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.

durango wrote:
Saying the players are responsible obviously doesn't work which is why it behooves the TOs to do so.

 kronk wrote:

durango wrote:
The TOs should always review army lists. Not doing so is just passing the buck.

How many events have you run?

How many players were in these events?

Did you check all of the army lists?

If you have never been a TO, for how many events did you volunteer to help the TO review lists?

Still waiting for an answer.

durango wrote:
Saying the players are responsible obviously doesn't work which is why it behooves the TOs to do so.

It actually does work, but TOs have not only set the expectations, they must also penalize players who are found to have illegal lists. The problem is that the penalties have not been swift and severe, so the effort involved in ensuring lists are accurate by players has been lacking.

I will weigh in here. I have run many tourneys from small eight man events up to large GT's and list checking is difficult. The larger the event the harder to check but you have to at least make an attempt. I have never attended LVO but I am a little floored as to what Blackmore had posted as a list. That just should not be allowed. If someone handed me that list and said he had other war gear etc...I would explain he could not play it since it was not on his list. Then explain he can have a TO come by and we can argue our case. There is just no excuse in any event to allow that level of laxness in organization. The event should have a standard and what Blackmore shows in that picture shows me an event where they just don't care.

Any event with any hope of real list checking must do it in advance then verify at the event that is the list being played. Large events should have someone whom this is their entire job over the course of the event.

In addition to this I like events that expect you to turn a list into them for every round (give them three lists at a three round event) then they give your list to your opponent at matchup. This again takes an individual dedicated to performing just this function as it can be time consuming but if they organize it between rounds does not add to the overall time of the event.

I think these two steps can help but it will never be perfect. Most of us, including judges, use software to build and check lists. If there are errors there then it will probably slip through. In the end it is up to the player to make sure their list is legal and correct. Any failing there should be reflected on the player and the events reaction should be equal to severity of the infraction.

Edits to add this:

Players stating that an error in points was not the fault of the player due to the software are mistaken. If I run a stop sign because a cute girl distracts me does not mean the girl is to blame. I made the infraction for not double checking/allowing myself to be distracted. Players at that level should do a paper check with the list at home to make sure the software is right. Events MUST do their best to try but the overall responsibility is up to the player....period. If an event is UP TO 1850 points and you bring 1851 then you cheated, even if by accident, and even if you never gained an advantage. Repercussions should be based in that and not that software is flawed.

 white925 wrote:
Sure you can turn your list in a few weeks in advance. But unless someone is reviewing each list that knows that army very well they will still miss things. You would probably catch some mistakes but that is a huge task and not guaranteed to catch all of them or any of them. Also what if the T.O. misses a mistake on a list but gives it the stamp of approval? Is it now the T.O.s fault? Seems pretty unfair to me.

That's like saying the TSA should not bother with checking luggage because the volume ensures mistakes. If anything TO's would be given much more credit for trying and missing rather then kicking the can down the road. I don't know what the answer is for large tournaments, but that doesn't mean some attempt shouldn't be made.

Not sure why this is even a debate. Player is responsible for their list. If player wins something, list gets checked. If list is illegal or incorrect, player forfeits.

You guys are asking way to much from TO's almost all of us lose money putting on events don't get to play in events and just do it for the love of the game.

If you want everything at a Large GT to checked and double checked then expect to pay a lot more for your ticket. I mean a lot more.

7th ed 40k is so bloated with rules interactions and ways to build armies the resources alone just to check everything would be in the thousands.

Please be reasonable and thank your TO every once in a while.

Well we see mistakes slipping through often enough. I'd pay more for TOs to check the lists.

 MDizzle wrote:


7th ed 40k is so bloated with rules interactions and ways to build armies the resources alone just to check everything would be in the thousands.

Please be reasonable and thank your TO every once in a while.

Perhaps then TO's should put some though towards limiting the bloat and restricting all those interactions...

I mean, are armies composed of 3 or 4 or more detachments, with overlapping bonuses and rules, often composed of factions that would not be working together as portrayed in the list (e.g. DA's and Space Wolves, DE & Eldar, etc), and often taking advantage of synergies unintended by the codex writers, and that many players can't keep track of themselves, really something that have much value to events and communities in the first place aside from highlighting how badly people can break the system?

 Vaktathi wrote:

 MDizzle wrote:


7th ed 40k is so bloated with rules interactions and ways to build armies the resources alone just to check everything would be in the thousands.

Please be reasonable and thank your TO every once in a while.

Perhaps then TO's should put some though towards limiting the bloat and restricting all those interactions...

I mean, are armies composed of 3 or 4 or more detachments, with overlapping bonuses and rules, often composed of factions that would not be working together as portrayed in the list (e.g. DA's and Space Wolves, DE & Eldar, etc), and often taking advantage of synergies unintended by the codex writers, and that many players can't keep track of themselves, really something that have much value to events and communities in the first place aside from highlighting how badly people can break the system?

That is a totally different topic my friend. You are correct it's nuts out there what can you do.

 MDizzle wrote:
You guys are asking way to much from TO's almost all of us lose money putting on events don't get to play in events and just do it for the love of the game.

If you want everything at a Large GT to checked and double checked then expect to pay a lot more for your ticket. I mean a lot more.

7th ed 40k is so bloated with rules interactions and ways to build armies the resources alone just to check everything would be in the thousands.

Please be reasonable and thank your TO every once in a while.

100% agree. Checking every list simply isn't feasible. What I was recommending was having lists checked for prize winners. List is over points or wrong? No prize and/or ITC points submitted. Period.

In Bolt Action I have slightly moved away from cash prize while some are awarded the real prize is a trophy..

With a good chunk of the prize support goes in to community sourced and voted on terrain. We focus on building tables like a France table or a Pacific table and such.

This helps bring people together and makes a better environment for all.

 Red Corsair wrote:
That's like saying the TSA should not bother with checking luggage because the volume ensures mistakes.

This is a pretty good analogy. Check 10% of lists. Punish any illegal list discovered with immediate disqualification from the event and a ban on attending future events. Now, as a cheater, are you willing to roll the dice on that 10% chance of losing your hobby forever? Or are you going to take a legal list just in case yours happens to be one of the ones that is checked?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
That's like saying the TSA should not bother with checking luggage because the volume ensures mistakes.

This is a pretty good analogy. Check 10% of lists. Punish any illegal list discovered with immediate disqualification from the event and a ban on attending future events. Now, as a cheater, are you willing to roll the dice on that 10% chance of losing your hobby forever? Or are you going to take a legal list just in case yours happens to be one of the ones that is checked?

This is a statement from someone that has never run and event and stuck his/her neck out there for the community to run an event. This is as bad as Trumps wall. You are going to Punish people that are playing a game of toy solders and in your mind you would be taking their hobby away from them? Seems crazy bro.

Just so you know TO's have to consider a little thing called attendance with rules like yours you are sure to draw jack& gak to your event.

 MDizzle wrote:
You are going to Punish people that are playing a game of toy solders and in your mind you would be taking their hobby away from them?

Yes, of course I'm going to punish people who cheat. Are you suggesting that cheaters should be allowed to continue participating in the hobby?

And yes, you can adjust the penalty if you feel that's too harsh. The point is not the specific penalty, it's that you check a percentage of the lists at random and impose a penalty harsh enough that it's not worth trying to cheat and taking the risk of getting caught. Even a chance of being kicked out of an event that you spent hundreds of dollars to travel to would probably be a pretty significant deterrent, especially combined with a 100% chance of checking your list if you are eligible to receive any prizes.

Are you sure that the people that have made errors on their lists are cheaters?

Forget to write down a melta bomb and get banned seems legit!

Punishing cheaters is a big deal to you list issues would be far down the rung for me. In 40k the way people cheat most is slow play.

A 3 point issue on a list is small potatoes IMHO.

Making honest people feel like cheaters for making a simple mistake is not the way to build a community and have a good and healthy environment.

 MDizzle wrote:
Are you sure that the people that have made errors on their lists are cheaters?

Forget to write down a melta bomb and get banned seems legit!

Punishing cheaters is a big deal to you list issues would be far down the rung for me. In 40k the way people cheat most is slow play.

A 3 point issue on a list is small potatoes IMHO.

Making honest people feel like cheaters for making a simple mistake is not the way to build a community and have a good and healthy environment.

Sorry,

But when 40k players take themselves as seriously as they do, there's no other way.

A guy running a MTG deck with cards not listed in his decklist gets kicked and banned. They pay as much or more for their hobby as we do. I don't see them struggling with attendance.

3 points here or there might have been the difference between a transport, melta bomb, or formation cost, all of which could drastically change how the game ends.

 MDizzle wrote:
Are you sure that the people that have made errors on their lists are cheaters?

Forget to write down a melta bomb and get banned seems legit!

Punishing cheaters is a big deal to you list issues would be far down the rung for me. In 40k the way people cheat most is slow play.

A 3 point issue on a list is small potatoes IMHO.

Making honest people feel like cheaters for making a simple mistake is not the way to build a community and have a good and healthy environment.

What about the honest people who didn't make mistakes that may have affected the game? They're passively punished by allowing the "mistakes happen" argument to be so prevalent. Honest Guy With Legal List might lose a game to Honest Guy Who Made a Mistake. Mr. Mistake earned the win in a non-legal manner, but gets to keep it because "mistakes happen." Mr. Legal List now has a loss that may not have been a loss, losing chances at prizes because "mistakes happen." I feel like something needs to be in place, I don't know what it is, I'm no rules writer, and I understand there's a lot of sacrifice involved in being a TO, and mad respect to those who do it. I want to preemptively thank all the TO's who do it for love of the game and community, even before I get involved in tournaments. But keep in mind, a good and healthy environment to me (and likely many others) means cheaters (mistake or intended) don't get hundreds of dollars payout.

This is the first game I've been in involved in with this mindset being so popular. It boggles my mind, but maybe I'll just have to adjust. I just honestly feel like this means "it's okay if cheaters win" and that makes me sad.

 MDizzle wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 MDizzle wrote:


7th ed 40k is so bloated with rules interactions and ways to build armies the resources alone just to check everything would be in the thousands.

Please be reasonable and thank your TO every once in a while.

Perhaps then TO's should put some though towards limiting the bloat and restricting all those interactions...

I mean, are armies composed of 3 or 4 or more detachments, with overlapping bonuses and rules, often composed of factions that would not be working together as portrayed in the list (e.g. DA's and Space Wolves, DE & Eldar, etc), and often taking advantage of synergies unintended by the codex writers, and that many players can't keep track of themselves, really something that have much value to events and communities in the first place aside from highlighting how badly people can break the system?

That is a totally different topic my friend. You are correct it's nuts out there what can you do.

I dont think it is a different topic at all, and would seem to be the obvious answer to "what can you do?".

Everyone agrees that its insanely difficult fot TO's to check lists as a result of 40k list building going nuts. Limiting detachments and allies would greatly mitigate many (though obviously not all) of these issues, largely only at the expense of the top end people that look to break the ruleset as much as they can and will just move on to another army in 6 months either way.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

A guy running a MTG deck with cards not listed in his decklist gets kicked and banned. They pay as much or more for their hobby as we do. I don't see them struggling with attendance.

No. No they don't. They get a Game Loss (in a best 2 out of 3 Match) and there are procedures to modify the deck to match the list as closely as possible. If they self report upon discovery then even that penalty can be lessened.

skarsol wrote:

 Thunderfrog wrote:

A guy running a MTG deck with cards not listed in his decklist gets kicked and banned. They pay as much or more for their hobby as we do. I don't see them struggling with attendance.

No. No they don't. They get a Game Loss (in a best 2 out of 3 Match) and there are procedures to modify the deck to match the list as closely as possible. If they self report upon discovery then even that penalty can be lessened.

Yes, yes they do.

From the DCI Penalty Guide.

Level 5 Events: Very strict rules enforcement. This level of rules enforcement is designed for the highest level of competition. Players are expected to have a thorough knowledge of all tournament rules and procedures, so judges should issue penalties for unintentional rules violations that reflect this expected amount of rules knowledge.

-Illegal Decklists and Sideboard Lists-

Level 4 or 5 Play.

-First Offense: Double warning and ejection.

Those rules are ancient. You want the IPG for current tournament rules at the competitive and professional levels. Level X Events don't even exist anymore.

 MDizzle wrote:
Forget to write down a melta bomb and get banned seems legit!

Here's a novel idea: don't forget a melta bomb. Check your list ten times, have your friends check it, etc. There is no excuse for having an illegal list in a tournament.

A 3 point issue on a list is small potatoes IMHO.

No, it's actually a rather big issue. Unlike many forms of "cheating", where the line between honest disagreements and deliberate cheating is hard to define, there's no ambiguity here. If you bring 1753 points to a 1750 point tournament you have an illegal list. It's one of the few cases in 40k where absolutely everyone can agree that the rule has been broken, and there is indisputable evidence in the written army list to confirm it.

skarsol wrote:
Those rules are ancient. You want the IPG for current tournament rules at the competitive and professional levels. Level X Events don't even exist anymore.

It's there at the bottom.

Cheating: Disqualification


There is a lesser infraction for deck list errors, but that also lumps in misprints and other things. I think swapping in cards you shouldnt have demonstrates a clear intent for advantage. I also think adding points you shouldnt have for extra units and wargear is the same.

Putting in a Sol Ring when your Decklist says Gruul Signet is a bit easier to call 'Cheating' than being 1 point over on your army list.

It's not a matter of shades of grey. If you are playing in any event, especially a GT or event with prize support, the army point total is the easiest rule to follow.

"Players must construct an army costing 1850 points or less."

Sneaking in extra points is just as bad as stealing inches or changing dice results when your opponent isn't looking.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

skarsol wrote:
Putting in a Sol Ring when your Decklist says Gruul Signet is a bit easier to call 'Cheating' than being 1 point over on your army list.

Do you mean easier to *catch*? Because you can call anything a banana pretty easily.

If a TO does check everyone's list and they still miss something, what happens then?

 axisofentropy wrote:
If a TO does check everyone's list and they still miss something, what happens then?

That's when we acknowledge that mistakes happen.

Saying mistakes happen before ever trying is stupid frankly.

Besides, all I hear in this thread is that scraping sound from the goal post being shifted continuously. read the thread and you will find a number of recommendations that are not that difficult. For example, checking all the top 16 lists thoroughly. Any violations will disqualify them from continuing on for the title and prize support. They don't need to be ejected and ridiculed, simply knock them down to 17 and continue. That alone will ensure players do their due diligence.

What is ridiculous are the claims that anyone in violation is somehow the victim, and if strict enforcement is applied somehow the victim is the TO. Doing nothing ensures everyone else is the victim and that tournaments will suffer in the long run.

 axisofentropy wrote:
If a TO does check everyone's list and they still miss something, what happens then?

Roll a d10. On the result of a 1 the TO is also a cheater, the event is cancelled and TO is banned from ever hosting an event again.

I do not condone, nor do I think anyone here condones actual cheating. However, people are being very sloppy with their language and just because you think a word means something in English, if the English language/dictionary disagrees with you, you are wrong/or not speaking English.

So since we are presumably speaking English here... Definitions from the Oxford English Dictionary (an authoritative source for English definitions):

Cheat: (Verb) Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game.

Cheat: (noun) A person who behaves dishonestly in order to gain an advantage.

Now lets look at the word "Honest" in the OED and one example we get is as follows:

"1.3(Of an action) blameless or well intentioned even if unsuccessful or misguided:
he’d made an honest mistake"

So, how is accidentally being over points equate to acting dishonestly (or unfairly) to gain an advantage? Someone could submit a list they intended to be at or under a points limit but be unsuccessful in doing so. That does not make them a cheater as cheating requires a knowledge element which is missing in what people call "honest mistakes". That is why laws involving dishonesty, deception and fraud involve a requirement that you prove the individual had knowledge that they were acting dishonestly, deceptively or fraudulently and that they acted in such a manner intentionally. It is worth noting that one defense to a fraud accusation is that you did not intend to commit a fraud, indicating that the intention of a person is what is at the heart of the matter.

Should there be ramifications? Sure... But taking a hard-line stance such as labeling someone a cheater and demanding they don't participate in said event and future events is pretty unreasonable absent the KNOWLEDGE that they, you know, actually knew or intended to submit a list over points and play it as such.

Specifically, I am referring to what Peregrine wrote in his comment "This is a pretty good analogy. Check 10% of lists. Punish any illegal list discovered with immediate disqualification from the event and a ban on attending future events. Now, as a cheater, are you willing to roll the dice on that 10% chance of losing your hobby forever? Or are you going to take a legal list just in case yours happens to be one of the ones that is checked?"

It has been pointed out that even if players check their lists several times and a TO checks their list, it is still possible for errors to persist due to the complicated nature of how lists are constructed. And while we can look to other game systems like MTG, that is a very flawed analogy. This is because MTG may have rather draconian penalties but remember that MTG is a vastly simpler and less complex system when it comes to deck building... Either a card is on the play list or it isn't. Either your cards are on your deck list, or they are not.... There is no interaction where one card will modify your ability to include any other card in your deck and there are no points associated with the inclusion of any cards.

So the less precise the process of competing is, the less severe the penalties need to be when errors are discovered, especially absent any clear proof that intentionally dishonest conduct was involved.

Now to play devil's advocate, one description of "unfairly" in the OED is "In a way that does not follow the rules of a game or sport" but while the rules for a points limit in 40k are black and white (a list is either at/under a points limit or it is not), the rules for getting there (e.g., putting together a list and the points implications for said lists) are not so black and white. Therefore, you cannot (or should not) be so black and white in your assessment of what penalties should or should not be applied. The definition of cheating has a very strong implication of intentional and wrongful conduct; so absent some knowledge of a person's intent, you cannot rightly label them a cheater.