed over more than once by the system, I learn from it and move on.

You can play the 'what if' game about holes in tournament scoring all day long.

It doesnt change the fact- if you dont have skill, and do not score battle points along with any other factors- you wont win.

Epic fail is whining online? How about defending a system that is flawed online? I don't play and yet you accuse me of being afraid of losing even though it's a solution that you propose?

You apparently are willing to put forth the effort to defend these systems or at least tell people that's the way it is and stfu.

And what exactly did you actually learn by getting screwed by the system more than once? That it's just fine to get screwed more than once?

There is no need to play the 'what if' game about holes in tournament scoring. They exist. They happen. Yet all you can say is that's the way it is and to bad, live with it.

Amazing.

And for further proof, just look here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/251019.page

Even painting contests are rigged. At a gw event no less.

But I guess that's just to bad and folks should just live with it, eh?

I like how you totally dodge the point about putting forth the effort or ideas on how to improve it, and instead nitpick anything I say. Great tactic, Im sure that play style has won many tournaments for you.

I acknowldge the system has flaws.

Whining about it is wasted energy- as it obviously wont change the system- as people have been whining about it since 3rd ed. GW doesnt care (shocker)

I ran my own 40k tournaments, at my home. I broke out the grill, the boys brought the beer and minis, good times had by all. Sure, I can only offer up 6 tables. But I also keep the whiners off the guest list

If you want to keep posting just to be contrary and have the satisfaction of feeling like you're right- go on ahead and stroke your e-peen. Doesnt change the fact you arent doing anything to change the things about tournament organization that you dislike so much. Which brings up my next point- if you dont like tournament rules- dont play in them. If you just play in them to find things to complain about- try runnin your own tournament and get some perspective.

That's a total cop-out attitude.

At least by pointing out problems, by vocalizing them in some form, the start for changes takes shape. You have a chance to polarize a community one way or the other.

If you are completely complacent, even when you yourself admit it is flawed, nothing will ever change.

Hey listen folks , I'm relatively 'new' to the game and I got a heaping mouthful of "tournament" one time and that was enough. Go to my profile and find my intro page--its enlightening (and easy to find). It tells a tale of how I was dicked not just by soft scores (we were told paint wouldn't matter), new random rules (to hold an objective over half over your unit had to be w/ in 4"), and more objectives than you can shake a burning, chaos-drenched, demonic stick at (minimum was 5- max I think 9-10).

When we got home we were... un-happy. :(

Plus, our store manager who had talked and arranged for us to head over to this venue to start trying to build some back/forth tourneying was PISSED. soooo, we decided to set up our own tournament of 40k not TourneyK as we've begun to call it.

2000pt
Standard Missions, Standard Deployment
Balanced Terrain, but different
2.5hrs to play
Victory=10, Tie=5, Loss=1
To break for ties count victory points as determined by annihilation standard--thus hard to get a tie, but it does happen
Swiss format so Best to best to best.

Everyone was happy with it, because no time was eaten up due to wonky rules for deployment and there was no super troop spamming for those that like to dig in like ticks and hoard objectives whilst clockwatching---

pretty much everyone had time to complete full games , account for scores, and then take breaks.

Now, this is basically what we like and maybe it's an idea if you guys out there wanna do something close to it.
Conversely, I think 'ard boys really is viable too. No crazy rule changes and the scenario boards are released before hand so you know what you CAN get stuck with--and it ain't that different from regular missions either.

As far as sportsmanship goes along with painting.... not my bag. I've seen nothing but corruption.

Fearspect wrote:That's a total cop-out attitude.

At least by pointing out problems, by vocalizing them in some form, the start for changes takes shape. You have a chance to polarize a community one way or the other.

If you are completely complacent, even when you yourself admit it is flawed, nothing will ever change.

Pointing problems out- and then doing nothing else? Come on, seriously? If that worked the RTT tourney format weould have been perfected several years ago. This is an ongoing problem.

Im not completely complacent- as mentioned, Ive ran my own tourneys. I played in tourneys at different shops. The shops that dont favor the locals I returned to for more tourneys.

Ergo- rewarding that which works better and avoiding that which does not.

Vocalizing the problems is only half of what should be the first step- the second half is vocalizing them to the ones that ran the tournament. Not just ranting randomly online looking for people to say 'dood you are so rite'.

Talk to your TO's, tell them what worked, and what didnt. Most TO's get alot of greif and little praise. But if you dont let them know whats not working- they cant even attempt to fix it.

The Dragon wrote:soooo, we decided to set up our own tournament of 40k not TourneyK as we've begun to call it.

Thats what Im talking about! You guys saw a problem, and rather than just lettin the nerdrage loose, you did something about it. Proactive problem solving.

I am not sure inviting some friends over for a barbeque and calling it a tournament is really going to have an effect on support for, or standards maintenance, of the current 40k tournament scene.

This is a step in the right direction. Anyway, I have to say that I just do not understand how someone can spend so much energy telling people to just ignore something. It seems contrary to your message.

Also, no one but you thinks that they 'win' an argument by just accusing the other side of 'nerdrage' and 'ranting'.

Fearspect wrote:I am not sure inviting some friends over for a barbeque and calling it a tournament is really going to have an effect on support for, or standards maintenance, of the current 40k tournament scene.

It was a full on tournament, which had the benefit of good food and beer

Fearspect wrote:This is a step in the right direction. Anyway, I have to say that I just do not understand how someone can spend so much energy telling people to just ignore something. It seems contrary to your message.

What you dont understand isnt really a concern for me- the fact you dont understand it pretty much invalidates the rest of your statements. If you arent surewhat someone means- its generally considered polite to ask.

It is tragically ironic that you lecture people on politeness.

What's more ironic Fearspect is that, having gone over all your posts, you've yet to actually respond to Mistress' points with anything more than bile and anger.

The thing is, that is most 40k tourney venues there are various ways to earn points and win a "best" catagory. They are usually for painting, sportsmanship, battle points (best general), comp, and overall champ.

The idea is that since the hobby encompasses so much more than just winning games, that all aspects of the hobby should be judged.

If a person doesn't care about the rest of the hobby and just wants to win games, then going all out for "best general" should be fine for that person....he obviously doesn't feel that painting and sportsmanship are as important - more power to him. He can still win a prize and prove that he is the most skilled player out there. Soft scores will not effect his goal. However, wininng every game doesn't mean that he will be grand champ.

Is this biased? Sure it is. Most tourneys use soft scores to make the tourney enjoyable for more people. If the only thing that mattered at tourneys was wins/loses, what would be the incentive for non-cutthroat hobbyists or newer players to go to the event? Answer: none.

The pupose of soft scores to to give players of every skill level an opportunity to enjoy the event. Soft scores alone will not win a tourney, so skill is still necessary to win overall.

Sure, there is luck involved in tourneys: who you draw early on, list matchups, soft scores, etc. However, luck is involved in ANY competition. The best MTG player in the world will lose if he gets a really bad draw. The best general in wartime can lose a battle, though no fault of his own, because of shifting weather or by being cut off from supplies/reinforcements. Just because you have to rely on luck sometimes, doesn't detract from the skill needed to succeed.

When all is said and done, this is a game of dice and chance, whether or not you are playing in a tourney. So, if you want to avoid luck and chance and prove that you have the greatest skill, and therefore should win, I only have one bit of advice.....maybe you should play chess instead.