ATC Drama

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.

**djones520**

ITC is an international thing. Saw someone mention today, an ITC Major will be taking place in Sweden soon.

**Brothererekose**

djones520 wrote:
ITC is an international thing. Saw someone mention today, an ITC Major will be taking place in Sweden soon.

Yes, djones, I knew. I was being a tiny bit disingenuous to get SSUp to come forward with some disclosure. Posters are always so reluctant to state what their experiences are, which, if they did, would give what they say some weight of authority. It helps remove any suspicion that they're just a troll.

I mean, you don't want me looking at your X-ray and deciding if that shadow is cancer or not. Nor a Volvo mechanic. Nor an oceanographer. You'd want the radiologist or an oncologist to do that.

I don't want the oceanographer nor the doctor under my s90 figuring out why it won't shift out of 2nd gear.

And when we want to know why dead or starving seals are showing up on the beach ... you get the idea?

**JohnHwangDD**

Brothererekose wrote:
Posters are always so reluctant to state what their experiences are, which, if they did, would give what they say some weight of authority

Welp, this is my experience.

Respec my authoritah!

**Larks**

Prestor Jon wrote:
If games need to finish within a set timeframe then tournament rules should assess a penalty to both players for failing to complete the required amount of turns within the required amount of time. The focus should be on completing the game not equalizing time used by each player, no?

"Slow-Playing" is the act of stalling the game so that it ends while you are ahead in points with the knowledge that you'd likely lose if the game were to continue to it's "natural" end. Punishing both players for games not completed does not solve slow-play, but gives a player decidedly down in a match an opportunity to game their opponent with a "if I can't win, nobody can!" back-pocket play. Death Clocks appear to me (in my admittedly limited experience with them) to be the "best" solution, and I'm not sure there even is a "perfect" answer to the issue.

The reason I think the time split needs to be equal is because every single player has the same pool of armies to choose from, and if they choose to skew towards high body-count lists, it's on them to perform with it accordingly. A tournament game is a test of skill between two players, not a game night at the Local.

**redux**

Chief Librarian Mephiston wrote:
I think it's still a practice. Noone is surprised when a company commander has a las pistol. I think some people are just taking WYSIWYG arguments to silly levels in hope of avoiding the actual discussion.

Yeah, some people are engaging in heavy strawman arguments to defend their positions, which I take as a sign that they know their position is indefensible, so they have to try to take it absurd lengths to make their position reasonable.

Everyone knows that standard gear doesn't have to be WYSIWYG, because it's understood that every model has its core equipment. You don't have to model a bolt pistol, frag grenades, or krak grenades on a Tactical Marine, because we all know that Tactical Marines come with that as standard. You don't have to model a laspistol or a chainsword on a Company Commander because we all know that laspistols and chainswords come standard on Company Commanders. The only time they don't have those weapons are when they're replaced by purchasable options, in which case, yes, those purchasable options should be visible on the model. If you replaced the laspistol with a boltgun or bolt pistol, then we should see the boltgun or bolt pistol on the model in some way. If you replaced the chainsword with a power fist, then we should see the power fist. In a tournament setting that should absolutely be a requirement. And if you don't have the appropriate model, or don't want to redo your existing models, then use them as they are. Simple.

I've only made it to page 17 on this thread but all the WYSIWYG talk makes me wonder about proxies. I haven't been to a tournament as I am very, very new to 40K so forgive me if I'm talking off topic. How do proxies fit into the WYSIWYG conversation? From my ignorant perspective it seems that a lot of what some of the anti-WYSIWYG arguments are saying is they support proxies.

https://youtu.be/1_UXan8lQa4?t=28

**niv-mizzet**

redux wrote:
Chief Librarian Mephiston wrote:
I think it's still a practice. Noone is surprised when a company commander has a las pistol. I think some people are just taking WYSIWYG arguments to silly levels in hope of avoiding the actual discussion.

Yeah, some people are engaging in heavy strawman arguments to defend their positions, which I take as a sign that they know their position is indefensible, so they have to try to take it absurd lengths to make their position reasonable.

Everyone knows that standard gear doesn't have to be WYSIWYG, because it's understood that every model has its core equipment. You don't have to model a bolt pistol, frag grenades, or krak grenades on a Tactical Marine, because we all know that Tactical Marines come with that as standard. You don't have to model a laspistol or a chainsword on a Company Commander because we all know that laspistols and chainswords come standard on Company Commanders. The only time they don't have those weapons are when they're replaced by purchasable options, in which case, yes, those purchasable options should be visible on the model. If you replaced the laspistol with a boltgun or bolt pistol, then we should see the boltgun or bolt pistol on the model in some way. If you replaced the chainsword with a power fist, then we should see the power fist. In a tournament setting that should absolutely be a requirement. And if you don't have the appropriate model, or don't want to redo your existing models, then use them as they are. Simple.

I've only made it to page 17 on this thread but all the WYSIWYG talk makes me wonder about proxies. I haven't been to a tournament as I am very, very new to 40K so forgive me if I'm talking off topic. How do proxies fit into the WYSIWYG conversation? From my ignorant perspective it seems that a lot of what some of the anti-WYSIWYG arguments are saying is they support proxies.

https://youtu.be/1_UXan8lQa4?t=28

Oh man been a while since I saw this thread. Anyway... It’s up to that tournament organizer in particular if proxies/counts-as/conversions are allowed. There is no worldwide policy. For best results, if you want to run something that is not what the model is, contact the TO in question and ask, usually with a picture.

**Audustum**

niv-mizzet wrote:
redux wrote:
Chief Librarian Mephiston wrote:
I think it's still a practice. Noone is surprised when a company commander has a las pistol. I think some people are just taking WYSIWYG arguments to silly levels in hope of avoiding the actual discussion.

Yeah, some people are engaging in heavy strawman arguments to defend their positions, which I take as a sign that they know their position is indefensible, so they have to try to take it absurd lengths to make their position reasonable.

Everyone knows that standard gear doesn't have to be WYSIWYG, because it's understood that every model has its core equipment. You don't have to model a bolt pistol, frag grenades, or krak grenades on a Tactical Marine, because we all know that Tactical Marines come with that as standard. You don't have to model a laspistol or a chainsword on a Company Commander because we all know that laspistols and chainswords come standard on Company Commanders. The only time they don't have those weapons are when they're replaced by purchasable options, in which case, yes, those purchasable options should be visible on the model. If you replaced the laspistol with a boltgun or bolt pistol, then we should see the boltgun or bolt pistol on the model in some way. If you replaced the chainsword with a power fist, then we should see the power fist. In a tournament setting that should absolutely be a requirement. And if you don't have the appropriate model, or don't want to redo your existing models, then use them as they are. Simple.

I've only made it to page 17 on this thread but all the WYSIWYG talk makes me wonder about proxies. I haven't been to a tournament as I am very, very new to 40K so forgive me if I'm talking off topic. How do proxies fit into the WYSIWYG conversation? From my ignorant perspective it seems that a lot of what some of the anti-WYSIWYG arguments are saying is they support proxies.

https://youtu.be/1_UXan8lQa4?t=28

Oh man been a while since I saw this thread. Anyway... It’s up to that tournament organizer in particular if proxies/counts-as/conversions are allowed. There is no worldwide policy. For best results, if you want to run something that is not what the model is, contact the TO in question and ask, usually with a picture.

This is the proper etiquette, I believe.

As a further clarification, I think I saw before that this is how the naming system works:

1. Proxy: Some object meant to be a legitimate model (like using a plastic cup as a Drop Pod).

2. Counts-As: An actual model meant to stand in for another model (close, but not quite, such as using Castellan Crowe as a Brotherhood Champion or a Knight Crusader as a Knight Paladin, I think).

3. Conversion: A custom model made by a player. Some tournaments actually have a percentage requirement, which I think means X percent of the model has to be GW bits for it to be usable (40% is coming to mind for some reason).

**insaniak**

Audustum wrote:

As a further clarification, I think I saw before that this is how the naming system works:

1. Proxy: Some object meant to be a legitimate model (like using a plastic cup as a Drop Pod).

2. Counts-As: An actual model meant to stand in for another model (close, but not quite, such as using Castellan Crowe as a Brotherhood Champion or a Knight Crusader as a Knight Paladin, I think).

3. Conversion: A custom model made by a player. Some tournaments actually have a percentage requirement, which I think means X percent of the model has to be GW bits for it to be usable (40% is coming to mind for some reason).

That isn't quite accurate. A proxy is anything standing in as something it isn't - so while this can cover using a cup as a drop pod, it can also cover using, say, a grot to represent a guardsman. Usually, a proxy is used because the player doesn't have an appropriate model.

Counts-as would be used where a model is fully intended to represent something else. Subbing in a standard grot model as a guardsman is a proxy. Subbing in a grot model equipped with a lasgun and with a cadian helmet hung on one ear would be a counts-as. Also used often with homebrew characters using special character rules - so this generic captain model armed with twin stormbolter-morning stars uses Marneus Calgar rules. The difference between a counts-as and a proxy would generally be that the counts as makes some sort of logical sense as whatever it is supposed to be, while a proxy is just whatever is to hand that's (hopefully) about the right size.

**the_scotsman**

djones520 wrote:
Somethings I will comment on, that's not related to this.

I was incredibly disappointed with the quality of some of the armies present. The paint job on some of these were atrocious. One army had literally been entirely sprayed blue, gold sharpie on the trim, and a random red splotch thrown here or there. Wasn't based or anything.

I played against a team who placed in the top 5 last year, and the guy was using unpainted toy models for custodes. There were numerous instances of Proxies, and numerous instances of "conversions" that were no where even close to reasonable represenations of what they were. An ork player had "KMK's" that were 1.5" tall, for crying out loud. They were about the same size as a terminator, when the actual KMK model is closer to the size of a rhino.

I was not pleased with the lack of enforcement on those rules.

(I will say that as a guy who owns both KMKs and Rhinos, a KMK is less than half the size/footprint of a rhino, though they are relatively close to the height if you angle the barrel upwards.

**Lorek**

I'm going to lock this thread due to thread necromancy. Please start a new thread on the topic.

Thanks!