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.

So finally caught up on the assorted X-Wing podcasts I listen to and there seems to be a bit of a hullabloo about Intentional Draws

How do the rest of Dakka Squadron feel about it

My thinking is it's something players didn't ask for and going forward it will cause more problems than it solves and may nudge the collective mindset away from Fly Casual to the less than fun attitudes that sometimes infect 40k and Magic

Have at it

Total non-issue. Both players have to agree to it, and the only rational usage of an ID is when a person is so far ahead on match points that they can afford to take the hit to make the cut. I'd prefer it wasn't in the rules at all, it's a concept mainly found in card games(they also tried insisting alt-arts had to be sleeved) so I think its just whoever's heading up writing these rules for organised play getting sloppy. I in fact love that the community as a whole has kicked backed hard against the stupidness. The whole fiasco at Roanoke was an organised attempt to protest the new rules!

FFG have posted a big article about why they put the rule in, and what they are planning on doing going forwards-
https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2016/4/18/intentional-draws/

I'm not too happy about it as if draws are not allowed then a more complicated resolution mechanic will have to be introduced which will invariably increase round times. Unless they suddenly become wicked people like me in which case any draw will count as a loss for both players- simple way to insure aggressive play!

I'm ok with intentional draws being an official thing. You might as well allow it, since there's very little stopping people from doing it unofficially.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
My thinking is it's something players didn't ask for and going forward it will cause more problems than it solves and may nudge the collective mindset away from Fly Casual to the less than fun attitudes that sometimes infect 40k and Magic.

"Fly Casual" is one of the most misunderstood concepts in X-Wing. It doesn't mean don't try to win, play subpar lists, or don't be competitive, it means don't be a dick to people.

One could infer he know that by the rest of the sentence.

Colluding for mutual benefit to the exclusion of other compeititors gets filed firmly in the "dick behaviour" drawer. Regardless if Roanoke was a protest or no, this sort of thing has a history in MTG and I don't want it in X Wing.

 David Clarke wrote:
The whole fiasco at Roanoke was an organised attempt to protest the new rules!

I am fairly certain there is a post on the FFG forums from one of the Roanoke 8 which makes it quite clear that this is not the case. I will see if I can find it.

Edit: A Bad Rule, an Unfortunate Situation, and a Misguided Choice.... Reflections from a Roanoke Regional Top 8

 Azreal13 wrote:
Colluding for mutual benefit to the exclusion of other compeititors gets filed firmly in the "dick behaviour" drawer. Regardless if Roanoke was a protest or no, this sort of thing has a history in MTG and I don't want it in X Wing.

Except it's not colluding because it's done in the open and the TO has to be involved. It's not dickish behavior either because there's a way to get around: play better. And no, there was no collective thought process in Roanoke to make it a "protest." Did some of the players decided to "protest" the rule by using it? Sure, that's what they claim though I would say a much better protest would be to drop from the tournament but that's neither here nor there.


But really, you guys are about two months too late because FFG has already stated that they have "identified viable methods for the removal of draws" from single-game Swiss rounds (like X-Wing) and it will be addressed in the next tournament rules update in July.

Its cheating as they are deliberately gaming the system

Oh, and every TO in the history of everything has been immune to collusion?

It doesn't actually matter, as the specific wording merely states they have to be present for the discussion, which is, in reality, totally unenforceable, because they can't monitor every thing said by every player at all times, and by the time they're called over to officiate, the decision will of course already have been taken.

L2P isn't really much of an argument when the main issue was WRT the world champion being involved and 8 players deciding to feth everyone else and lock them out of the possibility of qualifying if they already hadn't made it into the inner circle.

Sure, hopefully they'll fix it, but then, they thought it was a good enough idea to include it in the rules pack in the first place...

 Azreal13 wrote:
Oh, and every TO in the history of everything has been immune to collusion?

Straw man much?

It doesn't actually matter, as the specific wording merely states they have to be present for the discussion, which is, in reality, totally unenforceable, because they can't monitor every thing said by every player at all times, and by the time they're called over to officiate, the decision will of course already have been taken.

Except in the Roanoke case, it was done to letter of the rule. I'm not really sure what your argument here is... cheating can still happen? I mean if that's your point than yes, I agree with you because rules don't stop people from cheating. However, in this case it was pretty clear that the players followed the rules as they were written.

L2P isn't really much of an argument when the main issue was WRT the world champion being involved and 8 players deciding to feth everyone else and lock them out of the possibility of qualifying if they already hadn't made it into the inner circle.

Sure it is. Paul is good but he's beatable and I've done it. Besides, Paul wasn't in danger of being bounced from the Top 8 to begin with. The bottom line is that none of those players did anything wrong and all of the hand-wringing and name calling done after that Regional is worse for X-Wing than taking an ID ever could be.

Sure, hopefully they'll fix it, but then, they thought it was a good enough idea to include it in the rules pack in the first place...

Again, your about two months late to the outrage party because FFG has already told us that they're removing draws in the next rules update.

 Soteks Prophet wrote:
Its cheating as they are deliberately gaming the system

It's difficult to call something explicitly allowed by the rules cheating. I do agree it should never have been allowed by the rules and hopefully the fix will be adequate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Oh, and every TO in the history of everything has been immune to collusion?

Straw man much?

Not when you're making the point that the TO has to be involved so it can't be collusion, no.

It doesn't actually matter, as the specific wording merely states they have to be present for the discussion, which is, in reality, totally unenforceable, because they can't monitor every thing said by every player at all times, and by the time they're called over to officiate, the decision will of course already have been taken.

Except in the Roanoke case, it was done to letter of the rule. I'm not really sure what your argument here is... cheating can still happen? I mean if that's your point than yes, I agree with you because rules don't stop people from cheating.

8 people spontaneously and simultaneously decided, without prior discussion, to do exactly the same thing?

I mean, ok, I'll give you it's possible, but it stretches credibility somewhat wouldn't you say.

L2P isn't really much of an argument when the main issue was WRT the world champion being involved and 8 players deciding to feth everyone else and lock them out of the possibility of qualifying if they already hadn't made it into the inner circle.

Sure it is. Paul is good but he's beatable and I've done it. Besides, Paul wasn't in danger of being bounced from the Top 8 to begin with. The bottom line is that none of those players did anything wrong and all of the hand-wringing and name calling done after that Regional is worse for X-Wing than taking an ID ever could be.

There's a thing called spirit of the game, which seems to go out of the window for people of a certain mindset at a moments provocation. But sure, they didn't technically do anything wrong, but not doing anything wrong =\= doing the right thing.

Sure, hopefully they'll fix it, but then, they thought it was a good enough idea to include it in the rules pack in the first place...

Again, your about two months late to the outrage party because FFG has already told us that they're removing draws in the next rules update.

They've stated they're "removing draws" not solely intentional draws, at least on the announcement I saw. If this means just intentional draws, then that's fine, but otherwise it indicates they're doing further fiddling, and may upset something else as a consequence.

 Azreal13 wrote:
L2P isn't really much of an argument when the main issue was WRT the world champion being involved and 8 players deciding to feth everyone else and lock them out of the possibility of qualifying if they already hadn't made it into the inner circle.

The only people who were locked out were people who lost at least two games earlier in the day. Don't want to miss the cut? Don't lose multiple games.

And I don't see why the world champion being involved is relevant. It's not like IDs are something that only the privileged elite and their friends can take advantage of. If you have the record to ID successfully then you always take the draw, no matter who your opponent is. If it's world champion vs. total stranger it's still going to be an ID.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
8 people spontaneously and simultaneously decided, without prior discussion, to do exactly the same thing?

Yep. If you understand how the tournament system works it is very clear that every undefeated and one-loss player would ID. That's how it works in other games. In MTG you don't need to discuss whether or not to ID, both players know if they have a X-Y or better record going into the final round (or final two rounds?) they will ID. As soon as the standings went up showing that the top eight players were all 5-0 or 4-1 and the 9th player was 3-2 every single person in the top 8 knew to take the ID.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
My thinking is it's something players didn't ask for and going forward it will cause more problems than it solves and may nudge the collective mindset away from Fly Casual to the less than fun attitudes that sometimes infect 40k and Magic.

"Fly Casual" is one of the most misunderstood concepts in X-Wing. It doesn't mean don't try to win, play subpar lists, or don't be competitive, it means don't be a dick.

This. I wish the whole "Fly Casual" thing would just die. I'm so tired of having it used in the same "casual at all costs" way that makes 40k a toxic mess, where playing "too competitively" gets you shunned from the community.

No, but it's a rule that people who aren't scrapping to grab that last qualifying place are, I'd suggest, far more likely to take advantage of. The consequence being that those that are scrapping for the last place may lose out.

But evidently some people have an issue with just playing games and determining a winner without some extra layer of fething about. Good job FFG don't appear to be one of them, it's just a shame they let it be legal in the first instance.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why is it so hard to just simply play the games as laid out and then see who's where?

Why does the system have to be worked?

Surely, if you're serious enough about a game to attend an organized event then a practice game against a player of decent caliber is worthwhile, even if placings aren't on the line?

Perhaps I'm too interested in a fair competition over winning, but I'm not going to lose sleep over that.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Not when you're making the point that the TO has to be involved so it can't be collusion, no.

But that wasn't the point you were making. You simply and sarcastically stated that every TO ever has been immune to collusion, which has nothing to do with anything I've said. It seems like you're trying to say that people can still cheat even if TO is involved, which isn't what we're talking about and it's an easily winnable argument for you because the obvious answer is yes.

So in other words, it's a straw man.

8 people spontaneously and simultaneously decided, without prior discussion, to do exactly the same thing?

I mean, ok, I'll give you it's possible, but it stretches credibility somewhat wouldn't you say.

So you are just throwing it out there that all of those guys are cheaters? Were you there? Do you know them? I'm going to go ahead and guess that since you live in the UK, the answer to both of those questions is a resounding "no." The players were well aware of how IDs work and know enough about the tournament system (as well as having the integrity to follow the rules) to decided that taking an ID was beneficial. Also, it only takes one player to initiate the conversation with the TO. You could look at the standings, realize that an ID would be the best possible outcome, tell you opponent that you want to call a TO over, and when the TO arrives, explain that an ID is the best thing for you. At that point, your opponent can decided to accept your offer.

But I guess it's easier just to assume they're all cheating donkey-caves, so whatever.

There's a thing called spirit of the game, which seems to go out of the window for people of a certain mindset at a moments provocation. But sure, they didn't technically do anything wrong, but not doing anything wrong =\= doing the right thing.

I was unaware that you were the arbiter of the Spirit of X-Wing. I'll keep that in mind at my next tournament in case I need to defer to your judgment.

 Azreal13 wrote:
No, but it's a rule that people who aren't scrapping to grab that last qualifying place are, I'd suggest, far more likely to take advantage of. The consequence being that those that are scrapping for the last place may lose out.

But those people already lost. They had their chance, they didn't take advantage of it. Complaining that they don't get even more chances to make the cut makes about as much sense as complaining that the 0-X guy doesn't get a chance to keep fighting for a spot in the cut.

Why is it so hard to just simply play the games as laid out and then see who's where?

Because pretending that you need a 100-0 win instead of a draw is stupid strategy? If you have to "play" the game what will actually happen is both players fortress in the corner and never leave their deployment zones, because leaving your deployment zone in this case is a clear negative-expected-value play (IOW, a really stupid thing to do). Allowing an ID without playing simply acknowledges this fact and allows everyone to skip over the tedious nonsense of pretending that the obvious winning strategy is anything other than "put your ships on the table and go get dinner for 74 minutes".

Surely, if you're serious enough about a game to attend an organized event then a practice game against a player of decent caliber is worthwhile, even if placings aren't on the line?

Nothing wrong with playing a game for fun once you've taken the ID. But most people just want a break. I don't know about you, but at the end of a long tournament most people are exhausted and the opportunity to take a nice long dinner break before the elimination rounds is worth much more than another game.

 Peregrine wrote:
But most people just want a break. I don't know about you, but at the end of a long tournament most people are exhausted and the opportunity to take a nice long dinner break before the elimination rounds is worth much more than another game.

Isn't that the truth!

In my last Store Championship, we cut to the Top 4 instead of the Top 8 due to size and in the interest in time. I was seeded fifth and while it would have been nice to make the cut and potentially win, I was fething thrilled that my day was over and I could enjoy watching the remaining games (especially since my best friend's son made the cut).

Somehow missed that FFG article, darn my tendency to go on info-binges for my games rather than keep up to date on a more consistent basis, its going away so I'm good with that although still think the whole scoring system needs a good looking at

 streamdragon wrote:

I am fairly certain there is a post on the FFG forums from one of the Roanoke 8 which makes it quite clear that this is not the case. I will see if I can find it.

Edit: A Bad Rule, an Unfortunate Situation, and a Misguided Choice.... Reflections from a Roanoke Regional Top 8

I've read that post, I'm not sure if you have, so lets quote the players reasoning at the time(which he did then regret)

Without knowing their reasons, here is what went through my head in the short time I had.... In the first Regional of the season, how powerful a message would it send FFG OP if the Top 8, that included the 3 time World Champ, a Worlds Top 4 and a well known podcaster, all took the ID? Would it be enough to protest the rule in this manor to get them to change the ID rule ASAP? So I made my decision. The next thing I know, my opponent is there as was the TO. Having never done it before we awkwardly fumbled our way and my opponent officially offered me the draw and I accepted..... as a protest. A short time later I had a moment in passing with the gentleman running the twitch feed and we both expressed our hope that this would send a message to FFG.

@Turnip Jedi, what do you think is wrong with the tournament scoring system as a whole? Or is it the organisation of Swiss Rounds,Cuts and Timing thats an issue?

Yeah, one person (in hindsight) claims that he did it as a "protest." There is absolutely no indication that anyone else did as a protest, let alone an organized protest among all eight players (in fact, most of them have said otherwise).

And really, if someone wants to protest a rule they don't like, drop from the tournament instead of using that rule to their advantage then writing a sympathetic forum post about how deeply they regret it.

@Dave

Not quite sure yet, part of me wants to say Strength of Schedule should be over MoV but then you open people up to the peril of other players dropping, need to get the Turnip Abacus on the case

I also think maybe rounds could go back to 60 mins, just on a practical level 5 or 6 rounds of 75mins plus turnaround time is a long day, especially with a cut

They are getting rid of it next time around, so the drama is over.

Best ot just let it die, no need for the Roanoke 8 to be constantly dragged through the mud.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
@Dave

Not quite sure yet, part of me wants to say Strength of Schedule should be over MoV but then you open people up to the peril of other players dropping, need to get the Turnip Abacus on the case

IMO, SoS is an indisputably superior metric for tournament rankings than MOV....in smaller tournaments, if you can get buy-in from players about not dropping. Once you get beyond 16 players or so, you're almost guaranteed that someone will have to drop before the tournament is over.

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

I also think maybe rounds could go back to 60 mins, just on a practical level 5 or 6 rounds of 75mins plus turnaround time is a long day, especially with a cut

And here, some of our local players are talking about going to 90 minute rounds I don't think there's any particularly "correct" round time. But it does influence what type of lists are good: alpha strike lists and lists with high HP ships.

The ID thing is a bit of a red herring, IMO. I think people are mostly annoyed with how the tournament structure promotes certain types of gameplay, which gets away from the "purity" of the game when you're just playing someone 1v1 without consideration of how your game will affect your performance in the tournament. In the context of winning a tournament, taking the ID if it will put you at 26 tournament points and gaurentee a cut is an obviously strong move. In the context of "playing a lot of x-wing", it's the opposite of what you would want to do. I think that discontinuity between player's goals at the tournament is what's leading to so much butthurt on the various X-Wing forums about the ID rules. But the underlying source of disgruntlement is that the gameplay and list building required to do well in a tournament is different than the gameplay and list building required to have fun at a casual pick-up game.

FFG is just going to change the rules to eliminate modified wins, and have draws go to whoever has initiative. That will eliminate a lot of the weird tournament math, and will force players to play all their games to win. They will also probably add an option for mutual intentional loss, for the players who are guaranteed a spot in the cut regardless of whether they lose or win their last game in the swiss rounds.

@DB

I think my shorter rounds thinking is partly selfish, basically I live at least a minimum 1h30 from any likely torny, combine that will often, at least in the UK, many FLGS just aren't physically large enough to support more than a handful of players, so events are often in rented space or part of a show or con so have to abide by the locations restrictions, maybe a TO choice between 60-90mins would be the answer based on circumstances

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
Not quite sure yet, part of me wants to say Strength of Schedule should be over MoV but then you open people up to the peril of other players dropping, need to get the Turnip Abacus on the case

SoS is terrible as a tiebreaker because it's entirely out of your control. If you get paired against the person who goes 0-X in the first round then it hurts your tiebreakers and there's nothing you can do about it. You just randomly got 0 points for that round. MoV may be flawed, but at least it's something you have some control over.

I also think maybe rounds could go back to 60 mins, just on a practical level 5 or 6 rounds of 75mins plus turnaround time is a long day, especially with a cut

Oh god no. 60 minute rounds sucked. Even when both players were trying to finish the game you always felt rushed, and it made it way too easy for one player to stall and run out the clock before their opponent could finish off their last ship(s) and win the game. 75 minute rounds make it a lot less stressful in "normal" games and make it harder to stall successfully without being so obvious about it that the TO can get involved.

 Peregrine wrote:
Oh god no. 60 minute rounds sucked. Even when both players were trying to finish the game you always felt rushed, and it made it way too easy for one player to stall and run out the clock before their opponent could finish off their last ship(s) and win the game. 75 minute rounds make it a lot less stressful in "normal" games and make it harder to stall successfully without being so obvious about it that the TO can get involved.

Yeah, the change to 75 minute Swiss rounds and the half points for large ships were some of the best things to happen to competitive X-Wing. There were some lists purposefully designed to last at least 60 minutes (coughcoughFATHANcough) and having that extra time to finish them off is a godsend.

 David Clarke wrote:
I've read that post, I'm not sure if you have, so lets quote the players reasoning at the time(which he did then regret)

Well, reading down farther:

In the short time I had I mentally projected onto the others, especially Paul, this notion that we were making a point.... apparently I was wrong. That's my fault, not theirs. We didn't talk and they never actually said that, so I shouldn't have assumed that. I've seen the posts by some of the Nova guys, including Paul. They have clarified that it wasn't a protest, that, while they don't like the rule, they used it simply to secure their Top 8 place, no more, no less.

One guy may have done it for protest, but it was not a case of all 8 of them using the ID rule as a protest.

I admit I don't understand the intricacies of the Swiss tournament format, but wouldn't a relatively simple fix be to change the entire thing to a double (or even triple) elimination tournament?

And to encourage others to stick around, perhaps a secondary tournament for a different set of prizes (perhaps the winner gets a spot back in the top tournament? )...

It seems like the best way to avoid the problems that come up with intentionally drawing would be to switch the format entirely, no?

I could also see a world cup style set of group play (groups of 4 each playing three games with the top two advancing to a single elimination stage)... there could again be problems with IDs in the last round of group, but I think it'd happen infrequently because the only times it has seemed to happen in soccer (football for the non-American world) is when there are UNINTENTIONAL draws in the first game or two.

Thoughts?

No, both of those would be a terrible tournament structures.

Swiss rounds pair players with similar point scores, making it so people play opponents that are generally performing the same as they are.

I've got no problem with the Intentional Draw.
As some have already said on here, if you and your opponent have played well enough to put yourselves in a position to take an ID, congratulations, you've earned it.

What the X-wing community doesn't need is all the pearl-clutching nonsense that people throw out there about "spirit of the game" and "play to play" and -worst of all- "fly casual".
And while the ID topic is 2 months old, in some forums and places it got pretty nasty; thankfully it's blown over at this point.

I will say that it kind of bothers me that FFG felt the need to remove the draw in some way come August; the silver lining is that it shows they care about player opinions enough to do something.

I hope that they can address the competitive aspects of the game in a way that makes everyone happy.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
No, both of those would be a terrible tournament structures.

Why? Because it would require limited numbers of people? Also, why not just randomize opponents in all rounds? I kinda wonder because I came in 2nd in my FLGS weekly tournament tonight (3 rounds, 1st random, 2nd ? and 3rd paired somewhat like swiss) but according to some of the discussion, I shouldn't have had a shot because I lost my 1st game?

(I won the 2nd 2 games for a 2-1 record and my loss did force a modified victory for my 1st round opponent... the MOV was 6 points and I had a decent mov in game 2 but a crushing victory in game 3).