Switch Theme:

Any idea where I can find GT top 5 (or even 10) placement Army Lists?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard




New York

"Tournaments". You don't own the word. It's got an established definition, and you don't have the authority to change it. You're the latecomer to the hobby. You can try to change it, but that doesn't mean those of us in it already will go along.


This might be news to you, but the word "tournament" had an established definition before GW started mis-using it. You know, that whole being in the dictionary thing. I'm not changing the word, I'm simply reminding people what it actually means. And how is playing since 2nd edition a latecomer to a hobby? Perhaps you should climb off that high horse before you fall off and hurt yourself.

If you look at the results of an actual event, the score range at the top is normally even tighter. For example, in the 2010 Adepticon Championship blue side, the top eight of us all had perfect Sports scores. On the Yellow side it’s more mixed, but the only guy who’s not within a 3pt spread is actually the overall winner, who more than made up for it in Battle points, proving my point.


OK, let's put this to the test. I created a spreadsheet to analyze the distributions of the data of the top 10 finishers for both the yellow and blue competitions. You can view the spreadsheet here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ak_2KkJADjGNdDdhWktWeUpxX1BXdUtCVThGOEFnT0E&hl=en

I added up all of the soft scores and compared them to the hard scores (battle points) and calculated the ranges, means, and standard deviations (σ) for each sample (not the most sophisticated method, but I'm not busting out mathlab for this). The standard deviations were then weighted according to ratio of possible soft score points (95) versus possible hard score points (135) in order to account for the difference (which is about 29%). Notice that your initial impression of the data that the soft scores had less overall impact on the blue set when compared to the yellow was correct. Also note how significant the soft scoring distribution was for both sets, and how it accounted for almost the same amount of deviance from the mean as battle points did in the yellow set. This completely undermines the argument that it's battle points, not soft scores, that make the difference in tight tournament finishes.

As for tight results, anyone who’s actually placed high in one these things knows that it is the nature of the beast that a little luck in one place or another is what really separates the top ten. Virtually any of the top five or ten guys usually could have been the one to win it, with one slightly different table, or a slightly easier opponent in one round, or slightly luckier dice.


Poor reasoning. You can use this same argument to justify deciding the winner of the tournament by a die roll--hey, it's just the nature of the beast. The more luck, subjectivity, and overall bs involved in determining the winner the less the competition was based on skill and therefore less competitive the event was. This is the problem with soft scoring and "competitive" events.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You keep saying this but I have yet to see a huge influx of people who have come out and say that they don't attend tournemtents because of soft scores. In fact according to this poll the highest percentage wants soft scores mixed in with the rest. So what evidence do you have that strong players are staying away other than "I wouldn't and neither would many other people I know"?


And according to this poll the most popular scoring format (by far) is battle points only: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/282431.page

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/04/02 03:39:20


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





whidbey

Danny you are wrong

People would rather play in an event with pretty figures and friendly people, then play bare metal butt nuggets.

that is a fact. people go to events too play 3-5 fun games vs different people vs pretty armies. Going to an event to win it all is secondary to just having fun.
the tournaments with soft score combine all the things desired in a good event. Like figure skating techincal difficulty is added to the beauty.

Just because you are either a painting turd or a jerk and lack the skills needed to win a big event. don't derail what the events are about.

having painting scores makes people put that extra effort for pretty which makes a better event
having sportsmanship keeps some jerkiness down.

do these cause some problems sure,
I can by a pro painted army because i am wealthy
I can chimpmunk you because I am pissed at losing.

The good outweighs the bad. so you don't win first at an toy solider event. big deal. There are very few 40k events that the prize support surpasses the effort required to put into it.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
the poll linked is also flawed because I voted battle points only but I prefer a sports/paint/battle event. I play for battle points because my paint is what it is and sportsmanship ussually has such a small variation.

thus I am a battle point tourney player.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/04/02 06:12:55


 
   
Made in us
Major






far away from Battle Creek, Michigan

Danny--excellent work on the spreadsheet. I doubt the hobbyist have the stomach to actually examine the work you've done though.

PROSECUTOR: By now, there have been 34 casualties.

Elena Ceausescu says: Look, and that they are calling genocide.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I don't know what all those numbers mean on the spreadsheet, but it looks to me like the person who scored the most hard points won the tournament. Ahh I love it when a plan comes together.
   
Made in au
Death-Dealing Ultramarine Devastator






If you think a tourny can be run better, try to convince the TO, if you can't manage that, organize your own tourny. If you can't do that, accept that sometimes the people in charge aren't doing the best job, and there's nothing you can do about it. It could ALWAYS be worse, at least there IS tournaments, and at least they use battlepoints. Arguing about it on an internet forum really isn't going to do much, it might even make matters worse. In some areas the infighting between groups makes it impossible to organize ANY kind of tournament. Don't let your distaste of soft scores stop you from enjoying the part of the hobby you DO like!

 
   
Made in us
Grumpy Longbeard




New York

DarthDiggler wrote:I don't know what all those numbers mean on the spreadsheet, but it looks to me like the person who scored the most hard points won the tournament. Ahh I love it when a plan comes together.


Perhaps if you read the post that went along with it you might understand what the spreadsheet is about?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I read the post. I saw the spreadsheet. Obamaspeak it all you want In the end, the person with the most hard points won both tournaments.
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

Temporarily closing while the thread is reviewed. Here's to hoping I get to suspend five people in one day (tee hee!)

Edit:


Another thread dragged into the useless softscores vs. generalship only debate.
1. I so regret supporting a tournament only subdirectory now.
2. I'm going to take this up with the other Moderators as to whether constant dragging of threads of into the softscore vs. generalship nonsense could equate to trolling.

This thread is closed as the initial request had nothing to do with the STUPID argument of softscores vs. generalship, but some decent posters replied before it was dragged down like a bear dragged down by the incessant needling of lice ridden rats. Thank you to those posters.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/04/02 13:16:22


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: