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.

I just played a local tournament recently and lost the last round on the top table due to my opponent using 3/4 of the 2 hour time limit on his turns. This meant that when the tournament director called time, my opponent had just finished his second turn. I would like to hear some advice from the dakka community on how you all go about preventing this from happening. I think introducing a chess clock where each opponent gets an hour a piece could fix this problem but would force everyone to spend a bit more money.

Call the TO over and complain.

Every tournament I have played at has a rule that if a player is found to be slow playing they get kicked out. if your tournament doesn't have this it need it.

Was he playing Orks, Nids, or blob IG? If so, he could have just been playing normally and wasn't skilled at playing a time intensive army in a timed setting. Give the benifit of the doubt.

From the information provided, I don't know if the guy was stalling or just new to the game or using a horde army.

Either way, a gentle reminder at first that this is a timed event.

Then a more straight forward "Dude, we only have two hours and you're still on turn 1. Let's go."

Then, call the TO.

If you waited until the end of the two hours and he was only on turn 2, you waited too long to complain.

He was playing Dark Eldar so certainly not horde. I told the Tournament Director half way through the game that I was getting screwed by the slow play of my opponent but it didn't seem like he knew how to respond to that.

We have a tournament here that wants to put in timed turns because of a certain group of guys that would only get 2 or 3 turns in and win their games. Its a cheater tactic that they annoy the gak out of you until you just dont care about winning. Even worse is when they will do things then argue with you and then claim you are stalling. The best thing to do is call over a judge or TO and have them speed the game along, the group I mentioned pretty much has a judge on hand at the table every game and even then.

That sounds like a poor TO. Before the next event, ask the TO what he's going to do about slow play.

For yourself, keep telling the guy you're playing that you only have 2 hours and so on. I don't know what else to tell you.

This seems like a structural flaw in the tournament rules.

Shouldn't the ruling for any tournament be that if you don't finish within the time limit both players get penalised? And some sort of sportsmanship scoring system? Because it seems to me any attempt to game the system is inherent to the system itself.

Also, how the hell do you take an hour for a turn? My turns last fifteen minutes, tops.

I don't know about penalizing both players for failing to finish inside the 2 hour time limit. Most tourney games I've seen are still being played when time gets called. (Granted, usually much farther than turn 2!)

I think kronk's pretty much got your only options nailed down. Got to a TO if it happens, ask a TO ahead of time, and be nice but prodding with your opponent.

Sorry you got the short end of the stick this time around, and I hope your luck improves.

A cattle prod to move the proceedings along

We have a simple 2 strikes and you are out rule. Every round you mark on the sheet if you would play against the player again. If you answer no, a TO will ask you why and lets the other person tell him his side of the story. If you have a good reason, that player gets a strike. Two strikes in one tournament gets you thrown out of the tournament. One strike disqualifies you from any Sportsmanship prizes.

How many points were being played in a 2 hour game? 2 Hours is short for anything over 1500 points.

Timed game turns is a terrible idea as the game is not designed around equal play as the turns are interactive. If you assault me on your turn, there is a good chance we may have a 20-30 minute assault if someone does a coordinated assault. The game is not designed around equal play.

What was he actually spending his time on? Movement? Shooting?

Got accused of slowplay. Were playing 2000pts in 2hrs. We started late, because the round before went over because ofthe paint judging. We still managed to finish on turn 4. I felt that if the game had continued to turn 5 he could have won. I felt that with my model count over 100 and less than 2hrs to play, turn 4 was break neck speed.

I agree that there are several major and important factors which were not covered in the OP.

1. Experience level of the opponent. Inexperienced players who do not know the rules cold play slower. This is an unavoidable fact, and something one always needs to compensate for.
2. Fielding a horde army. The OP later clarified that the opponent wasn't, but it's still something to look out for and sometimes more of a factor than slow play, especially when the organizers have failed to allot sufficient time for the point size of the game.
3. Time alloted and point size of the game. Two hours was a tight time schedule for a normal tournament game of 5th edition. 6th plays slower in several areas, and you really shouldn't be trying to squeeze in anything above 1500pts in two hours. 2:15 to 2:30 is more reasonable for 1750 or 1850, but even with an extra half hour you still need to play quickly and efficiently if either player has a high model count.

Maybe a sliding scale to the max points you can get
Ended in turn 1 20%
Turn 2 40%
Turn 3 60%
Turn 4 80%
Turn 5 100%

Yep there are lots ways to get hosed but we need to get players geared on getting more game in during the time period.
So if you finish turn 4 you get 100%. everybody should be able to do that. Every game.

2 turns in 2 hours is prety extreme. I think that games should really go for 5 turns to make it fair. Had the player been slow playing in other rounds? If so, then the 2 strikes and your out idea would certainly help here. 2 turns is just ridiculous.

I admit that I've not been to a tournament before where they wanted to play 1,750 in 1:40. Playing a 2 tervigon list I knew there was no way I could play a 5 turn game including deployment in that time so didn't go. I could have gone with my SM bikes, but the arms are not WYSIWYG at the moment - but that is at least a faster army to play/deploy.

I know some people will say it's the players right to play what they want but you have to be realistic about your own speed and the tournament timings - if you know you can't complete matches then don't go or chage your army list to one that plays a little quicker.

I agree that players need to be practiced with their armies and realistic about how quickly they can play, but even more so, organizers need to be realistic and allot enough time to allow high model count armies to be used. Making Tyranids or Orks unable to compete by making the games too short is a bad thing.

One of the important innovations toward fixing this problem that I've seen in the last couple of years is TOs putting a question on the results sheet asking if the game finished normally rather than by time limit. As in, it went the full 7 turns or ended by random game length roll. Then collecting that data and seeing what percentage of games are ended by time, and being to adjust their tournaments by lengthening the rounds and/or lowering the point size appropriately to allow more full games to be played to natural completion.

How big was the tournament size? if it was 2k, then 2 hours is not enough time anyway. Our tournaments are 2.30 hours with bonus points going to players that finish turn 5. There are very few people who do not get 5 turns as those bonus points matter.

Ravenous D wrote:We have a tournament here that wants to put in timed turns because of a certain group of guys that would only get 2 or 3 turns in and win their games. Its a cheater tactic that they annoy the gak out of you until you just dont care about winning. Even worse is when they will do things then argue with you and then claim you are stalling. The best thing to do is call over a judge or TO and have them speed the game along, the group I mentioned pretty much has a judge on hand at the table every game and even then.

Asmodai Asmodean wrote:This seems like a structural flaw in the tournament rules.

Shouldn't the ruling for any tournament be that if you don't finish within the time limit both players get penalised? And some sort of sportsmanship scoring system? Because it seems to me any attempt to game the system is inherent to the system itself.

Also, how the hell do you take an hour for a turn? My turns last fifteen minutes, tops.

Jimsolo wrote:I don't know about penalizing both players for failing to finish inside the 2 hour time limit. Most tourney games I've seen are still being played when time gets called. (Granted, usually much farther than turn 2!)

I think kronk's pretty much got your only options nailed down. Got to a TO if it happens, ask a TO ahead of time, and be nice but prodding with your opponent.

Sorry you got the short end of the stick this time around, and I hope your luck improves.

At Game Empire in Pasadena we have a standing 4 turn rule. If your game does not get to turn 4 then both players receive a loss. While this was shelved at the beginning of 6th edition it worked really well in 5th and is being implemented again. We do recognize that 6th ed games take longer and so we dropped the usual tournaments to 1500 points rather than lift the 4 turn rule. This rule was even used at Ard Boyz events, it works and works very well.

I honestly think that is the best way to handle slow play. Rather than have a policy where the TO has to babysit games/players or using clocks, which is just a bad idea for 40k, installing a turn minimum keeps it simple. Relying on the TO and your own abilities to, in some cases, constantly hurry an opponent along their turn just to try and speed through yours to try and get to turn 4 or 5 is asking a bit much from an edition of the game that already has many more complexities and is naturally slower than the previous two editions.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:


At Game Empire in Pasadena we have a standing 4 turn rule. If your game does not get to turn 4 then both players receive a loss. While this was shelved at the beginning of 6th edition it worked really well in 5th and is being implemented again. We do recognize that 6th ed games take longer and so we dropped the usual tournaments to 1500 points rather than lift the 4 turn rule. This rule was even used at Ard Boyz events, it works and works very well.

I honestly think that is the best way to handle slow play. Rather than have a policy where the TO has to babysit games/players or using clocks, which is just a bad idea for 40k, installing a turn minimum keeps it simple. Relying on the TO and your own abilities to, in some cases, constantly hurry an opponent along their turn just to try and speed through yours to try and get to turn 4 or 5 is asking a bit much from an edition of the game that already has many more complexities and is naturally slower than the previous two editions.

I like this rule, as long as they have realistic time per point value standards. I find turns 4+ go really fast anyways and that extra 15-30 minutes can make the difference between a 3 turn game and a 7 turn game.

nkelsch wrote:

 OverwatchCNC wrote:


At Game Empire in Pasadena we have a standing 4 turn rule. If your game does not get to turn 4 then both players receive a loss. While this was shelved at the beginning of 6th edition it worked really well in 5th and is being implemented again. We do recognize that 6th ed games take longer and so we dropped the usual tournaments to 1500 points rather than lift the 4 turn rule. This rule was even used at Ard Boyz events, it works and works very well.

I honestly think that is the best way to handle slow play. Rather than have a policy where the TO has to babysit games/players or using clocks, which is just a bad idea for 40k, installing a turn minimum keeps it simple. Relying on the TO and your own abilities to, in some cases, constantly hurry an opponent along their turn just to try and speed through yours to try and get to turn 4 or 5 is asking a bit much from an edition of the game that already has many more complexities and is naturally slower than the previous two editions.

I like this rule, as long as they have realistic time per point value standards. I find turns 4+ go really fast anyways and that extra 15-30 minutes can make the difference between a 3 turn game and a 7 turn game.

This has been exactly our experience, which is also why we have dropped the point level for the next couple tournaments. We did the same thing at the beginning of 5th, there really is about a year of transition time needed for most small competitive environments.

The main thing to do is make sure both players get an even amount of turns. You keep an eye on the clock and decide whether there is enough time to get a full game turn in before starting one.

I really like the four turns or lose idea though. I may have to mention it to my club.

OP, where was this tourney?

The "complete 4 turns or loose the game" rule is crazy in my opinion. It lets your opponent slow play until the last second, letting him win on turn 4, before cutting him/her off by time out. It also punishes both players if one of the players is simply very new to the game or both players are playing horde armies.

Each player is roughly given half of the time for each match. If a player takes longer than this time, he gets penalty points, the longer it takes, the higher the penalty. Purposefully stalling the game results in an immediate disqualification. Requires TO that know what they're doing though.

Mohoc wrote:
The "complete 4 turns or loose the game" rule is crazy in my opinion. It lets your opponent slow play until the last second, letting him win on turn 4, before cutting him/her off by time out. It also punishes both players if one of the players is simply very new to the game or both players are playing horde armies.

Both players know the game must reach 4 far in advance. This actually evens the playing field because you know before the event even begins what turn the game must go to which allows you to plan accordingly.

There is a second issue that this rule addresses. People should not be winning tournaments when their games don't get past turn 2 or 3. It is wholly unfair to the rest of the field, not to mention their opponents, when a game does not reach turn 4 or more. It is even more unfair when a player wins a tournament because none of their games get past turn 2 or 3. Relying on the TO to police the slow players and insure they aren't winning the tournament through use of slow play isn't as reliable as the simple turn 4 minimum.

Plus, you know about the rule when you come to one of our events so if you don't think you can play your army in that time design a different one. It really isn't a big deal since we don't spring it on people. If it were a surprise I could see it being a problem, then again anyone miffed about it really should analyze how they are playing the game and whether or not they are slow playing, or planning to play slow.

I guess the issue that I could see with mohoc's post is, do both players have to get to turn 4? Or just 1?

 Sigvatr wrote:
Each player is roughly given half of the time for each match. If a player takes longer than this time, he gets penalty points, the longer it takes, the higher the penalty. Purposefully stalling the game results in an immediate disqualification. Requires TO that know what they're doing though.

40k is not designed around equal play as the turns are interactive. All that 'half the time' rules do is cause the person to roll armor saves slowly on your turn and slow up assault resolution on your turn.

At least the 4 turn minimum makes people plan for making those 'this is the last turn' actions shoudl time be expiring.

Next event, talk to the TO ahead of time. Remind him of the slow player. Reccomend a ruling (to be put out at the start) that if a player is slow playing AND his opponent lets the TO know at least half way through the tiome limit, if the game does not complete 4 full turns (both players completing their turn 4) the slow player gets a zero point loss and the 'victim' gets awarded a max point win.

No benefit for the slow player and he can't intentionally bone a good player to help his buddy steal the win (not that a group of guys would ever throw a game in an effort to help their designated team mate win the event).
This would also get other players mad at the slow player by giving away free wins.

 OverwatchCNC wrote:

Mohoc wrote:
The "complete 4 turns or loose the game" rule is crazy in my opinion. It lets your opponent slow play until the last second, letting him win on turn 4, before cutting him/her off by time out. It also punishes both players if one of the players is simply very new to the game or both players are playing horde armies.

Both players know the game must reach 4 far in advance. This actually evens the playing field because you know before the event even begins what turn the game must go to which allows you to plan accordingly.

There is a second issue that this rule addresses. People should not be winning tournaments when their games don't get past turn 2 or 3. It is wholly unfair to the rest of the field, not to mention their opponents, when a game does not reach turn 4 or more. It is even more unfair when a player wins a tournament because none of their games get past turn 2 or 3. Relying on the TO to police the slow players and insure they aren't winning the tournament through use of slow play isn't as reliable as the simple turn 4 minimum.

Plus, you know about the rule when you come to one of our events so if you don't think you can play your army in that time design a different one. It really isn't a big deal since we don't spring it on people. If it were a surprise I could see it being a problem, then again anyone miffed about it really should analyze how they are playing the game and whether or not they are slow playing, or planning to play slow.

I am not disagreeing with you on the reasons why the rule is in place and the fact that players know this in advance. I actually wholeheartedly agree with that. I just disagree with the rule. I think something like the rule from the Atlanta Series is much more appropriate. In the Atlanta Series you loose battle points if the game does not end on time and some more points if you don't finish Turn 5. That way you can still score some points. In addition you can get penalized on Sportsmanship by the other player. The loss of battle points and sportsmanship points guarantees that you will not win any prizes during the Tournament. I think that is a much better solution.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Each player is roughly given half of the time for each match. If a player takes longer than this time, he gets penalty points, the longer it takes, the higher the penalty. Purposefully stalling the game results in an immediate disqualification. Requires TO that know what they're doing though.

How is "roughly" half the time determined? How do you account for variables like different opponent skill levels, and army builds? Does the TO come by and tell each player how much time they "roughly" have for each round in the event, basing it on the various factors such as skill and list build? The 4 turn minimum is much simpler and easier to enforce, plus it doesn't require any "rough" estimates for each players allotment of time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mohoc wrote:

 OverwatchCNC wrote:

Mohoc wrote:
The "complete 4 turns or loose the game" rule is crazy in my opinion. It lets your opponent slow play until the last second, letting him win on turn 4, before cutting him/her off by time out. It also punishes both players if one of the players is simply very new to the game or both players are playing horde armies.

Both players know the game must reach 4 far in advance. This actually evens the playing field because you know before the event even begins what turn the game must go to which allows you to plan accordingly.

There is a second issue that this rule addresses. People should not be winning tournaments when their games don't get past turn 2 or 3. It is wholly unfair to the rest of the field, not to mention their opponents, when a game does not reach turn 4 or more. It is even more unfair when a player wins a tournament because none of their games get past turn 2 or 3. Relying on the TO to police the slow players and insure they aren't winning the tournament through use of slow play isn't as reliable as the simple turn 4 minimum.

Plus, you know about the rule when you come to one of our events so if you don't think you can play your army in that time design a different one. It really isn't a big deal since we don't spring it on people. If it were a surprise I could see it being a problem, then again anyone miffed about it really should analyze how they are playing the game and whether or not they are slow playing, or planning to play slow.

I am not disagreeing with you on the reasons why the rule is in place and the fact that players know this in advance. I actually wholeheartedly agree with that. I just disagree with the rule. I think something like the rule from the Atlanta Series is much more appropriate. In the Atlanta Series you loose battle points if the game does not end on time and some more points if you don't finish Turn 5. That way you can still score some points. In addition you can get penalized on Sportsmanship by the other player. The loss of battle points and sportsmanship points guarantees that you will not win any prizes during the Tournament. I think that is a much better solution.

I see, thanks for the clarification, now I understand where the issue was. We don't always run battle point format tournaments and prefer the W/L/D format, so assigning a Loss in W/L/D or Swiss is really the only way to handle it. In a Battle Points format having the penalties you described for not reaching turn 4 makes perfect sense.

I am starting to think that is it the TOs fault.

6th edition plays a lot slower than 5th edition and TOs have not come to that realization yet.

There several factors for this:
A lot more rolls on tables, e.i. psychic powers, warlord traits, chaos boon tables, whatever demons have now, random objectives, random terrain, etc. There is a lot more going on now before the game in 6th edition that the game itself is starting a lot later.

The move away from mech armies to horde armies. It takes a lot longer to shoot an infantry blob with prescience and first rank fire, second rank fire than it does for a few chimeras, yet alone moving them.

The problem is that TOs have not adapted to this paradigm shift and are still trying to shoehorn games into 2 hours to 2.5 hours and trying to do it with 1750+ points.

I have played in 2 GTs in the last 2 weeks and I can say that in the first GT I lost 1 game that I should have tied, and tied a game that I should have won because of time, and in the 2nd GT I tied one game that I should have won. And this is with one of the fastest playing armies in the game (a Paladin army).

At the lat GT there were many other players that were ending games on 3 turns, and there were a lot of people who should have won games but ended up losing because of time.