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.

CT GAMER wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:We've had many threads and the general pros and cons of Sportsmanship scoring, but that's off-topic for this thread.

Please keep any further posts on the original topic.

Obviously you can try to sanitize the true nature of this conversation as a mod but I don't think it is off-topic at all.

In fact the attitudes of tourney players, how they approach such events, how organizers choose to structure such events, the pros/cons and limitations of trying to play a game like 40k as if it is a competative sport are all vital and directly related parts of a much large issue and conversation that surround topic like this very thread.

Threads like this arise out of a player culture (tournament players) that is directly impacted and shaped by issues such as the validity/fairness of sportsmanship scoring and the possible dangers of it's abuse and misuse like described in this thread.

This thread was given birth by the very issues you want to prevent people from discussing..

This thread was opened to discuss a specific question, not to be a forum for people to climb on their hobby horse and recite tired talking points about sportsmanship in general, pro or con. I have no objection to some expansion of the topic into sportsmanship scores in general, but if I see folks popping in just to drop a one-liner or an entire post which doesn't even address the original topic, that's not going to fly. I don't prevent people from discussing these issues. I do appreciate them trying to at least address the topic, and participate in the discussion in good faith.

Oh this is sorta on topic. I find that when I play against a person who has built a list that is designed to wipe you off the table, I will ding them on Sports, when there is no comp scores. The idea being that the person is not being very nice by making their army that way, so they cannot get a perfect score.

Ugh, axeman. I'd say list construction should not be covered under sports scores... events have comp (or not) for a reason. It's a separate issue, in my opinion...

It's certainly on-topic, though. At the very least, it would be good to read the sports scoring rubric and make sure that list construction is a viable reason to ding them... but I can't imagine a sports scoring rubric under which it would be!

Sportsmenship has nothing to do with who wins.

If they taunt you, berate you or laugh at you for losing then yes, but they are kind and reasonable, then no(I wouldn't mind losing to the latter.)

I wouldn't ding the sportsmanship unless there was no comp score to ding. That person that brings that list deserves it. They know what and why they brought what they brought. Sportsmanship is all about making the game fun for your opponent. They brought a list that is specifically designed to crush your opponent. Most people don't find that fun. Personally I usually win against these players, but the mentality behind their list construction strikes a nerve that prevents me from giving them top marks.

OverwatchCNC wrote:Perhaps I missed it since I have been away from Dakka for a few days but I don't believe any of the 13 people who said "yes" to the poll have bothered to chime in and explain why...

Read the previous post that got locked.

The offensive comments and personal insults got out of hand.

If the vocal minority of people who oppose sportsmanship scoring weren't such donkey caves about the issue, a rational conversation could be held. It's my opinion that those who steadfastly oppose sportsmanship scores do so because they don't want to be good sports. It's also my opinion that those types of people should find a different game to play. Maybe competitive Russian Roulette.

biccat wrote:The offensive comments and personal insults got out of hand.

If the vocal minority of people who oppose sportsmanship scoring weren't such donkey caves about the issue, a rational conversation could be held. It's my opinion that those who steadfastly oppose sportsmanship scores do so because they don't want to be good sports. It's also my opinion that those types of people should find a different game to play. Maybe competitive Russian Roulette.

Yes, it would be a much more rational discussion if the opposition would stop being such poor sports and shoot themselves in the head...

biccat wrote:

OverwatchCNC wrote:Perhaps I missed it since I have been away from Dakka for a few days but I don't believe any of the 13 people who said "yes" to the poll have bothered to chime in and explain why...

Read the previous post that got locked.

The offensive comments and personal insults got out of hand.

If the vocal minority of people who oppose sportsmanship scoring weren't such donkey caves about the issue, a rational conversation could be held. It's my opinion that those who steadfastly oppose sportsmanship scores do so because they don't want to be good sports. It's also my opinion that those types of people should find a different game to play. Maybe competitive Russian Roulette.

I suppose neither of those highlighted sections would constitute offensive comments or personal insults...

I don't believe it is a vocal minority that oppose sportsmanship scores are the problem here. This thread and question at hand is not about Sportsmanship in general. It is about whether or not losing a game badly warrants you dinging a persons sportsmanship score. The overwhelming MAJORITY in the poll clearly believe taking out your loss, no matter how bad, on your opponent by knee-capping their sports scores is unwarranted.

OverwatchCNC wrote: It is about whether or not losing a game badly warrants you dinging a persons sportsmanship score. The overwhelming MAJORITY in the poll clearly believe taking out your loss, no matter how bad, on your opponent by knee-capping their sports scores is unwarranted.

And a majority seem to understand what constitutes 'good sportsmanship' which means to me, most people wills core correctly and fairly.

Making that guy who lost and scored poorly for losing (IE: Chipmunking) a rarity and a glaring irregularity in scores when it shows up on a TO's scoring tablet, which allows a TO to intervene and have judges watch that table or player more to see if it was a 'chipmunk' or if the person who got the low score actually deserved it. Either way, it alerts the TO to a 'problem person' which he can then handle appropriately. Even if you think they should be removed from the overall score, tracking sportsmanship does more good overall than the possibility of harm.

This is where I miss composition scores. Irrelevant in today's games but if someone spams a cheezy list, I figure they are going to get their comeupance in comp scores. The sportsmanship score is more about your opponent being a dick. Now I will say that the tendency to be a dick seems to go up with a cheezy win-at-all-costs list.

For example a BA player that takes an all death company list - where nothing can control objectives. Or a Canis wolf list where nothing can control obejectives and the beat me. I will probably be impressed that they took an all-out table or lose list and got it to work. Kudos to them and no reason to get vindictive.

OTOH someone who continuously makes side comments about the poor list or poor play of me. Or that that he is so superior when he got lucky and pened two landraiders with two single lascannon shots on the opening turn... Well snide or boastful will probably cost him a point or two on sportsmanship.l

Sportsmanship points are a stupid concept to begin with.

Not everybody needs to be a winner and being a good sport shouldn't be a scored factor.

Yes, kneecap them and then steal their army manz.

Or, unless they were a dick about winning, just man up and accept you lost to someone who was probably superior to you.

40k is a social interaction.

I would have no problem with the sportsmanship system if giving a poor sportsmanship score required that you explain to your opponent in the presence of a judge at the end of the round why you're giving them a poor sportsmanship score, with a judge to initial the score.

That would stop knee-capping.

Dashofpepper wrote:40k is a social interaction.

I would have no problem with the sportsmanship system if giving a poor sportsmanship score required that you explain to your opponent in the presence of a judge at the end of the round why you're giving them a poor sportsmanship score, with a judge to initial the score.

That would stop knee-capping.

QFT. This is the best way to stop the problem. I think the poll adequately shows that the problem is unacceptable to most players and that the Sports scores are there as a way to deter poor sportsmanship. A system like the above would keep sports scores from being used as a tool for poor sportsmanship (i.e. chimpmunking someone because they beat you).

You should always be HONEST about your scores. Losing or Winning does not make you a bad/good sport. You should be a good sport, regardless of whether you are winning or losing.

Honesty, however, is a quality that is lost on a good amount of people if it benefits them to forget about it.

BeefCakeSoup wrote:Sportsmanship points are a stupid concept to begin with.

Not everybody needs to be a winner and being a good sport shouldn't be a scored factor.

In general I agree with you but sadly the addition of sportsmanship scores does lend itself to more civility and most importantly more enjoyment to be had by all.

If you beat me fair and square with a superior army, tactics or dice rolls kudos to you. However if you are going to be a general a$$ about it, enjoy it my friend because chances are you are never going to get me into a pickup game and I will bet most of your opponents are going to take the same general view of things.

I have better things to do than waste one of my days off getting a headache from dealing with someone with an over-inflated ego and the personality of a gnat.

axeman1n wrote:Oh this is sorta on topic. I find that when I play against a person who has built a list that is designed to wipe you off the table, I will ding them on Sports, when there is no comp scores. The idea being that the person is not being very nice by making their army that way, so they cannot get a perfect score.

I think this is a trick area to dock people on, as it's hard to judge someone on that sort of thing. Some folks, for example, aren't trying to table people but just normally play in really tough, competitive environments and play nasty lists by default because that's the way everyone in their area plays. Also, lists generally aren't designed to wipe an opponent off the table, per se. Usually it takes a combination of mismatched army lists, big mistakes made by the tabled player, and lucky dice by the tabling player to do that sort of thing. The list itself being specifically designed for that is not (IME) a major factor.

As has been discussed, too, it comes down to the Sports system whether this is an acceptable reason to mark down. I don't think Sports should (be default) serve to replace Comp at an event choosing not to use Comp. Some events and systems (like mine) specifically note that Sportsmanship isn't about the army the person brought, so in such a system marking a person down for their list would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the rules. In some very broadly-worded systems, OTOH, where they ask you grade purely how enjoyable the game was, it might be justified to knock off a little if you found the person's list particularly boring or unenjoyable to face.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote:

OverwatchCNC wrote:Perhaps I missed it since I have been away from Dakka for a few days but I don't believe any of the 13 people who said "yes" to the poll have bothered to chime in and explain why...

Read the previous post that got locked.

The offensive comments and personal insults got out of hand.

If the vocal minority of people who oppose sportsmanship scoring weren't such donkey caves about the issue, a rational conversation could be held. It's my opinion that those who steadfastly oppose sportsmanship scores do so because they don't want to be good sports. It's also my opinion that those types of people should find a different game to play. Maybe competitive Russian Roulette.

This right here is not okay. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not everyone who objects to Sportsmanship scores is a jerk, and not everyone who posts on here to object to them does so in an offensive manner. There is no call to go tarring them all with the same brush. That's just rude.

axeman1n wrote:I wouldn't ding the sportsmanship unless there was no comp score to ding. That person that brings that list deserves it. They know what and why they brought what they brought. Sportsmanship is all about making the game fun for your opponent. They brought a list that is specifically designed to crush your opponent. Most people don't find that fun. Personally I usually win against these players, but the mentality behind their list construction strikes a nerve that prevents me from giving them top marks.

Although I hate tournament play and avoid it (and those who embrace it) like the plague I find your attitude illogical to the extreme.

tournaments are sporting events. They are ultra-competative by design and by nature. The goal is to win. If a list is legal both in terms of the game itself and any event restrictions it is fair game n such an environment.

many people want to enforce this murky dual nature onto tournaments in which people are also supposed to be "nice" and bring "friendly" armies, and other such subjective criteria etc.

I find this sort of thought applied to tournament play to be bizarre tbh.

Oaka wrote:I've been to several tournaments where the 'sportsmanship' score was rather a question of whether it was an enjoyable game, usually on some sort of scale. If I get tabled, it probably wasn't an enjoyable game, so I would probably mark the score low. I don't consider that a sportsmanship score, but it does seem to be used as a replacement for sportsmanship.

As another poster mentioned, there is also sometimes a separate score for ranking your favorite opponent. By default, my favorite opponent would definitely be the guy that I had a close game with, not the guy who tabled me.

So, I voted yes, because in some situations you may expect to be docked if you table someone (I also answered the actual poll question, not the question in the thread subject, they are quite different).

I think this is a rough way to grade people. While if the Sportsmanship score asks you to grade how enjoyable the game was, it may seem logical to mark it lower if the game was one-sided, remember that goes both ways. Would you also mark someone down for being a poor player with a terrible army list, which you easily walked all over and tabled?

That seems harsh, but is just as logical. For my part, even if the Sports score says to grade based on how fun the game was, I'm not going to mark my opponent down for having a nasty army list or a bad army list, or a for being a much worse or better player than me, causing the game to be one-sided. I'd rather grade them based on their behavior and attitude, regardless of the outcome.

axeman1n wrote:Oh this is sorta on topic. I find that when I play against a person who has built a list that is designed to wipe you off the table, I will ding them on Sports, when there is no comp scores. The idea being that the person is not being very nice by making their army that way, so they cannot get a perfect score.

So, if it were an Annihilation game, would you do this? And seriously, how many of us play this game with the intent of not winning in one way, shape, or form? You are using the scoring system to affect someone not based on their play, but their army list, when it's really a vendetta against them personally.

Seriously, sportsmanship scores are good for guys like this, not for the general public. This guy, like so many others, use a sportsmanship or composition score to negatively affect the scores of opponents they couldn't defeat on the table. This is why I will always be against sportsmanship scores.

CT GAMER wrote:

axeman1n wrote:I wouldn't ding the sportsmanship unless there was no comp score to ding. That person that brings that list deserves it. They know what and why they brought what they brought. Sportsmanship is all about making the game fun for your opponent. They brought a list that is specifically designed to crush your opponent. Most people don't find that fun. Personally I usually win against these players, but the mentality behind their list construction strikes a nerve that prevents me from giving them top marks.

Although I hate tournament play and avoid it (and those who embrace it) like the plague I find your attitude illogical to the extreme.

tournaments are sporting events. They are ultra-competative by design and by nature. The goal is to win. If a list is legal both in terms of the game itself and any event restrictions it is fair game n such an environment.

many people want to enforce this murky dual nature onto tournaments in which people are also supposed to be "nice" and bring "friendly" armies, and other such subjective criteria etc.

I find this sort of thought applied to tournament play to be bizarre tbh.

Here is a wistful reminder of playing in Rogue Trader tournaments circa 3rd Edition. I went into a tournament with a firebreathing list and a cut throat attitude. I won all my games and came in 3rd place due to composition, a few nicks on sportsmanship, not the most stellar painting, etc. It opened my eyes to thinking about my opponent having a good time too. Instead of playing cut throat, I built a non-optimised but competitive list, had more fun and came in 1st.

The idea of sportsmanship and composition scores lends itself to an enjoyable 8 hours of time spent. If all I had to look forward to was playing each codex's version of the biggest slice of cheese possible and then having that shoved down my throat. I probably am not going to be the most happy and more likely to view you or any opponent more critically. If the atmosphere became too toxic, chances are I too will "avoid it like the plague."

OTOH, by its nature sportsmanship scoring is going to be very subjective as it is going to be "how did you feel..." or "did you like..." kind of questions. I like a checklist as this helps people to focus on black and white issues rather than a simple rate your opponent on a 1 to 10 scale. Truthfully unless I feel like I am walking on sunshine after playing your match, I am going to be rating you less than a 10. That is not the issue though it is rating based on handing each opponent an average of X but reserving an X - 1 or more for every opponent that trashed you in a round. That is never acceptable however if you were a bit smug, indifferent or pushy and I rated you a 6 and everyone else an 8 perhaps you should do a little examination of your attitude. If you would be a pleasant 2 hours perhaps you could coax me to give you a 7 or 8 or god forbid a 9 and add that up over 4 or 5 rounds and you might be talking 10 to 20 points toward your overall goal.

Lets just assume a sports and comp scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best.

a 10 is not a normal game. 10 should be the best player you have every faced, or the most fair, fluffy army you have ever seen.

5-6 is the normal game score. Assuming nothing good or bad, everyone should score either a 5 or a 6. That is basically average.

a 1 is not a bad game....its a F&^^&%^% Horrible game, against the worst d-bag with a cheese-ball army.

I think that too many people assume that a 10 is the normal score.

For this years Broadside Bash, I specifically outlined the suggestions of where you should score someone....I hope that will help clarify some of the issues for folks.

http://broadside-bash.blogspot.com/2011/10/sportsmanship-composition-scoring.html

Mannahnin wrote:

Oaka wrote:I've been to several tournaments where the 'sportsmanship' score was rather a question of whether it was an enjoyable game, usually on some sort of scale. If I get tabled, it probably wasn't an enjoyable game, so I would probably mark the score low. I don't consider that a sportsmanship score, but it does seem to be used as a replacement for sportsmanship.

As another poster mentioned, there is also sometimes a separate score for ranking your favorite opponent. By default, my favorite opponent would definitely be the guy that I had a close game with, not the guy who tabled me.

So, I voted yes, because in some situations you may expect to be docked if you table someone (I also answered the actual poll question, not the question in the thread subject, they are quite different).

I think this is a rough way to grade people. While if the Sportsmanship score asks you to grade how enjoyable the game was, it may seem logical to mark it lower if the game was one-sided, remember that goes both ways. Would you also mark someone down for being a poor player with a terrible army list, which you easily walked all over and tabled?

That seems harsh, but is just as logical. For my part, even if the Sports score says to grade based on how fun the game was, I'm not going to mark my opponent down for having a nasty army list or a bad army list, or a for being a much worse or better player than me, causing the game to be one-sided. I'd rather grade them based on their behavior and attitude, regardless of the outcome.

Sorry for being slightly off topic but this example above shows great reason why people should adopt Mannahnin's system for sports scores.


back to topic:

I only score low on sports scores if I know the guy is cheating. I have only down voted 4 times out of nearly 10 years of gaming.

thehod wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:

Oaka wrote:I've been to several tournaments where the 'sportsmanship' score was rather a question of whether it was an enjoyable game, usually on some sort of scale. If I get tabled, it probably wasn't an enjoyable game, so I would probably mark the score low. I don't consider that a sportsmanship score, but it does seem to be used as a replacement for sportsmanship.

As another poster mentioned, there is also sometimes a separate score for ranking your favorite opponent. By default, my favorite opponent would definitely be the guy that I had a close game with, not the guy who tabled me.

So, I voted yes, because in some situations you may expect to be docked if you table someone (I also answered the actual poll question, not the question in the thread subject, they are quite different).

I think this is a rough way to grade people. While if the Sportsmanship score asks you to grade how enjoyable the game was, it may seem logical to mark it lower if the game was one-sided, remember that goes both ways. Would you also mark someone down for being a poor player with a terrible army list, which you easily walked all over and tabled?

That seems harsh, but is just as logical. For my part, even if the Sports score says to grade based on how fun the game was, I'm not going to mark my opponent down for having a nasty army list or a bad army list, or a for being a much worse or better player than me, causing the game to be one-sided. I'd rather grade them based on their behavior and attitude, regardless of the outcome.

Sorry for being slightly off topic but this example above shows great reason why people should adopt Mannahnin's system for sports scores.


back to topic:

I only score low on sports scores if I know the guy is cheating. I have only down voted 4 times out of nearly 10 years of gaming.

I must admit I respect that so much. If everyone could either use Mannahins system or conduct themselves as you do with Sports Scores the hobby would be in a much better place imo.

DAaddict wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

axeman1n wrote:I wouldn't ding the sportsmanship unless there was no comp score to ding. That person that brings that list deserves it. They know what and why they brought what they brought. Sportsmanship is all about making the game fun for your opponent. They brought a list that is specifically designed to crush your opponent. Most people don't find that fun. Personally I usually win against these players, but the mentality behind their list construction strikes a nerve that prevents me from giving them top marks.

Although I hate tournament play and avoid it (and those who embrace it) like the plague I find your attitude illogical to the extreme.

tournaments are sporting events. They are ultra-competative by design and by nature. The goal is to win. If a list is legal both in terms of the game itself and any event restrictions it is fair game n such an environment.

many people want to enforce this murky dual nature onto tournaments in which people are also supposed to be "nice" and bring "friendly" armies, and other such subjective criteria etc.

I find this sort of thought applied to tournament play to be bizarre tbh.

Here is a wistful reminder of playing in Rogue Trader tournaments circa 3rd Edition. I went into a tournament with a firebreathing list and a cut throat attitude. I won all my games and came in 3rd place due to composition, a few nicks on sportsmanship, not the most stellar painting, etc. It opened my eyes to thinking about my opponent having a good time too. Instead of playing cut throat, I built a non-optimised but competitive list, had more fun and came in 1st.

The idea of sportsmanship and composition scores lends itself to an enjoyable 8 hours of time spent. If all I had to look forward to was playing each codex's version of the biggest slice of cheese possible and then having that shoved down my throat. I probably am not going to be the most happy and more likely to view you or any opponent more critically. If the atmosphere became too toxic, chances are I too will "avoid it like the plague."

OTOH, by its nature sportsmanship scoring is going to be very subjective as it is going to be "how did you feel..." or "did you like..." kind of questions. I like a checklist as this helps people to focus on black and white issues rather than a simple rate your opponent on a 1 to 10 scale. Truthfully unless I feel like I am walking on sunshine after playing your match, I am going to be rating you less than a 10. That is not the issue though it is rating based on handing each opponent an average of X but reserving an X - 1 or more for every opponent that trashed you in a round. That is never acceptable however if you were a bit smug, indifferent or pushy and I rated you a 6 and everyone else an 8 perhaps you should do a little examination of your attitude. If you would be a pleasant 2 hours perhaps you could coax me to give you a 7 or 8 or god forbid a 9 and add that up over 4 or 5 rounds and you might be talking 10 to 20 points toward your overall goal.

This is exactly what I have found, and it is the rubric I use to judge people. Only TG brings lists like that. I believe in rewarding good players with good scores. A perfect example of a list like this that I gave perfect sports and comp to was a guy who brought a skimmer Eldar lists. He had 7 grav tanks in 2000pts. Each tank was modestly equiped. Each unit was not a 5man nekkid DAVU. The units were small but they had a round feel. The guy was awesome and fun to play against. He even had Eldrad, but not Yriel. He took the army to a competative level, but he eased up on the gas pedal a bit. We took 1st and 2nd in the tournament.
Getting into rules disagreements with an unreasonable opponent who happens to be friendly with the TO is a bad idea, especially when the TO's play favorites. I don't know about anyone else, but I find that each store/area has it's own idea of how a set of rules reads. Because I live between areas I have a blend. I have disagreements. Being told that if I have another disagreement, on a FAQ'd rule btw, I will be DQ'd is not my idea of fun. I'm not saying I should be a 10 out of 10 for sports, but I should not be scored zero, so long as I show up, play nice and don't cheat. For this reason I may end up skipping a lot of touraments that are run by a certain group of gamers. For this reason I've been looking into playing Apocolypes games.
I think I'd like to change my answer to yes, with the exception of annihilation missions, once you have won the game, and their is no chance for you opponent to win or tie, you should call it. He he tables you after the game is over, then you should doc a sports for it, unless you want to be tabled. (I can think of at least 3 games where I've been getting beat to death and asked my opponent to play it out till he tabled me, taughting him for the fun of it. FYI I didn't hide either.)


In the end, it's about yours and your opponents fun factor. Maximize it and you both win.

captkurt wrote:Lets just assume a sports and comp scale of 1-10, with 10 being the best.

a 10 is not a normal game. 10 should be the best player you have every faced, or the most fair, fluffy army you have ever seen.

5-6 is the normal game score. Assuming nothing good or bad, everyone should score either a 5 or a 6. That is basically average.

a 1 is not a bad game....its a F&^^&%^% Horrible game, against the worst d-bag with a cheese-ball army.

I really like that system, though there's no way to force people to follow that method. Going to propose something similar in the rules for our next tournament and explain it before the slips get handed out.

As others have said, this game is social. Tournaments should exemplify the Berks tournament in PA i think is a great example of doing it right.

CT Gamer, I feel you have it wrong about sportsmanship, unless you meant comp(don't get me started on comp).

Yes tournaments are sporting events, but 40k tournaments should not be treated like a 100 yard dash where there are obvious winners/losers. When you do this it devolves into something that this game is not, look at some of the drama incurred over at nova this year. The reasons of which are many, 40k's got a ton more rules to follow and the codex's are not balanced for tournament play, couple this with the "ultra-competitive" nature of some folks and there you have it.

Yes the goal is to "win" but some people need that reminder to at least be respectful to one another, otherwise we might as well play 40k in the thunder dome. What some folks in this thread need to realize is that from an organizer(at least mine) point of view, sportsmanship at the table is not about the list and how its played, its about is the person you are playing with being respectful, a good sport, and not being a d-bag.

Monster Rain wrote:No. You should give them a low sportsmanship score if they are being a douchelord, regardless of the game's outcome.

While I agree with monsterRizzain on low sports... but deliberate score sniping is a douche move that a good TO will pull you up on, or at least request a legitimate reason for.

AvatarForm wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:No. You should give them a low sportsmanship score if they are being a douchelord, regardless of the game's outcome.

While I agree with monsterRizzain on low sports... but deliberate score sniping is a douche move that a good TO will pull you up on, or at least request a legitimate reason for.

In my experience, the best tournaments that I have been to do exactly that.

Ding someone on sports? Explain to the TO, in front of your opponent, why you felt the need to do so.

I was torn to shreds in the recent 40k doubles in Nottingham, voted for the opponent as best opponent to play, because they were... being hammered didnt stop them from being nice people or sportsmanlike.

They won an award for best opponents over the weekend so I obviously wasnt alone.