Switch Theme:

Change to Tournament times in 40k  [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
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran






SOoo... What happens if the player(s) forget to flip the clock?
   
Made in se
Been Around the Block



Sweden



 BaconCatBug wrote:
Ban TITANICS if you want to have actual fun.


I never thought I'd agree with you, but THIS! So much this! Titanic units is for Apocalypse, not normal 40k.

Remember to brush your teef! 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




 oni wrote:
SOoo... What happens if the player(s) forget to flip the clock?


The player who forgot to pass the time to their opponent loses out as a result of their mistake. How is this a problem? Yet again, this is another supposed gotcha to show how chess clocks aren't the answer and it simply doesn't stand up to the evidence of experience. Chess clocks have been used at major tournaments now. They aren't perfect but the feedback overall has been that they are a benefit. All the scare stories about forgetting to pass the time or phones running a chess clock app running out of battery or disputes about when to pass the time to your opponent simply weren't a major problem.
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Slipspace wrote:
The player who forgot to pass the time to their opponent loses out as a result of their mistake.


And if the opponent had passed the time to them when they weren't looking?

All the scare stories about forgetting to pass the time or phones running a chess clock app running out of battery or disputes about when to pass the time to your opponent simply weren't a major problem.


Because most people aren't cheating TFGs. Clocks can work as long as nobody tries to cheat, but those players weren't the ones slow playing anyway.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Peregrine wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
The player who forgot to pass the time to their opponent loses out as a result of their mistake.


And if the opponent had passed the time to them when they weren't looking?

All the scare stories about forgetting to pass the time or phones running a chess clock app running out of battery or disputes about when to pass the time to your opponent simply weren't a major problem.


Because most people aren't cheating TFGs. Clocks can work as long as nobody tries to cheat, but those players weren't the ones slow playing anyway.
You would be shocked to see how much faster games go against people that are not slow playing when you add a clock.

And for the billionth time. Clocks don't eliminate TFG. nothing completely stops TFG, no one is claiming that. It improves the situation and makes it harder to be TFG and easier to catch.
Yes you can try to flip the clock to me when I'm not looking, but by god if I catch you the judge is getting called on you instantly.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/03/15 12:24:49


 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




 Ordana wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
The player who forgot to pass the time to their opponent loses out as a result of their mistake.


And if the opponent had passed the time to them when they weren't looking?

All the scare stories about forgetting to pass the time or phones running a chess clock app running out of battery or disputes about when to pass the time to your opponent simply weren't a major problem.


Because most people aren't cheating TFGs. Clocks can work as long as nobody tries to cheat, but those players weren't the ones slow playing anyway.
You would be shocked to see how much faster games go against people that are not slow playing when you add a clock.


Given that the anti-chess clock crowd seem to like to ignore any evidence that shows chess clocks actually work I don't think they'd be shocked. They'd just ignore said evidence.

 Ordana wrote:

And for the billionth time. Clocks don't eliminate TFG. nothing completely stops TFG, no one is claiming that. It improves the situation and makes it harder to be TFG and easier to catch.
Yes you can try to flip the clock to me when I'm not looking, but by god if I catch you the judge is getting called on you instantly.


Precisely. I mean, there's also nothing to stop my opponent pushing my models back 3" when I'm not looking, or from flat-out removing a couple of models from one of my squads while I'm distracted. TFG is TFG. The harder we make it for them to be TFG the better, and chess clcoks came about because slow play was identified as a particularly difficult area of TFG behaviour to deal with (among other reasons).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/03/15 13:21:28


 
   
Made in ca
Painting Within the Lines




t.dot

Let's just redux this to the max. All games decided by the flip of a coin. Boom. No trouble finishing in under 2 and a half hours now. Let's see someone slow-play that!

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Pasadena

 Peregrine wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
The player who forgot to pass the time to their opponent loses out as a result of their mistake.


And if the opponent had passed the time to them when they weren't looking?

All the scare stories about forgetting to pass the time or phones running a chess clock app running out of battery or disputes about when to pass the time to your opponent simply weren't a major problem.


Because most people aren't cheating TFGs. Clocks can work as long as nobody tries to cheat, but those players weren't the ones slow playing anyway.


Arguing against using clocks on the basis that someone could cheat with them is asinine. By that logic, I should refuse to use tape measures, dice, terrain built by others, models built by others, or accept rules out of anyone else's rule books because all those things could have potentially been tampered with by my opponent and they might be cheating. Best to not play at all! Have you started attending tournaments by the way?

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

 
   
Made in fi
Decrepit Dakkanaut





well I'm sure glad this isn't trouble that bothers me. No need to use clocks, no troubles getting games in. 3h games <3

“Nothing has a definite nature, so people cannot be purely evil. Even so-called evil people will aspire to follow a moral path when they feel a sense of community.” – Kukai

11772 pts(along with lots of unpainted unsorted stuff)
5150 pts
~3200 pts Knights
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut







 Brothererekose wrote:
When my time is zero, my opponent gets his Turn 5 or 6, with his 10 or 20 or however many minutes left. He will likely get kill one, kill more, and likely, push my units off objectives and score those.

Example:
Let's say Bob runs of time at the top of turn 5. He moves units, starts to roll dice to shoot, but his time runs out. Fran still has 12 minutes on her clock. Bob doesn't get to roll to wound because he's done. He can score any objectives points & secondaries but then Fran gets her time.

Fran takes her turn 5. Move units, psy phase. Shoot enemies. Bob rolls saves only, no FNP, and if Bob is a douche and tries to lolly gag through her turn by dithering over which models to remove, she can call a judge over. The TO could pause the clock (according to ITC rules, players don't pause the clock, only judges can. That's straight from Mr. Raspy voice himself). Fran goes the fight phase. Again, Bob doesn't roll dice to fight back, only saves.

Fran's turn 5 is over and she still has 4 minutes. Bob has no time for turn 6, so it goes right back to Fran, who again, can use her 4 minutes to Move, Psy-cast, Shoot and Fight.

I see no problem in all that and I have been in both situations, having more time than an opponent and running out of time (and won and loss in both circumstances).


Only thing I'd quibble with here is Bob's shooting in T5 - I do think he should get to completely resolve the firing of that unit, if only so the game isn't technically in a weird game state - "We know these rounds hit, sir, but..."

After all, at this stage Bob has at most, what, 3 more rolls to do? 1, Potential re-rolls to hit from current unit. 2, Initial wound rolls for current unit. 3, Potential re-rolls to wound from current unit. Heck, you could even not allow the re-rolls, and then he just has one roll to make before he is done.

2019 Plog - Dysartes Twitches - 2019 Output

My Twitch stream - going live at 7pm GMT Tuesday & Thursday, 12pm Sunday (work permitting).

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
 
   
Made in gb
Dispassionate Imperial Judge






HATE Club, East London

The issue with chess clocks isn't people cheating, or how people use them, or people forgetting to use them. All those things can be accounted for.

The issue is the very idea that both players should have the same amount of time, and the game imbalance that occurs when you try and force this.

Let's say we're playing a friendly game. You have 20 units and I have 10. We happen to finish in three hours. In that game, it's likely you took twice as long to do your turns as I did. Both of our turns probably involved checking the odd rule, chatting, having a drink, etc. In total, you might have taken 2 of those hours and I only took 1, but this is completely fair. In a game of 40k there is no expectation that each army take the same amount of time to play, just like there is no expectation that each army have the same number of models. If you've got more models to move, you'll take more time.

If we decide, though, that each of us is only allowed 1.5 hours 'to be fair' then the game really changes. You need to play your two-hour army really efficiently. You can't stop to think, can't check rules, and have to be switched on and rushing at all points to make sure you don't overplay your time, all the while remembering about the chess clock. On the other hand, I can take half an hour LONGER than I actually need. I can spend time thinking up new tactics and tricks and go to books and check up on the rules for them. I can pop to the bar. I'm not rushed or stressed. This is a MASSIVE advantage. And, it's an unfair advantage - it has nothing to do with 'fairness' as far as the rules of 40k are concerned.

Of course, you could account for this and divide time by size or complexity of army using some sort of formula, but I doubt any TO really has the time for that!

So, instead, we have a situation where introducing chess clocks will inevitably lead to an unfair advantage for players using smaller armies.

The only way to remove this would be to set the points size at a level where your average tournament attendee (so, casual players), playing the biggest possible army, can still play 6 turns in 1.5 hours without feeling any more rushed or stressed than someone with a small army.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/03/21 12:54:48


   
Made in ca
Ancient Venerable Black Templar Dreadnought





Canada

I was very happy to see a horde army use movement trays. I found that dramatically helps with movement until we get into dense terrain. Pretty handy for setup as well.

A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




 ArbitorIan wrote:
The issue with chess clocks isn't people cheating, or how people use them, or people forgetting to use them. All those things can be accounted for.

The issue is the very idea that both players should have the same amount of time, and the game imbalance that occurs when you try and force this.

Let's say we're playing a friendly game. You have 20 units and I have 10. We happen to finish in three hours. In that game, it's likely you took twice as long to do your turns as I did. Both of our turns probably involved checking the odd rule, chatting, having a drink, etc. In total, you might have taken 2 of those hours and I only took 1, but this is completely fair. In a game of 40k there is no expectation that each army take the same amount of time to play, just like there is no expectation that each army have the same number of models. If you've got more models to move, you'll take more time.

If we decide, though, that each of us is only allowed 1.5 hours 'to be fair' then the game really changes. You need to play your two-hour army really efficiently. You can't stop to think, can't check rules, and have to be switched on and rushing at all points to make sure you don't overplay your time, all the while remembering about the chess clock. On the other hand, I can take half an hour LONGER than I actually need. I can spend time thinking up new tactics and tricks and go to books and check up on the rules for them. I can pop to the bar. I'm not rushed or stressed. This is a MASSIVE advantage. And, it's an unfair advantage - it has nothing to do with 'fairness' as far as the rules of 40k are concerned.

Of course, you could account for this and divide time by size or complexity of army using some sort of formula, but I doubt any TO really has the time for that!

So, instead, we have a situation where introducing chess clocks will inevitably lead to an unfair advantage for players using smaller armies.

The only way to remove this would be to set the points size at a level where your average tournament attendee (so, casual players), playing the biggest possible army, can still play 6 turns in 1.5 hours without feeling any more rushed or stressed than someone with a small army.



That argument only holds up if tournaments fail to allocate a reasonable amount of time per round in the first place. If we assume round times are long enough to reasonably expect all but the most extreme armies to finish their games chess clocks become a check against slow play rather than a punishment for taking a slow army. Regardless, we know that slow play has been a problem in tournaments in the past. If it's determined it's enough of an issue steps need to be taken to stamp it out. No solution is perfect, but given that we know even the largest horde armies were able to complete games using a clock at the LVO we know it's not inherently unfair to those armies, particularly when balanced against the need to make sure other players aren't unfairly impacted by their opponent's choice of army.

40k was never designed as a tournament game. It remains singlarly unsuited to it, IMO. However, if you're going to make it into a tournament game some modifications may be required. Arguing the core rules don't include a time limit ignores this rather obvious fact.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer



London

I was at the UKGT this weekend and played 6 games at 1750pts. Ran out of time three of them I think, and in two cases we stopped because one player conceded - not because we actually finished. In one game we used a chess clock but the round ran out anyway, with the two of us having spent roughly the same amount of time (there was maybe 3-4 minutes difference).

The worst was a game in which we only got two turns, and that wasn't because of slow play. It was because we both had a lot of models, moving and firing a lot. The game just takes a long time sometimes.

Personally I see no downside to smaller games. In fact I think there's a case to be made that they'd be better games, with fewer points to spend on the big expensive stuff that many people seem not to like. It might therefore reduce the benefit of going first - but it might also make it harder to fit in enough stuff to make a TAC list. That could turn the game more "rock-paper-scissors".

The thing I really hate about not having enough time is that you feel so rushed. I had one opponent who'd call out how much time was left literally any time I stopped to think about what to do. Then the chances are you make mistakes.

I'd probably try for 1500 point games and see if that helped.
   
Made in gb
Dispassionate Imperial Judge






HATE Club, East London

Slipspace wrote:
That argument only holds up if tournaments fail to allocate a reasonable amount of time per round in the first place. If we assume round times are long enough to reasonably expect all but the most extreme armies to finish their games chess clocks become a check against slow play rather than a punishment for taking a slow army. Regardless, we know that slow play has been a problem in tournaments in the past. If it's determined it's enough of an issue steps need to be taken to stamp it out. No solution is perfect, but given that we know even the largest horde armies were able to complete games using a clock at the LVO we know it's not inherently unfair to those armies, particularly when balanced against the need to make sure other players aren't unfairly impacted by their opponent's choice of army.

40k was never designed as a tournament game. It remains singlarly unsuited to it, IMO. However, if you're going to make it into a tournament game some modifications may be required. Arguing the core rules don't include a time limit ignores this rather obvious fact.


Agreed, the argument only holds up if there’s not enough time. In fact, the argument applies until you get to the point where the time allocated is enough that neither player feels rushed or could possibly gain advantage from having more time than the other.

So, what is a reasonable amount of time? As you say, some players were able to complete their games with a horde army in 1.5 hours. But weren’t chess clocks only used on the top tables? There are always going to be the sort of ultra-competitive types who have read up on every possible enemy and already have their plans set, but most players aren’t like that. The vast majority of tournament attendees are casual players coming for a fun weekend away.

Practically, the only way a chess clock / equal time scenario works is if the ONLY way someone could ever go over their allotted 1.5 hours is if they are deliberately slow-playing. Can a casual, mid-table player play six turns of a 2000pt horde army without being rushed, with enough time to check anything they need to and have fun, in 1.5hrs? I don’t think so, even if the odd top-table player can do it.

I think, if you stick to everyone having 1.5 hours max, you need to limit games to 1250pts or less.

   
 
Forum Index » Tournament Discussions
Go to: