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.
mortetvie wrote: Once someone masters the art of herding stray cats, that person should be the one to advise the gaming community on how best to deal with army list submission and review.
Honestly, there are just too many factors and variables in play for this to go off without a hitch.
You need enough competent staff or volunteers from the event, to manage 60-160+ army lists.
You need them to be able to do this in a reasonable window not too soon and not too late before the event starts.
You need players to cooperate with submitting lists on time.
You need the stars to align just right.
You need to hope the Stock Market doesn't crash.
Why do I have the feeling that posts like this are telling players to bring whatever they want and write down whatever they want because no one will check anything so let's all play over points and with made up stuff.
chipstar1 wrote: Crowd sourced list verification is the only method I've thought up that could work in this instance; have talked about this a bunch.
Not only do you leverage the people watching events, but you also engage people and provide record keeping digitally as well.
The trick though, is it's not as easy as it might seem at first blush. Without some key pieces, you can easily turn the error checking into more of a burden than a boon, as a lot of folks will probably review lists incorrectly. Gotta eliminate the chaff in order to get accurate reviews.
I could see this:
Each player sets their list down with their appropriate codecies, books, downloadsc, etc. TOs would have pre-asked a group of the attendees to spend some time (10 minutes?) reviewing, either before Round 1 and/or after Round 2. Can't review your own. Each list gets reviewed by a pair of participants to walk through the build's points. IMHO, this seems workable at 60 players and under.
100+ events should remain on Honor System for the simple logistics.
I'm a Table 80 or 90 guy at the LVO & BAOs and we are a fun group once Round 3 hits. We all love each other after Round 4.
Once the Top 8 (or whichever Top) are set, *that* is an easy check for the TOs, and maybe those Top 8 players too.
"You can bring any cheesy unit you want. If you lose. Casey taught me that." -Tim S.
"I'm gonna follow Casey; he knows where the beer's at!" -Blackmoor, BAO 2013
NOVA definitely has the strongest initial list-checking component of any of the major tournaments; their TO and head judge (Neil and Phil) check lists as they're handed in, and while there's only time for a cursory check in that timeframe, they're at least two people qualified to catch the most obvious problems.
At check in, you're required to have the published number of lists with you (one for the tournament, one for each opponent). Each list is stamped by the TO to prove it's the same list that was presented at check in. That alone solves most of the problems mentioned in this thread (garbage hand-written lists, not having enough lists, switching lists, etc).
As someone stated earlier in the thread, there's really only about two people involved in most tournaments that have any capability to check lists in a reasonable timeframe without having to cross-reference a dozen books. Even the idea of "crowdsourced" listchecking is pretty much a mess--there's no way I'd trust 50%+ of the 40k community to weigh in correctly on whether or not a list is legal. During the finals at LVO, the stream chat was an absolute spam of people claiming the Eldar list was illegal, because they'd never heard of a Pale Court.
DJ3 wrote: ... Even the idea of "crowdsourced" listchecking is pretty much a mess--there's no way I'd trust 50%+ of the 40k community to weigh in correctly on whether or not a list is legal. During the finals at LVO, the stream chat was an absolute spam of people claiming the Eldar list was illegal, because they'd never heard of a Pale Court.
Well, you don't leave it up to the Internet. Yer maximizing the potential for stupidity there.
But if the IA Pale Court book was sitting under Harrison's list, along with the other books, then the attendees *at the venue*, could take a couple minutes on it at the end of Round 6, before the Top 8 square off.
"You can bring any cheesy unit you want. If you lose. Casey taught me that." -Tim S.
"I'm gonna follow Casey; he knows where the beer's at!" -Blackmoor, BAO 2013
mortetvie wrote: Once someone masters the art of herding stray cats, that person should be the one to advise the gaming community on how best to deal with army list submission and review.
Honestly, there are just too many factors and variables in play for this to go off without a hitch.
You need enough competent staff or volunteers from the event, to manage 60-160+ army lists.
You need them to be able to do this in a reasonable window not too soon and not too late before the event starts.
You need players to cooperate with submitting lists on time.
You need the stars to align just right.
You need to hope the Stock Market doesn't crash.
Why do I have the feeling that posts like this are telling players to bring whatever they want and write down whatever they want because no one will check anything so let's all play over points and with made up stuff.
Probably becauase you read things between the lines that simply are not there...
All I was saying is that ensuring every list is kosher is no small task for a TO so we should cut them some slack. I tried to use sarcasm and humor but apparently that automatically means someone is condoning illicit conduct?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/05 05:44:40
Jesus Christ changed my life, He can do the same for you!
DJ3 wrote: Even the idea of "crowdsourced" listchecking is pretty much a mess--there's no way I'd trust 50%+ of the 40k community to weigh in correctly on whether or not a list is legal.
The way I do this in our tournaments (40-50 players, so relatively small) is that the crowd only points out possible problems after checking the lists, as the TO I'm the one who actually makes the decisions on legality. There are "false reports", but by no means so many that it would make the system "a mess". Then again, smaller tournaments.
In practice, it goes like this: The lists are sent to me via e-mail, after which I publish them on a forum. People who are attending the tournament look through the lists and if they see something they think is a mistake they post on the topic and tell what they found. Quite often the player whose list was commented on is also following the topic and will post their point of view on the issue. If not, I'll send them an e-mail asking for a correction. When an actually illegal list is spotted (most comments are usually on stuff like "warlord not marked"), the player has the opportunity to alter the list to make it legal. We don't have written rules about this, but it's generally understood that you should alter the list as little as possible to make it legal, even if that means it's not quite as optimized anymore.
The biggest problem with this approach is actually getting players to submit their lists when asked to. Some TOs around here practically disqualify anyone who hasn't submitted their list by the deadline, by giving them a battlepoints penalty that's so heavy that it's almost the same as saying "your points are not counted at all". I don't like doing that, and I've been very happy to notice that once people get used to the practice, everyone actually sends in their list within a day or so of the deadline (and most of them before the deadline, like they should). I don't even send out any reminders by e-mail unless someone has missed the deadline. I do post reminders on the forums, though.
The tournament community in Finland is pretty small, and if anyone had pulled shenanigans like played a different list from the one they submitted, I'm sure I'd have heard about it. It would be easy to prevent this by printing everyone's lists and handing them to the players before the first round, but like I said, haven't seen a reason to do that. Plus ink cartridges are so damn expensive...
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/04/05 14:27:52
Every year for the last three years I have personally gone over every single list for the DaBoyz GT in upstate NY. It's a really *#(@!y process to go over 100+ lists but in those three years we've only had 2 issues. We also require 7 copies of their lists. One for each of their 5 opponents, a judge list, and a list for them to hold onto.
To say that there is "very little oversight" of lists at GT's is sort of an insult to those GT's that put in so much work.
DJ3 wrote: Even the idea of "crowdsourced" listchecking is pretty much a mess--there's no way I'd trust 50%+ of the 40k community to weigh in correctly on whether or not a list is legal.
The way I do this in our tournaments (40-50 players, so relatively small) is that the growd only points out possible problems after checking the lists, as the TO I'm the one who actually makes the decisions on legality. There are "false reports", but by no means so many that it would make the system "a mess". Then again, smaller tournaments.
In practice, it goes like this: The lists are sent to me via e-mail, after which I publish them on a forum. People who are attending the tournament look through the lists and if they see something they think is a mistake they post on the topic and tell what they found. Quite often the player whose list was commented on is also following the topic and will post their point of view on the issue. If not, I'll send them an e-mail asking for a correction. When an actually illegal list is spotted (most comments are usually on stuff like "warlord not marked"), the player has the opportunity to alter the list to make it legal. We don't have written rules about this, but it's generally understood that you should alter the list as little as possible to make it legal, even if that means it's not quite as optimized anymore.
The biggest problem with this approach is actually getting players to submit their lists when asked to. Some TOs around here practically disqualify anyone who hasn't submitted their list by the deadline, by giving them a battlepoints penalty that's so heavy that it's almost the same as saying "your points are not counted at all". I don't like doing that, and I've been very happy to notice that once people get used to the practice, everyone actually sends in their list within a day or so of the deadline (and most of them before the deadline, like they should). I don't even send out any reminders by e-mail unless someone has missed the deadline. I do post reminders on the forums, though.
The tournament community in Finland is pretty small, and if anyone had pulled shenanigans like played a different list from the one they submitted, I'm sure I'd have heard about it. It would be easy to prevent this by printing everyone's lists and handing them to the players before the first round, but like I said, haven't seen a reason to do that. Plus ink cartridges are so damn expensive...
I have to fully agree that this is the best way to enforce lists. But, I am a GT attendee not a TO. The last major event I attended was ATC 2015, an event with over 200 players in attendance for the 40k event alone. Lists were due several weeks in advance, and were then vetted by the TOs, before being posted online. I can tell you that one of the lists I sent in was wrong, within 24 hours I was corrected, so we sent in a list that was almost identical. (We had put a ResOrb on a cryptek by accident, and then had to add a new wargear piece). After that, all of the lists were posted online. While I was getting ready for the event, my team and I were reading through all of the lists, and I noticed one that was illegal (three detachments in a two-detachment format). So, I emailed the TO to clarify the format, and was informed that it was an illegal list. That player was then contacted and forced to resubmit a list as close to the original as possible. In the end, he complied and there were no other problems that I was aware of.
The point is, everyone makes mistakes. TOs aren't perfect, and combing through 100 or 200+ lists is pretty damn hard with limited staff members. But, once every list is submitted, I think it's fair to post them online in a public forum to be read. The community knows who some of the "famous" national players are, and can look at their lists. And then some imperfections were caught and fixed. And most GTs wont have 200 lists, making it easier to check.
Yes, and that's what baffles me. What is wrong with retroactively punishing a player? If you, as a TO, don't punish a player who is proven to be a cheater for having a wrong list afterwards, then you send everyone the message "Try your luck, maybe we don't catch you!". That is horrible and downright wrong.
If a player is found guilty of cheating, ban him and strip him from all rewards. End of discussion. Not punishing a player who played with a wrong list is you, as a TO, publicly disrespecting all proper players at your tournament and, long story short, you accepting cheating as a part of your tournament. That's bad.
A good start IMO (and a repeat suggestion from earlier) is to go over any list in contention for ANY prize with a fine tooth comb before that last round starts. A 450 person tourney may not have the staff necessary to go over evey list in this current age of Stupidhammer army composition but they certainly SHOULD have the amount to go over the top 16 on the final day (and who ever is in the running for individual prizes) if they're adequately staffed.
Let's be honest.. .in a large tourney, almost no one cares if the 64th placed guy had an illegal list except maybe the 65th placed guy or one of the few folks who lost to him but an illegal army winning any sort of prize should be an embarassment to everyone running that tourney. Avoid the internet and local drama... check any list that might be rewarded.
warboss wrote: A good start IMO (and a repeat suggestion from earlier) is to go over any list in contention for ANY prize with a fine tooth comb before that last round starts. A 450 person tourney may not have the staff necessary to go over evey list in this current age of Stupidhammer army composition but they certainly SHOULD have the amount to go over the top 16 on the final day (and who ever is in the running for individual prizes) if they're adequately staffed.
Let's be honest.. .in a large tourney, almost no one cares if the 64th placed guy had an illegal list except maybe the 65th placed guy or one of the few folks who lost to him but an illegal army winning any sort of prize should be an embarassment to everyone running that tourney. Avoid the internet and local drama... check any list that might be rewarded.
This. No player in the top 16 should be using an illegal list, no excuses.
Las Vegas Open Head Judge
I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings or pride, but your credentials matter. Even on the internet.
"If you do not have the knowledge, you do not have the right to the opinion." -Plato
A few years back my FLGS had this same type of tournament issue. To Start the TO was part of a local game club that helps support the store.
Problem was club members showed up with the same type of poor lists and primed black miniatures with "proxies" I feel all was allowed because the TO was wearing
the same club shirt as the offenders. Their defense was they don't want to alienate newer players..
I played a club guy with the bad list but worse his writing was chicken scratch; He didn't assign units to drop pods that I could tell ..
And the drop pods were allowed to land on top of buildings. It was allowed because I didn't Identify what type of terrain the building was before the game..
We complained to the store owner and nothing was really done.. Sad truth is the owner is very good about supporting games with prizes.
But after repeated debacles like this; many people don't attend any tournament ran by the members of the "club".
Now 40k is about dead with only the "club" players left and most people have moved to different games.
I have seen numerous posts over the past few years that very large events cannot handle the staff requirements. Either get more staff or find a way to fix things.
This is not a serious proposal. Many staff are volunteers, and most participants aren't willing to pay additional entry fees required for this staffing.
Its not a terrible proposal. As long as checking lists didn't disqualify me from playing, I'd be happy to volunteer a little bit of time to check through lists. It could actually be a hybrid to Reecius' crowd sourced idea. Have a pool of 10-20 experienced players and send them each 5-10 lists to check. It wouldn't take them long, they could flag lists that look wrong for closer scrutiny by a judge and it would reduce the burden on the TO.
while not anywhere on the scale of adepticon im playing in a tournament in Cambridge, Ontario (Canhammer and 40 players) at the end of April, lists had to be in at the end of march, than each team (its a team event), gets to check 3 teams lists (12 total lists) for errors before the tourney begins. It was very easy to handle and unless people are sleeping at the wheel, should be error and drama at the event free.
The early crowd sourcing is an imperfect option as well though.
Say all lists were posted 2 weeks ahead. And an illegal list is found. How much does that person get to change their list now that they've seen the entire rest of the field?
It's not feasible to reliably check 200+ lists. Checking the top 16 or so is more feasible. But by then the illegal list has already played 4-5 games and knocked out as many people.
IMO, each round everyone should have to sign a copy of their opponent's list evidencing that they reviewed it and they that agreed to play it as presented. Then if an error is found late in the tournament, the error is explicitly on the prior the prior 4-5 opponent's. Then for a champs bracket when things are checked in more detail offending models can be pulled and the tournament can proceed.
Lifetime Record of Awesomeness
1000000W/ 0L/ 1D (against myself)
ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote: The early crowd sourcing is an imperfect option as well though.
Say all lists were posted 2 weeks ahead. And an illegal list is found. How much does that person get to change their list now that they've seen the entire rest of the field?
It's not feasible to reliably check 200+ lists. Checking the top 16 or so is more feasible. But by then the illegal list has already played 4-5 games and knocked out as many people.
IMO, each round everyone should have to sign a copy of their opponent's list evidencing that they reviewed it and they that agreed to play it as presented. Then if an error is found late in the tournament, the error is explicitly on the prior the prior 4-5 opponent's. Then for a champs bracket when things are checked in more detail offending models can be pulled and the tournament can proceed.
Not bad. The only problem is the idea that int he final rounds an offending player simply modifies their list to make it legal. That's bull imo. Lists for the top 16-32 should be checked, if an error is found in a players' list they are removed from the running. Put them at 17th or 33rd bump everyone up and the tournament continues. The offending player should still be allowed to play, but not contend for a prize or top spot.
Las Vegas Open Head Judge
I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings or pride, but your credentials matter. Even on the internet.
"If you do not have the knowledge, you do not have the right to the opinion." -Plato
Potentially, Battlescribe could fill this niche (business plan)?
They could bundle list verification across multiple games along with automatic pairings, rankings etc. Flat fee paid by TO. Subsidised by entry fees. All above board. All online. Yoi put yoir lost into tje program. Opponent can verify its validity and check units etc. Database Searchable by army or name for subscribers with stats by player or list or unit. Poof! money please.
ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote: The early crowd sourcing is an imperfect option as well though.
Say all lists were posted 2 weeks ahead. And an illegal list is found. How much does that person get to change their list now that they've seen the entire rest of the field?
It's not feasible to reliably check 200+ lists. Checking the top 16 or so is more feasible. But by then the illegal list has already played 4-5 games and knocked out as many people.
IMO, each round everyone should have to sign a copy of their opponent's list evidencing that they reviewed it and they that agreed to play it as presented. Then if an error is found late in the tournament, the error is explicitly on the prior the prior 4-5 opponent's. Then for a champs bracket when things are checked in more detail offending models can be pulled and the tournament can proceed.
Not bad. The only problem is the idea that int he final rounds an offending player simply modifies their list to make it legal. That's bull imo. Lists for the top 16-32 should be checked, if an error is found in a players' list they are removed from the running. Put them at 17th or 33rd bump everyone up and the tournament continues. The offending player should still be allowed to play, but not contend for a prize or top spot.
The don't modify it. The judge just pulls models until the illegal portions are removed and the player plays down in points. That's what Adepticon did.
The hard part about really punitive things like disqualification or removal of prize support (as has been noted my Mike Brandt and Reece) is that attendees (who are customers that the convention needs) pay many hundreds of dollars to attend and will have an EXTREMELY negative experience if you kick them out for what are likely honest and often trivial mistakes. That person and anyone they came with are likely to never come back. Not to mention the angst that that creates on potential attendees that now worry their entire weekend is dashed because of a 1 point screw up.
Disqualification is the nuclear option. It's in the judge's tool set, but it's a means of last resort.
Forcing people to sign away their right to complain 1) increases the chances that errors are found early and 2) allows people to still compete after errors are found.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
doktor_g wrote: Potentially, Battlescribe could fill this niche (business plan)?
They could bundle list verification across multiple games along with automatic pairings, rankings etc. Flat fee paid by TO. Subsidised by entry fees. All above board. All online. Yoi put yoir lost into tje program. Opponent can verify its validity and check units etc. Database Searchable by army or name for subscribers with stats by player or list or unit. Poof! money please.
The problem is that Battlescribe is far from perfect. Aaron Aleong's list was pointed correctly in Battlescribe and Army Builder.
Those two programs can't even get the points correct 100% of the time. Much less support the extra army building rules for ITC, Adepticon, and NOVA.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/05 18:56:00
Lifetime Record of Awesomeness
1000000W/ 0L/ 1D (against myself)
Sigvatr wrote: Yes, and that's what baffles me. What is wrong with retroactively punishing a player? If you, as a TO, don't punish a player who is proven to be a cheater for having a wrong list afterwards, then you send everyone the message "Try your luck, maybe we don't catch you!". That is horrible and downright wrong.
IMHO nothing. This is what I do at my events, and I've had to do it a few times, including at a GT. If a list violation is found during the event, and they have been. I pull the player aside and review the issue. I explain to them that they have an illegal list and why. I tell them that all of their previous battle scores will be set to 0 and I give their previous opponents the smallest winning score allowable (if it would be better than their existing results). I give their current opponent the option to take a concession, or allow the player to modify their list and continue the game. They can continue to play with the modified list, but cannot win non-raffle prize support, and only if they apologize to all of their previous opponents for the error.
I don't like what this may mean to a previous player who lost to an illegal list, but it is at least an acknowledgement of wrong doing.
In fact, I lost to a player in round 1 of a large GT in February. I found out about it from a friend after the end of Day 1. Had he not told me, I would have never found out. There was no recognition of the issue from the TOs until I inquired. The response was, "you should have checked his list, we can't check them all." While I agree with the fact that it is impractical to check lists for large events in advance, this event did not allow for adequate time for opponents to check each others lists. Someone who spends time and money to attend a competitive event and loses chance to win due to an opponents illegal list should receive an acknowledgement and apology, if nothing else.
If a player is found guilty of cheating, ban him and strip him from all rewards. End of discussion. Not punishing a player who played with a wrong list is you, as a TO, publicly disrespecting all proper players at your tournament and, long story short, you accepting cheating as a part of your tournament. That's bad.
I agree that a TO needs to make an example of players who bring illegal lists, but I feel that their are strong ways to do this that still foster inclusiveness, but make it clear that the player has lost all real chance of victory and prize support. Public flogging is not really a good solution, but public apology is a good lesson.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/05 20:58:54
Hulksmash wrote: If anyone from Adepticon played me in the champs and still has my list could they send it to me? Just need to check something
Were you over on points too!?
Las Vegas Open Head Judge
I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings or pride, but your credentials matter. Even on the internet.
"If you do not have the knowledge, you do not have the right to the opinion." -Plato
Crimthaan wrote: Every year for the last three years I have personally gone over every single list for the DaBoyz GT in upstate NY. It's a really *#(@!y process to go over 100+ lists but in those three years we've only had 2 issues. We also require 7 copies of their lists. One for each of their 5 opponents, a judge list, and a list for them to hold onto.
To say that there is "very little oversight" of lists at GT's is sort of an insult to those GT's that put in so much work.
As someone who plays in Upstate NY, and wants to go to Da Boyz this year, thank you.
Crimthaan wrote: Every year for the last three years I have personally gone over every single list for the DaBoyz GT in upstate NY. It's a really *#(@!y process to go over 100+ lists but in those three years we've only had 2 issues. We also require 7 copies of their lists. One for each of their 5 opponents, a judge list, and a list for them to hold onto.
To say that there is "very little oversight" of lists at GT's is sort of an insult to those GT's that put in so much work.
As someone who plays in Upstate NY, and wants to go to Da Boyz this year, thank you.
Do we have a signup for that tournament yet? I may go to that
punchdub wrote: Public flogging is not really a good solution, but public apology is a good lesson.
I dunno. If someons did the flogging ... and maybe someone else just stood there wearing a leather vest, hood and arm bands for intimidation's sake ....
Would that work?
Issuing a public apology now:
Sorry, folks. I stepped over the line with names and such.
Painting models instead.
Srsly
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/04/06 02:29:06
"You can bring any cheesy unit you want. If you lose. Casey taught me that." -Tim S.
"I'm gonna follow Casey; he knows where the beer's at!" -Blackmoor, BAO 2013
warboss wrote: A good start IMO (and a repeat suggestion from earlier) is to go over any list in contention for ANY prize with a fine tooth comb before that last round starts. A 450 person tourney may not have the staff necessary to go over evey list in this current age of Stupidhammer army composition but they certainly SHOULD have the amount to go over the top 16 on the final day (and who ever is in the running for individual prizes) if they're adequately staffed.
Let's be honest.. .in a large tourney, almost no one cares if the 64th placed guy had an illegal list except maybe the 65th placed guy or one of the few folks who lost to him but an illegal army winning any sort of prize should be an embarassment to everyone running that tourney. Avoid the internet and local drama... check any list that might be rewarded.
This. No player in the top 16 should be using an illegal list, no excuses.
Here comes a major problem that happened with FOB
when it is made clear that someone cheated, demands for refunds or redos can be made. If I found out an opponent who I lost too cheated purposefully? You bet your ass im gonna make a fuss about it.
warboss wrote: A good start IMO (and a repeat suggestion from earlier) is to go over any list in contention for ANY prize with a fine tooth comb before that last round starts. A 450 person tourney may not have the staff necessary to go over evey list in this current age of Stupidhammer army composition but they certainly SHOULD have the amount to go over the top 16 on the final day (and who ever is in the running for individual prizes) if they're adequately staffed.
Let's be honest.. .in a large tourney, almost no one cares if the 64th placed guy had an illegal list except maybe the 65th placed guy or one of the few folks who lost to him but an illegal army winning any sort of prize should be an embarassment to everyone running that tourney. Avoid the internet and local drama... check any list that might be rewarded.
This. No player in the top 16 should be using an illegal list, no excuses.
Here comes a major problem that happened with FOB
when it is made clear that someone cheated, demands for refunds or redos can be made. If I found out an opponent who I lost too cheated purposefully? You bet your ass im gonna make a fuss about it.
The players shouldn't have to make a fuss. There should be a clear cut protocol in place for the top 16/32 of an event that states lists will be reviewed something like this: "Once the top bracket of 16/32 has been determined, those in the top bracket will have their lists reviewed. If your list has errors in your favor you will be dropped out of the top bracket and be ineligible for prizes but may continue to compete in the event with a modified list."
It is simple, cut and dry, doesn't expel people from events, bar them from further events etc. It does however create an incentive for players to make sure their lists are correct, which doesn't seem to exist now. The honor system is great as a concept, but let me assure you as someone who has worked in education the last 12 years it doesn't actually exist. When given lax guidelines or unenforced rules there will always be a majority who choose not to follow said rules or guidelines. If you lived in a city where the PD refused to hand out citations for parking violations would you still follow posted street signage? I doubt it.
Las Vegas Open Head Judge
I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings or pride, but your credentials matter. Even on the internet.
"If you do not have the knowledge, you do not have the right to the opinion." -Plato
warboss wrote: A good start IMO (and a repeat suggestion from earlier) is to go over any list in contention for ANY prize with a fine tooth comb before that last round starts. A 450 person tourney may not have the staff necessary to go over evey list in this current age of Stupidhammer army composition but they certainly SHOULD have the amount to go over the top 16 on the final day (and who ever is in the running for individual prizes) if they're adequately staffed.
Let's be honest.. .in a large tourney, almost no one cares if the 64th placed guy had an illegal list except maybe the 65th placed guy or one of the few folks who lost to him but an illegal army winning any sort of prize should be an embarassment to everyone running that tourney. Avoid the internet and local drama... check any list that might be rewarded.
This. No player in the top 16 should be using an illegal list, no excuses.
Here comes a major problem that happened with FOB
when it is made clear that someone cheated, demands for refunds or redos can be made. If I found out an opponent who I lost too cheated purposefully? You bet your ass im gonna make a fuss about it.
The players shouldn't have to make a fuss. There should be a clear cut protocol in place for the top 16/32 of an event that states lists will be reviewed something like this: "Once the top bracket of 16/32 has been determined, those in the top bracket will have their lists reviewed. If your list has errors in your favor you will be dropped out of the top bracket and be ineligible for prizes but may continue to compete in the event with a modified list."
It is simple, cut and dry, doesn't expel people from events, bar them from further events etc. It does however create an incentive for players to make sure their lists are correct, which doesn't seem to exist now. The honor system is great as a concept, but let me assure you as someone who has worked in education the last 12 years it doesn't actually exist. When given lax guidelines or unenforced rules there will always be a majority who choose not to follow said rules or guidelines. If you lived in a city where the PD refused to hand out citations for parking violations would you still follow posted street signage? I doubt it.
Or we could just do it the simple way: have each player check their first opponents list to make sure it is legal. Allot 15 extra minutes in the round for this to occur. Have players with concerns over the legality of their opponent's list call a judge over for clarification.
warboss wrote: A good start IMO (and a repeat suggestion from earlier) is to go over any list in contention for ANY prize with a fine tooth comb before that last round starts. A 450 person tourney may not have the staff necessary to go over evey list in this current age of Stupidhammer army composition but they certainly SHOULD have the amount to go over the top 16 on the final day (and who ever is in the running for individual prizes) if they're adequately staffed.
Let's be honest.. .in a large tourney, almost no one cares if the 64th placed guy had an illegal list except maybe the 65th placed guy or one of the few folks who lost to him but an illegal army winning any sort of prize should be an embarassment to everyone running that tourney. Avoid the internet and local drama... check any list that might be rewarded.
This. No player in the top 16 should be using an illegal list, no excuses.
Here comes a major problem that happened with FOB
when it is made clear that someone cheated, demands for refunds or redos can be made. If I found out an opponent who I lost too cheated purposefully? You bet your ass im gonna make a fuss about it.
The players shouldn't have to make a fuss. There should be a clear cut protocol in place for the top 16/32 of an event that states lists will be reviewed something like this: "Once the top bracket of 16/32 has been determined, those in the top bracket will have their lists reviewed. If your list has errors in your favor you will be dropped out of the top bracket and be ineligible for prizes but may continue to compete in the event with a modified list."
It is simple, cut and dry, doesn't expel people from events, bar them from further events etc. It does however create an incentive for players to make sure their lists are correct, which doesn't seem to exist now. The honor system is great as a concept, but let me assure you as someone who has worked in education the last 12 years it doesn't actually exist. When given lax guidelines or unenforced rules there will always be a majority who choose not to follow said rules or guidelines. If you lived in a city where the PD refused to hand out citations for parking violations would you still follow posted street signage? I doubt it.
Or we could just do it the simple way: have each player check their first opponents list to make sure it is legal. Allot 15 extra minutes in the round for this to occur. Have players with concerns over the legality of their opponent's list call a judge over for clarification.
You have the knowledge to check any list for errors of all types? I've been playing 40k since the end of 3rd through now, I play competitively, and I have no qualms about admitting I could NOT check all lists for errors. I don't have the points costs of every piece of wargear from every codex memorized. I don't have all the formations, detachments, and units special rules and restrictions memorized from every faction. Just two examples, I doubt most players at a given tournament have this type of knowledge of the game.
Las Vegas Open Head Judge
I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings or pride, but your credentials matter. Even on the internet.
"If you do not have the knowledge, you do not have the right to the opinion." -Plato
warboss wrote: A good start IMO (and a repeat suggestion from earlier) is to go over any list in contention for ANY prize with a fine tooth comb before that last round starts. A 450 person tourney may not have the staff necessary to go over evey list in this current age of Stupidhammer army composition but they certainly SHOULD have the amount to go over the top 16 on the final day (and who ever is in the running for individual prizes) if they're adequately staffed.
Let's be honest.. .in a large tourney, almost no one cares if the 64th placed guy had an illegal list except maybe the 65th placed guy or one of the few folks who lost to him but an illegal army winning any sort of prize should be an embarassment to everyone running that tourney. Avoid the internet and local drama... check any list that might be rewarded.
This. No player in the top 16 should be using an illegal list, no excuses.
Here comes a major problem that happened with FOB
when it is made clear that someone cheated, demands for refunds or redos can be made. If I found out an opponent who I lost too cheated purposefully? You bet your ass im gonna make a fuss about it.
The players shouldn't have to make a fuss. There should be a clear cut protocol in place for the top 16/32 of an event that states lists will be reviewed something like this: "Once the top bracket of 16/32 has been determined, those in the top bracket will have their lists reviewed. If your list has errors in your favor you will be dropped out of the top bracket and be ineligible for prizes but may continue to compete in the event with a modified list."
It is simple, cut and dry, doesn't expel people from events, bar them from further events etc. It does however create an incentive for players to make sure their lists are correct, which doesn't seem to exist now. The honor system is great as a concept, but let me assure you as someone who has worked in education the last 12 years it doesn't actually exist. When given lax guidelines or unenforced rules there will always be a majority who choose not to follow said rules or guidelines. If you lived in a city where the PD refused to hand out citations for parking violations would you still follow posted street signage? I doubt it.
Or we could just do it the simple way: have each player check their first opponents list to make sure it is legal. Allot 15 extra minutes in the round for this to occur. Have players with concerns over the legality of their opponent's list call a judge over for clarification.
You have the knowledge to check any list for errors of all types? I've been playing 40k since the end of 3rd through now, I play competitively, and I have no qualms about admitting I could NOT check all lists for errors. I don't have the points costs of every piece of wargear from every codex memorized. I don't have all the formations, detachments, and units special rules and restrictions memorized from every faction. Just two examples, I doubt most players at a given tournament have this type of knowledge of the game.
I've played since the start of third and do so competitively but that type of knowledge isn't necessary. Your opponent is expected to bring copies of all relevant rules, including codex with associated costs. Can you flip through a book(s) quickly and match the book entries to the army list presented? If you have questions, can your opponent help you answer them with his references? If your opponent can't show you something or you disagree, can you call a judge? Checking the first round opponents list doesn't require vast knowledge. It requires you to be able to match a list to provided references.
Yer maximizing the potential for stupidity there.
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
