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.

Polonius wrote:this hobby is filled with sad little man children that feel the need to knock down any attempt to build the hobby bigger than rolling the same three noobs in Bubba's Gamin' Shack.

Hahahahaha! Ah man, that is too funny!

@Petre

I am just joking around man. I don't actually talk like a gansta gangsta. I am just teasing those who put down systems they don't like while offering nothing in return to improve the system.

I just don't see a point in gong out of your way to be negative (not saying this applies to you). It just seems utterly pointless to me.

So let us playas play, and if you want in the game, you gotta roll with the big dogs, son!

Dashofpepper wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote: Amusingly, most of the responses were to Dash, but that's just because he's a magnet for controversy

Hey, it's all our fault. We don't understand that he's hilarious, and instead we've all agree to be mean to him on the internet.

You know, there are exactly three people on Dakka (used to be four) - that when I see their name in a thread, I could assume that they were posting negative stuff, and usually about me. You're one of them. I'll buy you a little hat that says "TROLL." You've earned it well over the last few months.

Hey, I'm just agreeing with you. I mean, you've explained yourself, and I've come to realize that you're just being funny, that I'm lame, and that when drama and controversy surround a person, it's simply far more likely to be a string of coincidences than anything that person could possibly be doing.

I mean, that's your point, right? I'm not missing any of it, am I?

And this is how serious I take the rankings: A Day in the Life of a 40k Champion

Dashofpepper wrote:And this is how serious I take the rankings: A Day in the Life of a 40k Champion

that is the funniest thing I've ever read!

@Sabote

Understandable man, but you can't say a system is broken because it rewards the people who put the most effort into the game which causes them to rank well.

That is a groundless argument.

I'm not attacking you, just saying that it is pointless to criticize people for flying around to go to tournaments. If someone wants to do that, and is willing to commit the resources, and play well, then it should be no surprise that they rank better. That is simple logic.

If someone only plays at their local, or unfortunately, is unwilling or unable to travel to events, then why should they rank as well? That is illogical.

If we are running a marathon and one guy decides to only do a half, should his time be compared to the others who ran the distance? Of course not. Obviously that is a metaphor, but you get the point. Play better in more, and bigger tournaments, then yes, that counts for more than playing well in less, smaller tournaments.

Seems simple enough.

Hulksmash wrote:@Spacecurves

How many people attended the 40k tournament for Da Boyz last year? I'm curious as you seem to have a little bit of aggression toward some events. A 30 person 5 game event does have merit if the players there are of a higher caliber. The only way to get accurate results is for everyone to send in all 5 game events and see what happens. As it stands basically as soon as you attend 3+ 5 game events your going to be in the top twenty if your not a bad player. But from what I've seen most of the 5 game events so far have sent in their results. They haven't added in the West Coast conquest events yet or BoLScon (both of which were submitted) so we'll see another shift in the rankings pretty soon.

To answer your question we have 70 paid players and 66 people showed. Here is info:http://daboyzgt.wordpress.com/category/da-boyz-gt/2009/


This year we have 62 paid 40k players to date with over two months to go. We going to cap it at 80.

@Dash

Hahahaha, that article is awesome!

Reecius wrote:@Dash

Hahahaha, that article is awesome!

Well, you're ranked at the top now, so you may also share some of your wise tips and daily routines with the masses to help further them on the path to awesomeness.

Dash, you need to tell us what you dream of as a 40k Former Champion.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote: Amusingly, most of the responses were to Dash, but that's just because he's a magnet for controversy

Hey, it's all our fault. We don't understand that he's hilarious, and instead we've all agree to be mean to him on the internet.

You know, there are exactly three people on Dakka (used to be four) - that when I see their name in a thread, I could assume that they were posting negative stuff, and usually about me. You're one of them. I'll buy you a little hat that says "TROLL." You've earned it well over the last few months.

Overly-sensitive, much?

That wasn't a dig at you. It was a dig at your haters.

CptZach wrote:Also, offtopic, INAT does not bring this hobby together, it divides it.

That is until you objectively apply math and not a subjective personal opinion.

For example - 50 states with an estimated average of 20 gaming groups (give or take depending on state size and population density). Majority of gaming groups have their "own style" of 40K and are therefore remain divided even amongst the most trivial issue. So you have 1,000 different group styles and even more sub styles within each group. However, if even at worst case two groups adopt the INAT as a standard or any other FAQ for the matter, then the respective FAQ has brought part of the community together. So unless the INAT creates more divides than groups it brought under a common system, it has brought the hobby together.

So while you may personally not like the INAT, there are many people that prefer to have that document as a reference. I at least know this based on the number of emails I have received from players throughout the entire world. And that's a fact Zach.

@Jay

Awesome! You'll be the 5th this year to clear 50 people for a 5+ game 40k event. That is awesome and shows you are giving the community in your area what it wants. You'll actually manage to be one of the top player attending 40k GT's if you hit 80 this year which is awesome. Thank you for filling me in on it.

Seeing how many tournaments you guys have in the Northeast almost makes me jealous, till I realize it's 75 degrees and sunny in February out here and my jealousy melts away

@Dash

Stop taking everything as a personal attack. It isn't. You (with a little help) have already gotten the SoCal Smackdown thread closed. Don't get this one closed too please

@IM

I don't like some of the rulings in the INAT but I'm not going to not attend an event that's using it just for using it. I applaud the effort I just think you could condense it quite a bit

Hulksmash wrote:I don't like some of the rulings in the INAT but I'm not going to attend an event that's using it just for using it. I applaud the effort I just think you could condense it quite a bit

There are always going to be improvements that can be made. For me, I will attend any event whether they use it or not. If the events use the INAT or another FAQ, then great. If not, I know that I will most likely have some issues that are not easily resolved because of differences in interpretation. The funny thing is - you should talk to the people who don't think the INAT is comprehensive enough.

Okay - last post on this for me - sorry to be OT.

lol, I had to update. I left out a not. Basically yeah, I won't not attend an event if they are using the INAT as long as I know. Bah, horrible proof reading on my part

Hulksmash wrote:lol, I had to update. I left out a not. Basically yeah, I won't not attend an event if they are using the INAT as long as I know. Bah, horrible proof reading on my part

Hah - too funny.

Reecius:

How did you just win a GT and move down two spaces?

That just doesn't seem fair.

They haven't posted the results for that one yet. I expect him to move to the number 2-3 spot when they do. That's without adding in WargamesCon too which will shake it all up

I look forward to reviewing at the end of the year (december-ish) and seeing where people stand. It'll be kinda fun.

I suppose that it is a bit of an edge living in Southern California where there's tons of events to go to, huh? For relatively good players, I mean.

To each their own in terms of fun. Some people want to see some sort of bookkeeping or recording of how people performed in tournaments. I give RHQ props for offering some sort of archiving especially since GW seemed to have canned their previous tournament winners. While the system is not perfect in any way, its nice to see who went to what tournament and how they performed.

Congrats to those who took the time and effort and to see your names on the board. To goto the big tournaments is a drain on financial resources and I personally envy everyone who does since I am able to play but cant afford to go out but maybe once or twice a year anywhere outside the state.

Arguing over this is like arguing over a game of monopoly. Its all pointless and just pisses people off.


btw when will Wargamescon be posted on RHQ?

@Monster Rain

Yeah it will get updated. I might even be number one for a hot second! That would be funny.

Inquisitor_Malice wrote:

CptZach wrote:Also, offtopic, INAT does not bring this hobby together, it divides it.

That is until you objectively apply math and not a subjective personal opinion.

For example - 50 states with an estimated average of 20 gaming groups (give or take depending on state size and population density). Majority of gaming groups have their "own style" of 40K and are therefore remain divided even amongst the most trivial issue. So you have 1,000 different group styles and even more sub styles within each group. However, if even at worst case two groups adopt the INAT as a standard or any other FAQ for the matter, then the respective FAQ has brought part of the community together. So unless the INAT creates more divides than groups it brought under a common system, it has brought the hobby together.

So while you may personally not like the INAT, there are many people that prefer to have that document as a reference. I at least know this based on the number of emails I have received from players throughout the entire world. And that's a fact Zach.

First of all, you realize the majority of players aren't even on the internet.

So now we have 2 different groups of players, one that knows INAT and one that doesn't.
Rules discussion comes up:
Player 1: Rules say this
Player 2: This random FAQ on the internet says this
Hilarity ensues.

I don't know what gaming group you belong to, but entire gaming groups don't get together and suddenly say "lets use the inat faq for all our rules discussions".

What more likely happens is, "I'm the TO and I agree with this FAQ, I will now enforce this random FAQ from the internet at all of my tournaments." What? I just forced some non 40k rules on all of my area gamers?



Also, so what I am reading from the Rankings HQ, is that it poor finishes don't even hurt you?

CptZach wrote:I don't know what gaming group you belong to, but entire gaming groups don't get together and suddenly say "lets use the inat faq for all our rules discussions".

We actually did exactly that.

/shrug

We also use it in Cleveland.

Mainly because it's not a case of the rules saying one thing, and the INAT saying another. Anybody that says that is being willfully ignorant to the possibility of interpreting rules different ways. I kid you not, I played at a tournament that wouldn't allow drop pods to scatter off the board. Nearly everybody online here agrees that the rules don't prevent it, but they see the edge of the board as impassable terrain.

Believe it or not, the rules aren't always crystal clear. In fact, they often aren't. So yeah, there are groups that instead of flipping a coin or asking a random TO to answer a murky question each time, use a fixed source.

Polonius wrote:

Mainly because it's not a case of the rules saying one thing, and the INAT saying another. Anybody that says that is being willfully ignorant to the possibility of interpreting rules different ways.

Except that the INAT council says that and it even says it in the document when something is listed under rules change...

CptZach wrote:

Polonius wrote:

Mainly because it's not a case of the rules saying one thing, and the INAT saying another. Anybody that says that is being willfully ignorant to the possibility of interpreting rules different ways.

Except that the INAT council says that and it even says it in the document when something is listed under rules change...

Ok, yeah, they do go against RAW sometimes when nobody plays the RAW. Not even Gwar advocates playing stricly RAW 100% of the time. You can't! Maybe you've got a specific beef, but I haven't seen a "rules change" that seems less reasonable than trying to play the RAW.

kirsanth wrote:

CptZach wrote:I don't know what gaming group you belong to, but entire gaming groups don't get together and suddenly say "lets use the inat faq for all our rules discussions".

We actually did exactly that.

/shrug

Us, too.

So did the guys in Santa Monica out here...Just sayin

Hulksmash wrote:So did the guys in Santa Monica out here...Just sayin

Seems to be partlially true in NJ also, its in some stores, but not all.

In response to the "bad scores don't hurt you" thing... Our Hobby does not have enough events during the year to allow players to make up for one or two bad events in a year... Unlike MTG that has a rating system which can have 3-4 maybe more events in a SINGLE day at an event that players can enter into and have it affect their rating... (at nationals when it was in Baltimore... I played in 6 single elimination type two "pods" in a single day...)

taking the 3 best games seems like a good way to get a ball park understanding of ability...

As I'm only familiar with people's INTERNET names, and really only barely so at that, this list is somewhat 'empty' for me!

Does anyone have a correlation list of 'real name' to 'screen name'?

frgsinwntr wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:So did the guys in Santa Monica out here...Just sayin

Seems to be partlially true in NJ also, its in some stores, but not all.

In response to the "bad scores don't hurt you" thing... Our Hobby does not have enough events during the year to allow players to make up for one or two bad events in a year... Unlike MTG that has a rating system which can have 3-4 maybe more events in a SINGLE day at an event that players can enter into and have it affect their rating... (at nationals when it was in Baltimore... I played in 6 single elimination type two "pods" in a single day...)

taking the 3 best games seems like a good way to get a ball park understanding of ability...

Understood, but that is initially why I said that it benefits people who can attend multiple events. Because there is no negatives to it. Only positives. It just strikes me as... oh wait, can't say that cause my post will get deleted.