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.

For me, 40k is such a mess right now that I have no real desire to play in a competitive environment. I still love going to events for the social aspect, and the Nova Narrative was fan-freakin-tastic.

What I've been observing is event attendance up but 40k GT attendance specifically down. There's more games popping up, more alternatives to GT 40k and so on.

Yeah, that's where I'm at too, Chumbalaya (just speaking for myself, not necessarily a trend).

MVBrandt wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
The marketing part of my brain is telling me well you have identified the symptom of the drop in attendance, you have not identified the cause!

Try and talk to players who use to come to tournments, and ask why they no longer come. Sometimes their are common themes between responses that may surprise you.

In my experience these are some of the causes I've seen been the issue.

-Player culture (Top players crushing people for example.)
-Cost to enter (Maby the entry fee is to high?)
-Prize support (Do you only have one larger prize for the top player? Maby consider supporting a 2nd, 3rd and/or wood spoon awards.)
-If it's the appearance of armies like some people suggest and you just do a few large tournaments, then introduce a award for best painted army.

If top players are crushing people like you suggest do not introduce sportsman ship scores. Their abused to much, and don't fix problems. (What you tabled my army? F you, I'm going to give you a low score because of your cheesy power list.)

In my experience stuff like doing gimmicks for each tournament worked best. (Maby one tournment their are restrictions tank AV, max % of points can be spent in a FoC slot, ect) Gimmicks encourage more list building and top players to adjust their list.

Problem is, his symptom is inaccurate. GT attendance by and large is not dropping, nor is his symptom reflective of how most "competitive" players think when they attend a GT (in other words, most do not attend for the phat lewt or massive glory ... they just want to catch up with friends and play good games, and enjoy winning well enough).

I assumed he was talking about specifically his area/a tournament series he ran in the GT format.

I ran a GT this month that restricted units outside troops to 0-2 and it was very well received. Also seemed like most people had a better time overall.

I think Games Workshop is the reason why tournament attendance (outside of GTs) is down. It's the fact the GT crowd is what it is, along with the great folks behind it (Reece, Chandler, Mike Brandt and all their respective teams), that keep those stages filled to the brim with waiting lists. That a third party defined rules of engagement where you can have 5~8 games in two days that don't have any further negotiations beyond whether you have beer before, during, or after the game makes for good times. NOT loosely defined hogwash of "should I or shouldn't I take this or that..."

Games Workshop introduced the loosest ruleset with more random bloat to date in a market filled to the brim with hungry competition. The fact the GTs stay full and, to my limited view, the local RTTs are ailing, is what we have all tacitly known: good rules structure makes a good game with helps promote a good community. And the fact that the 40k community that attends these events will have a good time if you give them bricks and boards and told to make their own game (as long as, again, beer is involved in the discussion...). They'll continue to strive to make the best with what they are given for the sake of friendships stemmed from the plastic army manz.

In my area, I probably have on choice for 40k tournaments with an hour drive on a monthly basis. Or I can simply chuck a stone in a direction and find a Steamroller event for that weekend. As long as the GT folks have a pulse on the community and diversify their game offerings and as long as they are pulling in the attendance, then the large events will stay successful until/unless something even more drastic this way comes from GW.

Fantastic post, TheKbob! I agree with everything you've said, and it mirrors my own experience / what I see happening my area, but you've put it into words much better!

 Kimchi Gamer wrote:

What is this an answer to? Is your answer to the OP's question about why attendance appears to be down in tournaments is because you and your two friends aren't competitive and will not play the game with people who are competitive so that is why attendance is perceived to be down in tournaments? What does this comment have do do with anything the OP is questioning? Or are you trying to turn this post into yet another competitive vs narrative gamer threads of which there are many and they all stink?

lmao OK bro...

I've been to quite a few events over the last few years, and they've been pretty good at avoiding the 'Win At All Costs' crowd.

The two major pillars of the Throne of Skulls/Council of War/Campaign Weekend stuff is:

(a) it's nigh - I'd go so far as to say completely - impossible to win an event without a substantial proportion of favourite game votes. That's probably the single most important element to my mind, because if you can't get it through your head that, tournament or not, the point of this hobby is to be enjoyable for both parties involved, then frankly you can win as many games as you like but I don't want you to win any event. Ever.

(b) on a campaign weekend event, there are loads of individual awards but spending two days making fourteen year olds cry with your particular interpretation of the rules that makes your army invincible isn't one of them. You win or lose as a team/faction/whatever.

(c) Tournament 'results' aren't based on your placement in the mass of contestants as a whole but your placement relative to your peers - i.e. those with the same army faction. So there is a 'best Marine player', 'best Imperial Knights player' etc. This means that turning up with that list from the internet from the newest codex doesn't help you, and if you really want an award, turning up with Adepta Sororitas, or Militarum Tempestus or a similar not especially competitive list and playing well with it is actually your best bet.


As to turnout - aside from local store events, most of the events I've been to have been Warhammer World run, and they've had a damn good turnout. I've got a lot of time for the Events Team there - they put a lot of time and effort into their stuff. Granted "it's their job" but there aren't many of them, they have other responsibilities too and between systems they put something on something tournament-esque pretty much every other weekend.

To the OP. If you want to see tournament size go up I'd suggest exactly the opposite of GW has been releasing the last 3 years. Basically please make list building back to a single army list no bull gak Low no allys no detachments. .. These are things that should build the narrative and bring random fun combos to a game. This has no place in competitive play. Competitive means level field, every man has one book and one army list just like 5th edition. Once GW decided to release more the a couple codexs a year it makes it almost impossible to tell what is a legal build or not... just like what happened at feast of blades with their small list issues. .... but if it was 5th edition it was black and white. One force org one book.

 Master Shake wrote:
Since I've been attending 40k GT's for the last 5 years, I've noticed a steady decline in attendance. A lot of people seem to want to chalk this to the edition changes, but I think that's simply not the case.

I think the problem lies within most of the top players. They forget about the primary purpose of the game. They make it their sole objective to crush there opponents without regard for having fun or sportsmanship. One of the best definitions of sportsmanship I've heard is "having a vested interest in making sure your opponent has a good time too". Taking balls out lists (Ad lance and 3 riptides for example) and trying to break the game (rules lawyering) is not conducive to that end..

What do you consider "rules lawyering"? What if two players have a genuine disagreement on what a rule means, and the rule is so shoddily written that it's impossible to look at it and say "You're right, you're wrong.". Invoke the "cheat on a 4+" rule, and potentially decide the game with one dice roll? That doesn't sound terribly fun either.

 Masos wrote:
To the OP. If you want to see tournament size go up I'd suggest exactly the opposite of GW has been releasing the last 3 years. Basically please make list building back to a single army list no bull gak Low no allys no detachments. .. These are things that should build the narrative and bring random fun combos to a game. This has no place in competitive play. Competitive means level field, every man has one book and one army list just like 5th edition. Once GW decided to release more the a couple codexs a year it makes it almost impossible to tell what is a legal build or not... just like what happened at feast of blades with their small list issues. .... but if it was 5th edition it was black and white. One force org one book.

That doesn't work, because some armies will still have killer builds with their one book. The problem is the poor balance within books, taking combos of them only aggravates it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
At heart, I think the problem is that 40K just isn't suited for tournaments. The rules are too unbalanced, and the options too varied in value for their points. And winning is kind of inherent to a tournament, otherwise why bother with any sort of ranking or record of who won games? Just show up and have a bash with whoever's around. If you think about it, you're blaming players for trying "too hard" to win....after entering an event with a winner! There seems to be an association between the list you run and what sort of person you are, that just plain doesn't exist in more balanced game systems.

I played all GT's in the Netherlands for years, but stopped a few years ago because of several reasons:
- The cost went up (in itself the smalles problem)
- Points for painting were more and more subjective (but predictable) and in many cases relative to how well you knew the organisation; quite some players knew their points beforehand.
- the number of players that played to win (not even a problem) only in combination with bad sportsmanship and (IMO a problem) got higher

In the end: less fun for more money.
For me winning is nice, but playing well is more important to me than playing to win.
I play since Rogue Trader and ik can win if i want, but it's more interesting to play a completely different thing and do well then use the current holes in the rules and win.

I do still attend smaller tournaments though, but also there the fun depends on who organises it and who comes to play.

One addition though: the new edition does not help in regard to balance. Not at all.
Will not stop me from the few tournaments i still attend, but did, again, diminish tournament attendance.
Maybe at most from players that thought "new edition, maybe nice to try a tournament" that then faced extreme Necron barge armies, Sneaky Allied combos and more Bikes, Thunderwolves and Thunderfire cannons than ever seen in the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I even forgot the most important thing: how to fix it.
Well, i don't really know.

The biggest flaw in the current tournament rules system (objectives) is that you need to reach an objective, you do not need to hold it.
So being fast is the most important thing, being fast with a good armour save means you can get somewhere and have survivability there.
If you are slow or have no armour, well, then you lose.

The biggest flaw in the armycomposition is that everything is allowed and there is nothing to balance it.

I understand it's good for the hobbyist and it is good for sales (of certain units).
But it does not solve any hobby problem (in friendly games we always allow anything), it does create tournament problems.

We all know freedom in armycomposition this is not how the rules are used in tournaments, it leads to more of the same, not more variety.

If you change these 2 things, you are talking off a new edition, because these are the only real changes in the new edition.

I play lots of game systems.
Armycomp should be a factor, luck should be a factor, but SKILL should be the biggest factor (50+% will do).
Blood Bowl, Epic Armageddon, Warmaster, Dystopian Wars, even Battlefleet Gothic can get to this 50%

In a good system there is balance and at least most (preferably all) units should be worth their points in the game.
No game system is perfect, but there are levels.
In WH40K skill does still matter, but armycomp has gone way over 50% in the average game.
In most battles in 7th i know beforehand what army will win, not what player.

And there is no solving that.
And i am afraid there is no solving the result of that, tournament attendance.

I think the biggest factor in all of this is trying to change the mentality that winning with the best list is the same as winning in the best way - everyone having fun.

This can come down to figuring out a different system of generating a winner and making those "fun" events better then the so called ball crusher events we see. Trust me TO's are watching every event in order to ensure their investment doesn't blow up in the faces in the next few years. A lot of the TO's have contracts they sign to get a good 2-3 year rate on the location - so generating a bad vibe for an event can kill them.

So let's look at the top things people kind of want.

1. Restricted army building in order to remove combos/unfair advantages/etc. This is one that everyone talks about but when you put your junk on the table no one wants to fully pull the trigger. I have always said - screw it make a ban list and call it a day like Magic and other Highly competitive games do. We all love options and variety but I think most players can point to certain things and armies that cause issues. Whenever you build a new list you should ask yourself - how long will 6 serpents take to table this army? Or what happens when I face a C'Tann/Revenant? It is pretty simple to see the worst things in the game right now.

So then restricting these things might be needed to keep the game breathing right. We could go Highlander (Which works great right now with everything scoring and a few armies needing the ability to duplicate a troop to ensure they re battle forged) which is a neat idea. We could go locked in only one Book armies. We could limit the sources like others do. It is hard because each style has a vocal minority that just screams if their idea isn't used or the idea presented doesn't butter their bread for their version of 40k.

2. Events the emphasis fun over complete destruction. We all want to have fun and the issue comes in we all have different kinks that make the game exciting. It might be fun to see how fast an optimized army tables you. It could be your thing to bring a subpar list and win most of your games. The event could just be a place to showcase your amazing painting/conversions and winning is an afterthought. I think more events might just need to try and push a more fun option to ensure player turnout. If you make the Highlander Championship - go on how their could only be one and do a decent amount of prize support spread down the Top to the Top player armies - you might see a big turn out. I think we need to bring back some more player love to make sure we keep going.

3. Unified system - either for reporting, scoring, ranking, etc. Something to unify all these events and make players feel like they can go from the East Coast to the West Coast and know how the game will work for themselves. Nothing is worse then to get to an event you thought was cool with your list and then find out halfway through you "cheated" because the list wasn't fully vetted. And we all know how hard it is to judge lists too? I mean - so many different options, rules, etc can get mixed in. Heck FW has changed rules and armies so many times it gets hard to keep those things in check.

Sorry this rambled on - baby came in plus some house issues makes Goatboy a tired man. I personally like the idea of Highlander as armies will become the armies you see in White Dwarves and on GW's site - and they usually end up looking better and at least fun to play/lose with.

The one thing I haven't seen in this thread is the only thing I was really interested in seeing.

Is there any data to support the assertion that there is decreasing attendance at tournaments? Our local scene seems to have fairly consistent tournament turnout. I'm not a member of the GT scene, so I have no idea about that.

Does anyone have attendance numbers for the GTs that have been in existence over the last five years or so? I'm curious to see if this perception is accurate to reality.

As noted on page 1 by Reecius / MVBrandt et al, GT attendance at big events is doing fine.

Several of us posted about declining RTT attendance / events locally, but you're not going to find nationwide compiled data on that or anything.

Yup - the bigger GTs are doing fine as they diversify their own events. Plus being in big cities helps a lot as well as a lot of the bigger events have more internet presence in order to help drive attendance, overall feeling of getting together with old friends, and generating interest. The big events will normally stay big while the smaller ones get hurt.

But really - lack of big pushes of talking about the event hurts some of these things. You know all about the Nova and LVO because Mike and Reese are talking about it all the time. It helps a lot.

So is this all anecdotal, sky-is-falling, hand-wringing on the OPs part then?

Seems to be that the GT scene is alive and well.
I would love to attend a GT, but finding time to do so in between career, family, friends, and other interests makes it harder and harder to do so.

I really dont see this at all living outside chicago 20 min from adepticon. They just had to triple the space they are using for that simply because they outgrew 40,000sq feet of space

Again - the big ones do fine because they are all not about 40k - and living 20min from Adepticon gives you an advantage many other folks don't have.

But again - yeah the big ones are not going to hurt because they can do all sorts of other events that make it not just a RTT etc. You don't have to play games and have a good time. A lot of events are just that - a Warhammer event. Thus they see a drop off as the game becomes less exciting for people to spend the money to drive/fly out etc.

 House Griffith wrote:
So is this all anecdotal, sky-is-falling, hand-wringing on the OPs part then?

Seems to be that the GT scene is alive and well.
I would love to attend a GT, but finding time to do so in between career, family, friends, and other interests makes it harder and harder to do so.

For the most part yes, most GTs have experienced no real noticeable change in numbers that I've seen, beyond wargamescon and feast of blades from what I've seen. Feast has a unique model in which it went to a pretty drasticly changed format, but sources from feeder events around the country - who didnt want to pay to run feeders (i heard, no clue if true) so that lowered attendance.

I will say life this year kept me out of smaller RTT events locally while I still attended 5 GT's and have a 6th coming up. I actually think it's easier for me to do a GT than an RTT because it's easier to plan a weekend and since it's more of an investment there is sudden last minute backing out.

That said our local area runs 1-2 RTT's a month and attendence is between 8 and 18 mostly. Really depends on the store, time frame it's advertised, and what else is going on. Winter normally equals bigger events for us too since there isn't anything else to do

EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

From my experience at recent small RTTs of 7th edition is any event that does not have FoC limitations and LoW's and just allow anything goes for the most part have suffered from low attendance.

Who wants to go to an 8 man Tournament and face 4 armies with C/Trans or multi CADs.

Arent we seeing a trend of GTs not limiting CADs and LoWs having trouble with attendance ? FoB and Wargamescon are recent examples. I will be interested to see Mechanicons attendance since they have little restriction.

 Fenris Frost wrote:
EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

Not sure if serious.......

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Fenris Frost wrote:
EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

Not sure if serious.......

Exactly what I am talking about.

That's a lot of pent up anger over people spending their weekend playing 40k.

The 40k bourgeoisie? Really? And tournaments exist to further their agenda?

Dude, chill. It's a weekend away from the missus, getting drunk and playing with toy soldiers. It's not a Bilderberg summit.

 Thud wrote:
That's a lot of pent up anger over people spending their weekend playing 40k.

The 40k bourgeoisie? Really? And tournaments exist to further their agenda?

Dude, chill. It's a weekend away from the missus, getting drunk and playing with toy soldiers. It's not a Bilderberg summit.

Ah yes, I forgot, it's only okay to make a big deal about this game and write some kind of dissertation when you're part of the elite crew. Then it's "an insightful look into the dynamics of the current world and local meta interaction, and the current feelings of the playerbase as pertains to the modern iteration of the 40k tournament gameplay standard.

You don't have a name everyone recognizes, though...you just get the old "bro chill it's just a stupid game god I can't even believe you care" treatment.

 Fenris Frost wrote:

 Thud wrote:
That's a lot of pent up anger over people spending their weekend playing 40k.

The 40k bourgeoisie? Really? And tournaments exist to further their agenda?

Dude, chill. It's a weekend away from the missus, getting drunk and playing with toy soldiers. It's not a Bilderberg summit.

Ah yes, I forgot, it's only okay to make a big deal about this game and write some kind of dissertation when you're part of the elite crew. Then it's "an insightful look into the dynamics of the current world and local meta interaction, and the current feelings of the playerbase as pertains to the modern iteration of the 40k tournament gameplay standard.

You don't have a name everyone recognizes, though...you just get the old "bro chill it's just a stupid game god I can't even believe you care" treatment.

So... seriously. Are you trolling? Because now you've really left the reservation.

 Fenris Frost wrote:
EDIT: I realize I'm out of my league here, but I wanted to put in my thoughts as a person who actually avoids GTs despite near constant invites and suggestions from people.

I think tournaments just have a combination of terrible reputation (the worst of the worst jerk players all trying to see who has the bigger game junk), and a terrible, tired, miserable old format.

They're always constantly modifying the game to try to find some elusive perfect balance that really doesn't exist. Subjective comp systems, ban lists, etc.

Tournaments exist to further the agenda of a sort of bourgois 40k elite class. At heart a tournament is some guys telling everyone else how to play. No one wants that. It's part of why we all hate each other; the fluff guy thinks you're a jerk for not being fluffy, the tourney guy thinks you're an idiot because you took a unit of Flayed Ones, the mathhammer guy thinks anyone who doesn't check the percentages on his units is a fool, the tourney fanatic thinks the FLGS club is full of uncompetitive schlubs who aren't on his level, and the FLGS club is full of guys who think tournaments are for squads of guys who are such epic jerks in-game that the only way they can play is to be in an environment when opponents are forced on each other at random and where no one has any right to complain against their cheesy lists.

It's a question of presentation, not of formats. Right now the presentation of tournaments is very poor. They are for elite players or players looking for a challenge, or they end up with this "kiddie pool" vibe indirectly correlating every attempt to change formats (that's how it comes off when you basically have GTs going "You can be in the REAL tournament, or you can be in the narrative/team/highlander/whatever event"...see this ALL the time. Experienced players basically coming off as if they are going "Wow I'm bored with hyper competitive stuff, let's try a novelty this go around!").

In order to fix tournaments, the very concept of a tournament as we know it from the old days needs to die, and signups need to stop being a date time price and 345758 restrictions and scoring mechanisms. That's my .02, for what it's worth -- and yeah, I'm out of my league here I'm sure. But as a person who has been playing the game for years and who runs a club of people in similar experiences, I see little to no reason to EVER go to a GT. I have literally no desire to, whatsoever.

That is the problem. GTs need to make people like me want to come, and not think of them as a gigantic ego stroke for the people who run them. Of course it is a catch-22, because I think that due to them being exactly that.

Either way, they may not be a hostile environment and likely have a bad rap for sure, but what they do instead is make it very clear this is only for people who are either deadly serious about competition or people who find the game so tedious that it needs a clever little spin. Neither of those make up the majority of players.

I've grown to consider the GT a blight. When it is replaced by something, then me and the people like me will take notice. Until then, it's just "the big leagues" that none of us really have any interest in because this is a hobby.

This post just indicates that you have no idea what you are talking about. You've built yourself a nice little box based on ignorant assumptions. It might behoove you to actually go see a GT. You don't have to participate. Come out of your box and just go see one. It'll open your eyes.

Let's ratchet down the language in this thread, please. Remember, Rule #1 of Dakka is "Be Polite". We should be able to discuss gaming with toy soldiers on the weekends without resorting to insults! Thanks.

Open my eyes to what? What real 40k is like? How the big boys play? Enlighten me, man. Because as far as I know, a GT is the same thing as an RTT except with more rounds (and more self-aggrandizing organizer hoopla).

It is the epitome of everything wrong with this game that I need to somehow blow a grand on a 40k vacation weekend with "the stars" before my opinion counts. I run a club, I keep a store open, and I oversee people every weekend playing this game instead of just one a year. What makes me not qualified to explain why those people prefer to come play at my place every week and avoid GTs and RTTs like the plague?

If you want to know why people AREN'T going, guys like me are the experts on that...not you lot with the stats in your sigs. That's all I'm getting at.

GTs survive on the underlying communal mentality. Mechanically, they are nothing but a more complicated, larger scale RTT (that more people have messed with, format-wise).