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.

brian007 wrote:The one thing I want to add to all this is a comment about the guy who said to hit them where it hurts....in the sportsmenship. I hate guys like this! Cry, you got beat and now you want to get even. Guys like this get kicked out of tournies where I play. Thats all I have to say.....

Yep, you beat me with a flavor of the month army whos list you put no effort into yourself. I must be a crybaby because you can't build your own lists. Sucks to be me.

Sorry, you bring an army you didn't build to a tournament and I'm going to hit you in your Comp. scores. You act like a dick while you beat me or gloat about your army? I'm gonna hit you in your Sportsmanship. There's a very fine line between powergaming and bringing someone else's list to the tournament. You do the first, I'll be the first to shake your hand and call it a good game, you do the latter and you can cry to a judge about why your scores from me were so low.


Your tournament turnout must be terrible. But I think it may be more because of your attitude than because you "kick them out"

sourclams wrote:

Likewise I don't think playing an Internet-Deck list makes you a poor sport or even a bad gamer.

It does, however, make you terribly unoriginal, and that's why I would gladly give someone a 0 for comp if they brought a list that they obviously didn't build to a tournament

And what if they actually thought it up themself, since they've got all the access to the exact same resources and some of these lists are painfully obvious? It didn't exactly take a genius to look at the Tyranid dex and go 'hey, 8 Monstrous Creatures might be pretty good'

Regardless I'd certainly give you a 0 for sportsmanship for being such a grognard.

See how stupid these "soft" scores are?

sourclams wrote:
Regardless I'd certainly give you a 0 for sportsmanship for being such a grognard.

So you get a 0 for being unoriginal, I get a 0 because you feel like being a jagoff because you're butthurt that you brought the most unoriginal list possible and people won't give you credit for it?

Works for me I suppose.

By all means, if this is a GT, bring whatever list you want. For a local tournament for a little bit of store credit, is bringing a list like this really necessary?


And yes, soft scores are stupid. I won't argue there. I;m just saying that people are going to resent being absolutely roflstomped by a list like Nob bikers in a small, local tournament.

What does Sportsmanship have to do with List Composition?

Tanking someone in both because you dislike their list is not how the system works.

You may as well tank someone's sportsmanship because you don't think their army is painted well, in addition to giving them a bad painting score.

I think a C'tan would get crushed by a squad of nob bikers.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:I think a C'tan would get crushed by a squad of nob bikers.

G

Definitely, he would.

nooB BIKERS... guys... not sportsmanship

nooB BIKERS... guys... not sportsmanship

Orkeosaurus wrote:What does Sportsmanship have to do with List Composition?

Tanking someone in both because you dislike their list is not how the system works.

But that's the point. That is exactly how the system does work. You can knock a soft score for any reason you please - including just not liking having lost to them.

Soft scores are grief scores. Players should not be given a system that encourages griefing.

You may as well tank someone's sportsmanship because you don't think their army is painted well, in addition to giving them a bad painting score.

Again, this is completely legitimate - as an individual may very well consdier it unsporting to show up with an army that isn't painted well. It can be esaily percieved as a lack of interest or effort when others have tried so much harder. If a player can concieve of it, it is a legitimate reason to knock the score.

The best tournaments I've attended had no comp or sports score given by the players. These scores were instead given by the judges and organizers.

You can tank soft scores at your own discretion. I would not knock someone because they brought a list I don't enjoying playing against. To be honest it is how a person plays how I score their sportsmanship. I have said I don't like nob bikers but on the other hand I like the challenge they bring to the table. I don't think it is fluffy when people field two squads though and I would mark them lower on their composition. It could be a fantastic looking army well painted and with a lot of conversions.

G

Democratus wrote:
But that's the point. That is exactly how the system does work. You can knock a soft score for any reason you please - including just not liking having lost to them.

Soft scores are grief scores. Players should not be given a system that encourages griefing.

That's not how it's supposed to work then.

Again, this is completely legitimate - as an individual may very well consdier it unsporting to show up with an army that isn't painted well. It can be esaily percieved as a lack of interest or effort when others have tried so much harder. If a player can concieve of it, it is a legitimate reason to knock the score.

What is and is not a "legitimate" reason is subjective, but I would think the presence of a score for painting would rule out the basing of sportsmanship on your opponent's paintjob. You're playing dumb if you wonder if the sportsmanship score is for painting too.

You could knock it down anyway, but that's not the intention of the sportsmanship score. It's one thing to say it's a bad system, it's another to say going against intention of the system in order to spite people who beat is ethical.

The best tournaments I've attended had no comp or sports score given by the players. These scores were instead given by the judges and organizers.

I agree.

Soft scores aren't particularly worthwhile. Even if people aren't trying to spite each other, you end with hugely different standards of judging.

Someone might play a decent game, go "no problems with that guy," and give him 5 out of 5 for doing nothing wrong.

Someone else might play a decent game, go "no problems with that guy," and give him 3 out of 5 for it being a regular game with no issues..

Bunker wrote:

sourclams wrote:
Regardless I'd certainly give you a 0 for sportsmanship for being such a grognard.

By all means, if this is a GT, bring whatever list you want. For a local tournament for a little bit of store credit, is bringing a list like this really necessary?

Apparently. Me personally, I'm about to double lash my way to a couple of slices of pizza and a free package of bases! Wooooooooohoooo!


I'm actually siding with Sourclams. In theory, he's making very good points - that the gaming community will police themselves and everyone will drop their bolters and hold hands sing hymns for the emperor.

But that doesn't really happen. There is always one dick ruining a scoring system, whether he be the dude who says "WTF YOU SLAM MY NON INTERNET BUT ITS INTERNET LITS I SLAM U BAC KLOLOLOL" or the dude who slams the "obviously internet list that the other duder didn't build" and so forth.

In a perfect world, free of human bias and emotions I would be all about a soft score. However, in the real world where you can get bad scores just because you won a game... well I wouldn't want anything to do with that system.

My personal take is - just know what kind of tournament you're getting yourself into. If it's a beer and pretzels, nothing on the line one why not take a softer army and have some fun? I'm personally not interested in walking all over the kid who moves his squads up the field in little clusters, backwards.. you know?

So are we all in agreement here that soft scores are stupid, powergaming in a "fun" tournament isn't really necessary, and that as gamers we should all hold hands and sing Joy to the World while we make s'mores over a campfire?

Ahh the eventual conclusion of most overpowered unit discussion: "I'll just tank their soft scores!"

It just makes me laugh that my ones downtrodden Orks of 3rd Ed now have on the most abusive "Small Model Count Armies" in 5th, and are on the same level of hatred of Nidzilla & Mech Eldar in 4th.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Ahh the eventual conclusion of most overpowered unit discussion: "I'll just tank their soft scores!"

It just makes me laugh that my ones downtrodden Orks of 3rd Ed now have on the most abusive "Small Model Count Armies" in 5th, and are on the same level of hatred of Nidzilla & Mech Eldar in 4th.

You're a page late, chief.

tau wouldnt have too much of a problem if you plan it right and prepare for the charge. Hit them up with markerlights to reduce the cover save, then fire with broadsides or hammerheads to ignore feel no pain and instant death, also, if you have plasma rifle and fusion blaster wielding crisis suits, blast away, the fusion will do a lot of damage, being instant death for the 4 base T nob and the plasma rifle will ignore the armor and wound on a 3+, not the best against them but still pretty good,

also if you can run a devilfish in the way of them to slow them down, fire warriors focussing can do a little damage.

A scary situation, but with some planning you can counter them, just watch out for the rest of his boyz running up behind them

Yeah, my bad, tau would do alright against the ARCH ENEMY (wohohoh)
LOL =P