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.

CaptKaruthors wrote:

And how would we 'get together' and decide? Put 70 of us in a cage and fight it out, winner decides the format?)

Thunderdome could work...LOL.

What if you had to chuck your minis at each other inside a huge pit and only the one survivor could emerge triumphant? Pewter with spiky bitz would so rawk again!

G

CaptKaruthors wrote:

And how would we 'get together' and decide? Put 70 of us in a cage and fight it out, winner decides the format?)

Thunderdome could work...LOL.

You know, they actually have one of those at Burningman. It's pretty much the whole reason I go. You're supposed to use foam weapons, but when you drop 'em and duke it out the goths that run it don't stop you (and you get crazy applause).

Isn't the Vegas GT traditionally at the end of the summer? Hmmm, these things could work together. "TWO NERDS ENTER! ONE NERD LEAVES!"

Savnock wrote:

CaptKaruthors wrote:

And how would we 'get together' and decide? Put 70 of us in a cage and fight it out, winner decides the format?)

Thunderdome could work...LOL.

You know, they actually have one of those at Burningman. It's pretty much the whole reason I go. You're supposed to use foam weapons, but when you drop 'em and duke it out the goths that run it don't stop you (and you get crazy applause).

Isn't the Vegas GT traditionally at the end of the summer? Hmmm, these things could work together. "TWO NERDS ENTER! ONE NERD LEAVES!"

I would so win this unless that guy from long island I played at baltimore, showed up. he was the first and only person I have seen be told to keep it down during a GT. It was an epic game

Manfred von Drakken wrote:Exactly one event north of Baltimore. Way to cover the Northeast, guys. Phoenix and Dallas get TONS of love.

My advice to any of "you guys" feeling left out.

1) Relax.
2) Relax.
3) Enjoy The Game.
4) Realize that winning a tournament doesn't validate you.
5) Realize they're doing you a favor and you'll be a better person for it if you embrace the oppurtunity to stop being "one of those guys".

Howlingmoon wrote:

Manfred von Drakken wrote:Exactly one event north of Baltimore. Way to cover the Northeast, guys. Phoenix and Dallas get TONS of love.

My advice to any of "you guys" feeling left out.

1) Relax.
2) Relax.
3) Enjoy The Game.
4) Realize that winning a tournament doesn't validate you.
5) Realize they're doing you a favor and you'll be a better person for it if you embrace the oppurtunity to stop being "one of those guys".

Thanx for the attitude adjustment. I now realise that tournament gaming is the root of all evil and if you enjoy competetive competition, you are a complete A-hole.

Again, I thank you for your advice.

Now....get out of our thread.

Good God I will never play another competitive game in my life ever again! I feel so dirty now.



G

Manfred von Drakken wrote:Exactly one event north of Baltimore. Way to cover the Northeast, guys. Phoenix and Dallas get TONS of love.

Just thought you guys would like to know, that GW stated they are looking for people to submit events so they can have more in the future. So if you want one in your area, then organize it yo!

Stupid GW discouraging Indy tourneys.

Oh, wait, sorry, that was what people were griping about last year.

This year it is stupid GW for encouraging Indy tourneys.

I get so confused as to why I am supposed to be complaining about GW.

There's always the C&D letters to fall back on.

Hi
As one of those key organizers – the Warmaster’s Fantasy (March 2010 & 2011) and 40K (September 2010) Challenges in Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (another 3 North-Eastern Events) - I am pumped about the new circuit.

We have an established event that has gotten a huge boost in a number of ways
- Exposure to American Players, increasing our growth potential.
- More substantial support from GW, helping our bottom line and increasing our prize potential beyond the thousands of dollars we already give away.
- A nice icing on the cake prize in the form of the Vegas entries.

In my view, the Vegas GT merely sweetens the pot rather than becoming the primary focus, although with luck it will bring in a few extra quality players.

On another note, why am I not worried about WAAC players?
The answer is simple. Our rules set demands excellence in all areas of the hobby; without painting and theme and sportsmanship and excellent play, you will not win our event. And I know that this holds true for other events as well – Astro-Toronto being one of them.

I love that GW has given us the freedom to have our own rules set in place. It means that players can have a unique experience wherever you go. Moreover, they can choose which experiences they want to have.

Cheers,
Nate Stevens, Organizer
The Warmaster’s Challenge

that GW stated they are looking for people to submit events so they can have more in the future. So if you want one in your area, then organize it yo!

Now that is what I was looking to hear.

Deadshane1 wrote:

Thanx for the attitude adjustment. I now realise that tournament gaming is the root of all evil and if you enjoy competetive competition, you are a complete A-hole.

Again, I thank you for your advice.

Now....get out of our thread.

It is refreshing to see events with varying levels of sports/comp/etc. giving every type of player a shot at the finals. Once there, sports and paint will matter, and the competition in those areas will be fierce. WAAC ain't gonna be enough unless it includes Extraordinarily-Nice-At-All-Costs too.

I'm really hoping/stoked for thorough independent coverage of the finals, with maybe a well-produced podcast or even condensed video. Interviews with top players, etc. I'd buy that for a dollar.

I keep reading about GBF and other talking about WAAC armies/players.

How do people come to the conclusion that these events will reward the WAAC players?

Yeah kind of sucks I cant find any events other than stuff in texas which is a 8 to 9 hour drive from new orleans. :(

Blackmoor wrote:I keep reading about GBF and other talking about WAAC armies/players.

How do people come to the conclusion that these events will reward the WAAC players?

Because soft scores are much easier to game for advantage than battle scores. Having events so heavily skewed towards soft scores only awards those who are willing to score their opponents low and bring pro-painted armies.

willydstyle wrote:

Blackmoor wrote:I keep reading about GBF and other talking about WAAC armies/players.

How do people come to the conclusion that these events will reward the WAAC players?

Because soft scores are much easier to game for advantage than battle scores. Having events so heavily skewed towards soft scores only awards those who are willing to score their opponents low and bring pro-painted armies.

If I understand what you are saying, events with a lot of soft scores reward WAAC players, where battle points only don't?

Did I read that right?

Yes, that has been my experience. Events with player-scored sportsmanship and comp scores that add into the overall only encourage those players who will do anything to win to game those scores.

While I think that comp particularly has no place in modern 40k, player-judged sportsmanship can be useful, but it should not add into the total score.

willydstyle wrote:Yes, that has been my experience. Events with player-scored sportsmanship and comp scores that add into the overall only encourage those players who will do anything to win to game those scores.

While I think that comp particularly has no place in modern 40k, player-judged sportsmanship can be useful, but it should not add into the total score.

I've felt the same way for a bit. The average decent person scores his opponent correctly. But it's open to abuse by those that wish to abuse it. You also have the opposite problem of too many people just giving everyone they play maximum points. I still will still have a painting and comp score as part of the events I'll be running, but they will both be judged by a panel of several people, and not player judged.

mikhaila wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Yes, that has been my experience. Events with player-scored sportsmanship and comp scores that add into the overall only encourage those players who will do anything to win to game those scores.

While I think that comp particularly has no place in modern 40k, player-judged sportsmanship can be useful, but it should not add into the total score.

I've felt the same way for a bit. The average decent person scores his opponent correctly. But it's open to abuse by those that wish to abuse it. You also have the opposite problem of too many people just giving everyone they play maximum points. I still will still have a painting and comp score as part of the events I'll be running, but they will both be judged by a panel of several people, and not player judged.

That's one way to do it.

At the last tournament I ran, I still had sportsmanship and paint scoring (no comp though), but they were separate prizes from the "overall." The paint scoring was not a check-list, but was panel-judged. The sportsmanship was player-scored, but I did not simply have a 1-10 checklist.

I had each player award their opponents one to three sportsmanship "awards": Most fun to play against, most fair, and best rules knowledge. Every award that a player got was worth one point, and the player with the most points won the sportsmanship award. I also actively policed the tables, and handed out bonus points to players who showed exceptional sportsmanship. It wasn't a perfect system, but I think it addressed the problem with players just giving all of their opponents max sports, and since they had to give out the awards, they could not just give their opponents minimum scores.

One problem I had was that many players felt like "most fair" and "best rules knowledge" had fuzzy boundaries.

It was common practice where I lived to always give your opponent max points, but I did not like that system because it did not reward the guys who were fun to play, and punish those that weren’t so I started to read the scoring sheets and gave people the scores they deserved. I took so much grief from this that I went back to giving max points again, but I still have people remember that I gave them what they deserved, and they still hold a grudge.

Phazeal wrote:
On the one hand, I have personally observed you (Blackmoor) game soft scores (hell, we still call chipmunking 'Getting Hernandezed' around here) and bring armies that are completely off the chain, dating back to the early days of 4th edition. Does the 18 model Tzeench list with a hald dozen bolts of change AND winds of chaos ring any bells?

The above quote is from this thead:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/232067.page#595494

I played the above poster and here is the irony: (besides calling a 4th edition Thousand Sons list powerful) He played an Altioc army with Wraithlords…and the tournament where we played at had those old 3rd edition results sheets that gave as an example of poor comp Wraithlords in and Altioc army, so I checked that box and I have never heard the end of it.

That is why I hate player judged comp and sports. The scores from them are really based on nothing.

That's hilarious he was playing Altioc with Wraithlords and that was given as the example of poor comp! I typically give max score for comp unless it was a really unfun game. Comp is fairly close to dead now but I don't see sportsmanship going away anytime soon.

G

comp is a dead concept..
any army right now can win games, missions should reflect balance not some scoring system.
I remember when good comp was taking one of everything in your codex, or having tactical squads with all different heavy and special weapons or so much percent in troops. crap I say
we have a force org. chart and good missions to balance things out.
there is absolutly no unbeatable army in the game right now so why do we need comp

Blackmoor wrote:It was common practice where I lived to always give your opponent max points, but I did not like that system because it did not reward the guys who were fun to play, and punish those that weren’t so I started to read the scoring sheets and gave people the scores they deserved. I took so much grief from this that I went back to giving max points again, but I still have people remember that I gave them what they deserved, and they still hold a grudge.

Phazeal wrote:
On the one hand, I have personally observed you (Blackmoor) game soft scores (hell, we still call chipmunking 'Getting Hernandezed' around here) and bring armies that are completely off the chain, dating back to the early days of 4th edition. Does the 18 model Tzeench list with a hald dozen bolts of change AND winds of chaos ring any bells?

The above quote is from this thead:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/232067.page#595494

I played the above poster and here is the irony: (besides calling a 4th edition Thousand Sons list powerful) He played an Altioc army with Wraithlords…and the tournament where we played at had those old 3rd edition results sheets that gave as an example of poor comp Wraithlords in and Altioc army, so I checked that box and I have never heard the end of it.

That is why I hate player judged comp and sports. The scores from them are really based on nothing.

Not trying to call you out here... but you seemed to be incredulous that I was suggesting that soft scores encouraged WAAC attitudes, but now it seems like you are agreeing with me, based on your own experience.

willydstyle wrote:

Not trying to call you out here... but you seemed to be incredulous that I was suggesting that soft scores encouraged WAAC attitudes, but now it seems like you are agreeing with me, based on your own experience.

Most people equate WAAC players/armies to the 'Ard Boyz type format of battle points only. WAAC players bring the chessyest beatstick armies they can and they thrive in that environment.

Comp is there because of WAAC players bringing the hardest armies possible and is meant to punish them, sportsmanship is their to stop people with WAAC attitudes and, and to a degree painting is made to lessen the impact of "battle points only" scoring, as well as that most WAAC armies are not painted well.


I think that soft scores hurt WAAC players more than they do regular players, but I hate soft scores.

There have been several good points about fixing the soft-scores system (so that WAAC players are handicapped and/or fair play is rewarded):

Soft scores should be independently judged by a panel, not player-judged, whenever possible.

Player-awarded sports scores can be moderated if you simply pick the best among your opponents on one or more well-defined criteria, rather than, say, giving a 0 on a 1-10 to all of them. This isn't bullet-proof, but if they _have_ to pick someone that should at least lower abuse.

Player-awarded Sportsmanship scores should be reviewed by judges if possible.

Do those sound like reasonable ideas?

The two stores in orlando offer RTT's monthly, switching between each other for WHFB and 40K every month. besides that, there is nothing in florida.

we may not be the largest gaming community down here in FLA but come on! we can fill a tourney, give us something GW.

i've been asking for years and they still havent responded.

lord marcus wrote:The two stores in orlando offer RTT's monthly, switching between each other for WHFB and 40K every month. besides that, there is nothing in florida.

we may not be the largest gaming community down here in FLA but come on! we can fill a tourney, give us something GW.

i've been asking for years and they still havent responded.

Well, they certainly won't now, with GW only running 1 GT.)

We're past that. New system. Get your club, or any club, and help one of those stores run a 50 person, 2 day, GT instead of just an RTT. Run it this year to get it started, then expand a bit and get it on the GT circuit for the 2011-2012 season.

Ok so as I have found recently I took upon Miks advice, and being that the boston and new england region really doesnt have many tournies or for that matter big tournies I have started one. That said for all of you thinking it is too expensive I am going to give you a great bit of advice for doing your own that will saves tons of money. One of the biggest expenses as I found on the west coast running these was renting a hall or playable space big enough for everyone. That said now I have realised a true diamond in the rough as I found you can rent out National Gaurd Armory's. Quite often this will be around 1k for a whole weekend and compared to halls or hotels this is freaking cheap, and they have the room trust me to house people, AND have the parking lot to go with it. So check it out, and if you are going to go to the armory and ask them who to talk to to rent the place. Good Luck

Blackmoor wrote:

willydstyle wrote:

Not trying to call you out here... but you seemed to be incredulous that I was suggesting that soft scores encouraged WAAC attitudes, but now it seems like you are agreeing with me, based on your own experience.

Most people equate WAAC players/armies to the 'Ard Boyz type format of battle points only. WAAC players bring the chessyest beatstick armies they can and they thrive in that environment.

Comp is there because of WAAC players bringing the hardest armies possible and is meant to punish them, sportsmanship is their to stop people with WAAC attitudes and, and to a degree painting is made to lessen the impact of "battle points only" scoring, as well as that most WAAC armies are not painted well.


I think that soft scores hurt WAAC players more than they do regular players, but I hate soft scores.

Eh, bringing the army that gives you the best chance at winning is not "WAAC" it's competitive.

The two are not equal.

WAAC means that not only do you bring a "hard" army, but if you have to fight someone else with a hard army you try to manipulate the rules in your favor, or stall for time, if that benefits you.

WAAC means that if you fight another good army you dock them sportsmanship/comp/whatever soft scores you can control to give yourself a better advantage.

WAAC mens that if you don't have the time or skills to get a "40 point" paint job, you hire someone else to do it for you, then never mention that you didn't paint your own army.

Battlepoints-only scoring is the best way to limit WAAC gaming in a competitive environment, because it means there is less that the underhanded gamer can manipulate to his advantage.

I think Comp is dead in the 5th ed. It is critical that you have troops to score with in 2 out of 3 of the missions which IIRC that was one of the bases of the old comp scoring. Also comp is so opinion based I can not see how you can be equally judged through out. I also believe however that you should paint your own army if you want it scored rather than seeing people pay for a high level painted army to make sure they get maxed paint scores. This is a hobby IMHO and any tourny should encompass all levels of the hobby.