Las Vegas Open 2018

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.

**DCannon4Life**

DarthDiggler wrote:
Back in the day I ran and was head judge of the Adepticon Gladiator event. This was back when the Gladiator was the premier competitive event - just battle point. I would walk around the hall and if I saw a rule being misplayed I interfered. It didn't happen much but I did. I remember two distinct instances. One was Marc Parker vs a big guy from Ohio with a reputation. Marc was getting very upset and agitated about rule lawyering. I stayed at the table and made sure both players played on the up and up. I didn't sit back and let misplays happen. Drama was minimized and the game played to conclusion.

Another instance occurred in either the finals or semi-finals. Hank Edley was up against another player who was stalling out and slow playing to get the win. Hank had an all assault Khorne list and needed the game to go to completion to have a chance. The stalling was obvious and I told both players this game would continue until Saturday morning if it needed to, but it would finish to natural conclusion. Neither questioned my decision and the slow player stopped putzing around and began to play at a regular pace immediately. The difference was stark.

If I had sat back on my hands and said I would not interfere without being summoned, then either I get summoned for every move or I let a misplay happen and let it go because one player doesn't know the rules well enough. This would leave a bad taste in the mouth of the offended person.

If I would have said 'slow play happens, but since I can't quantify that with a time comparison over a 3 hour game I won't stop it from happening' then I allow someone to steal a win by slow playing. Saying you can't stop slow play until after it happens and then saying you can't stop slow play after the fact is a circular argument to bad games and bad experiences.

Judges need to judge and if they need to stop a crime from being committed in the act they should. Cheaters rely on judges thinking they are the Marvel Universes Watchers - just sit back and observe, but don't act on what you are witnessing. Walk around the hall and make corrections when you see something played wrong. It's better than having to try and pick up the pieces 2 hours later and it will keep unscrupulous players on their toes. They are far to comfortable in the current environment right now.

If you don't mind: how many participants were there, what was the judge/player ratio, and which edition was this?

**Galas**

I actually usually borrow things for my friends, not because I want to spam things but because not all of us have as many miniatures as others. In the last tournament for example, one friend of mine lent me 2 Razorbacks, a Land Raider to another guy, and 6 dark angels bikers to another (So, not spammy meta things)
Specially me, that has a serious lack of imperial transport because I hate the models, but if you want to at least have a fair chance of not being rolfmstomped in warhammer you need transports.
But at the end of the day if it is some model that I like with rules that I like for my list, I will eventually buy it myself. But I have no moral high ground to blame anyone that isn't using his own models.

**DarthDiggler**

DCannon4Life wrote:
DarthDiggler wrote:
Back in the day I ran and was head judge of the Adepticon Gladiator event. This was back when the Gladiator was the premier competitive event - just battle point. I would walk around the hall and if I saw a rule being misplayed I interfered. It didn't happen much but I did. I remember two distinct instances. One was Marc Parker vs a big guy from Ohio with a reputation. Marc was getting very upset and agitated about rule lawyering. I stayed at the table and made sure both players played on the up and up. I didn't sit back and let misplays happen. Drama was minimized and the game played to conclusion.

Another instance occurred in either the finals or semi-finals. Hank Edley was up against another player who was stalling out and slow playing to get the win. Hank had an all assault Khorne list and needed the game to go to completion to have a chance. The stalling was obvious and I told both players this game would continue until Saturday morning if it needed to, but it would finish to natural conclusion. Neither questioned my decision and the slow player stopped putzing around and began to play at a regular pace immediately. The difference was stark.

If I had sat back on my hands and said I would not interfere without being summoned, then either I get summoned for every move or I let a misplay happen and let it go because one player doesn't know the rules well enough. This would leave a bad taste in the mouth of the offended person.

If I would have said 'slow play happens, but since I can't quantify that with a time comparison over a 3 hour game I won't stop it from happening' then I allow someone to steal a win by slow playing. Saying you can't stop slow play until after it happens and then saying you can't stop slow play after the fact is a circular argument to bad games and bad experiences.

Judges need to judge and if they need to stop a crime from being committed in the act they should. Cheaters rely on judges thinking they are the Marvel Universes Watchers - just sit back and observe, but don't act on what you are witnessing. Walk around the hall and make corrections when you see something played wrong. It's better than having to try and pick up the pieces 2 hours later and it will keep unscrupulous players on their toes. They are far to comfortable in the current environment right now.
If you don't mind: how many participants were there, what was the judge/player ratio, and which edition was this?

Edition was around 5-6ish. Judges were me and maybe one other (maybe not). Participants were about 110.

**Togusa**

Pepin wrote:
Togusa wrote:
Pepin wrote:
This was my first ever tournament, and I had a blast. I went 2-1-2, and skipped the last game to hang out with my wife.

I did bring a 120-model Ork army and never had a game go past Round 3, but I assumed that was just my problem.

The ungentleman-like conduct in the final two games was very off-putting. These guys and I don't play the same game/hobby, but I am OK with that.

I think in the future I will stick to the European tournaments, like the Warhammer World GT, where the hobby element is actually embraced. The fact that Tony admitted to (1) copying a list and (2) not even playing with his own models confirms what I said - he is playing a different game/hobby than me. And that's OK.

Did you play Grot Tanks?

60 Boyz
5 Meg Gunz + 25 Grot Gunners
10 Kommandos
5 Flash Gitz + 5 Ammo runts
Lots of Characters

Ah, I played against a dude with Grot Tanks, but I never got his name.

**Red Corsair**

DarthDiggler wrote:
DCannon4Life wrote:
DarthDiggler wrote:
Back in the day I ran and was head judge of the Adepticon Gladiator event. This was back when the Gladiator was the premier competitive event - just battle point. I would walk around the hall and if I saw a rule being misplayed I interfered. It didn't happen much but I did. I remember two distinct instances. One was Marc Parker vs a big guy from Ohio with a reputation. Marc was getting very upset and agitated about rule lawyering. I stayed at the table and made sure both players played on the up and up. I didn't sit back and let misplays happen. Drama was minimized and the game played to conclusion.

Another instance occurred in either the finals or semi-finals. Hank Edley was up against another player who was stalling out and slow playing to get the win. Hank had an all assault Khorne list and needed the game to go to completion to have a chance. The stalling was obvious and I told both players this game would continue until Saturday morning if it needed to, but it would finish to natural conclusion. Neither questioned my decision and the slow player stopped putzing around and began to play at a regular pace immediately. The difference was stark.

If I had sat back on my hands and said I would not interfere without being summoned, then either I get summoned for every move or I let a misplay happen and let it go because one player doesn't know the rules well enough. This would leave a bad taste in the mouth of the offended person.

If I would have said 'slow play happens, but since I can't quantify that with a time comparison over a 3 hour game I won't stop it from happening' then I allow someone to steal a win by slow playing. Saying you can't stop slow play until after it happens and then saying you can't stop slow play after the fact is a circular argument to bad games and bad experiences.

Judges need to judge and if they need to stop a crime from being committed in the act they should. Cheaters rely on judges thinking they are the Marvel Universes Watchers - just sit back and observe, but don't act on what you are witnessing. Walk around the hall and make corrections when you see something played wrong. It's better than having to try and pick up the pieces 2 hours later and it will keep unscrupulous players on their toes. They are far to comfortable in the current environment right now.
If you don't mind: how many participants were there, what was the judge/player ratio, and which edition was this?

Edition was around 5-6ish. Judges were me and maybe one other (maybe not). Participants were about 110.

Instead of paying the winner 5 grand, why not use it to pay for more judges. Even without hiring them as employees that money could pay for travel and accommodations, a reward night out and maybe a shirt or some sort of thank you token. Seems to me if one of the underlying issues is a lack of qualified judges then it makes very little sense to continue adding more players and then rewarding the winner in essentially unregulated environment.

**Primark G**

They do need more judges watching the top tables.

**Red Corsair**

Primark G wrote:
They do need more judges watching the top tables.

Top tables should not be an issue now though. Your telling me on Sunday they didn't have enough judges for 4 tables? I think the event as a whole needs more judges, you are more likely to find fast and loose shenanigans during the first 3 rounds between sharks and seals because there is no top table yet. Those are the rounds that require more judges wandering about.

**Primark G**

MVBrandt wrote:
greyknight12 wrote:
Primark G wrote:
Seriously did any of us actually believe they would do anything?

LVO is run by Frontline Gamine, which owns/started ITC. We all know this. What people often forget is that Frontline Gaming is also a RETAILER. They are a business that sells models and gaming supplies. So, they benefit from an ever-changing list-based meta, and they especially benefit from celebrity 40K players advertising those lists. Exalting people who win big tournaments makes those tournaments more attractive to competitively-minded players, and when the price of victory is advertised as the cost of a few boxes of Eldar then Frontline doubly benefits. The culture of "Celebrity 40k" has to continue, because without it eventually the cost of our plastic, hotels, and airline tickets isn't worth it anymore cause winning a GT means nothing. The "A-list" of celebrities is pretty much set at this point, and it will stay.

This is just ....

Lol.

No.

Upon further reflection and reading this article from an FLG staff member it does seem like there is indeed an "A" list of players. Basically the article says the offending player is a good guy so it's okay.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/02/01/a-teachable-moment-from-lvo-40k-championships/#comments

**andysonic1**

Actually the article says he's a nice guy and it's NOT okay what he did. They aren't going to retroactively try and change things, what's done is done, and moving forward they are going to look more closely at slow play and bad sportsmanlike conduct at tournaments. I think he's right that this was blown a little out of proportions. It was a dick move, and everyone, including the guy who did it, knows that. I doubt he will do the same thing again.

**Primark G**

"Tony by the way, is not a bad guy. In fact, he is super nice."

"We are lucky to have players like Tony with his great skill and tremendous ability."

**andysonic1**

And he goes on to say what he did was not good, was a dick move, was not sportsmanlike, and says they don't support it. Do you want them to spank Tony on the bottom now? Maybe burn his models in front of him? Give him a year long ban for a mistake of judgement that he understands he made and vocally regrets?

Or maybe you need to get off your high horse and realize people make mistakes. No one who participated in the LVO says this ruined their experience, and even the other player Alex took it in stride. The organizers acknowledged the issue and disavowed it. It's time for you and everyone else who's making this player out to be a boogyman of competitive warhammer to learn from it and move on, because everyone actually involved are.

**Voidwraith**

andysonic1 wrote:
And he goes on to say what he did was not good, was a dick move, was not sportsmanlike, and says they don't support it. Do you want them to spank Tony on the bottom now? Maybe burn his models in front of him? Give him a year long ban for a mistake of judgement that he understands he made and vocally regrets?

Or maybe you need to get off your high horse and realize people make mistakes. No one who participated in the LVO says this ruined their experience, and even the other player Alex took it in stride. The organizers acknowledged the issue and disavowed it. It's time for you and everyone else who's making this player out to be a boogyman of competitive warhammer to learn from it and move on, because everyone actually involved are.

Everything you just said is 100% correct.

You just need to realize this is a public forum. If people can't get on DakkaDakka and express themselves by screaming at one another and beating a dead horse over, and over, and over again...where else can they do it?

I suppose there's always Twitter...

**Galas**

Primark G wrote:
MVBrandt wrote:
greyknight12 wrote:
Primark G wrote:
Seriously did any of us actually believe they would do anything?

LVO is run by Frontline Gamine, which owns/started ITC. We all know this. What people often forget is that Frontline Gaming is also a RETAILER. They are a business that sells models and gaming supplies. So, they benefit from an ever-changing list-based meta, and they especially benefit from celebrity 40K players advertising those lists. Exalting people who win big tournaments makes those tournaments more attractive to competitively-minded players, and when the price of victory is advertised as the cost of a few boxes of Eldar then Frontline doubly benefits. The culture of "Celebrity 40k" has to continue, because without it eventually the cost of our plastic, hotels, and airline tickets isn't worth it anymore cause winning a GT means nothing. The "A-list" of celebrities is pretty much set at this point, and it will stay.

This is just ....

Lol.

No.

Upon further reflection and reading this article from an FLG staff member it does seem like there is indeed an "A" list of players. Basically the article says the offending player is a good guy so it's okay.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/02/01/a-teachable-moment-from-lvo-40k-championships/#comments

What a great article. My respect for everybody in Frontlinegaming and specially the author, as I said, even being very critic about what Tony did, I'm not gonna crucify the guy. He is not a boogeyman, he just did something wrong. My critizism was geared toward that general attitude that this problem was just an example of, not this specific case. Because if you enter too much in the specific example, you lose perspective of the actual problem (I'm not saying this is a generalised problem, of course not)

**Xenomancers**

I think the article is weak as heck. It goes out of it's way to call tony a nice guy. Undermines his slow play and attacks him enforcing an actual rule and says its wrong to do that. No - it's not. In competitive play - you play right or you lose. If you start your psychic phase to early - you can't go back to moving...this is pretty obvious as to why. In a friendly game I always let players go back and fix a mistake like that - but in a torny? Heck no - I woulda done the same thing. However - the slow play should have got him disqualified well before that - you see how much it tilted Alex? He forgot how to move and deploy his army! This is essentially a PR article. You notice how FLG takes no blame for any of this and they managed the dang tournament.

This is what I get out of it.

"Please! Please! Keep buying stuff from FLG! Please don't let us blow this huge opportunity GW gave us to be the face of 40k competitive play"

Sorry buddy...you blew it.

**quickfuze**

Nice fluff piece for Reece and company to try to save face for ABSOLUTELY blowing it. For the love of God I hope this incompetence is not to be the standard or model for competitive 40k events.

**Crimson Devil**

It is, and will be because those who criticize it refuse to create an alternative. Of course if you do start your own tournament circuit, you'll be open to the criticism of the anonymous on the internet.

**Primark G**

They did say in the latest podcast they are going to address slow play.

**Crimson Devil**

And a year from now when the newest controversy from LVO 2019 is burning up the internet you'll be back demanding blood.

**Primark G**

If they say they will address I believe them. It is a really big deal for them to admit it is a problem and to say they will fix it.

**An Actual Englishman**

In a few months time, no-one will remember this incident.

Any new player of 40k who is joining post LVO 2018, knows nothing of this incident.

Let it die. It's completely meaningless.

Tony acted like a douche, we've all done it I'm sure. Alex probably wasn't as cool as his demeanor implied either, but he kept it together.

Nobody cares except the few of you discussing it here. It'll have zero impact on the hobby.

**Primark G**

Why do you say that?

**General Hobbs**

Just wanted to throw this out in defense of this Tony guy.

In this and previous editions, they have had rules ( and let's not go into why we should follow them, duh) about moving and reserves and deep strikes.

I noticed something happening in previous editions if you let some players have some leeway with the movement rules. They'd change how they would play the turn. It would give them an advantage.

For example, Guy has a horde army and wanted to roll his fleet rolls now instead of waiting for the shooting phase. Sure, do it, I would say. But then if he got a bad fleet roll, he'd be able to adjust the movement of his other units to cover that unit, or be in a position to support it. Had he moved as per the rules, it would have been to my advantage ( not as many chargers, or a unit in LOS etc).

Ditto with deep strikers or summoned units. If the unit scattered into a bad position, because I'm giving him leeway in the turn order, he can cover for that mistake. If played normal, I might have an advantage, or I might not.

The point is, crafty players would take advantage of this, and it would be done to win, not to speed up the game.

So I see nothing wrong with Tony enforcing the rules against the soup player. Now I understand he played slow, and that is an issue unto itself. ( Personally, I usually give the" you can do it this time rule, but in the future let's follow the rules" rule)

**DJ3**

andysonic1 wrote:
And he goes on to say what he did was not good, was a dick move, was not sportsmanlike, and says they don't support it. Do you want them to spank Tony on the bottom now? Maybe burn his models in front of him? Give him a year long ban for a mistake of judgement that he understands he made and vocally regrets?

Or maybe you need to get off your high horse and realize people make mistakes. No one who participated in the LVO says this ruined their experience, and even the other player Alex took it in stride. The organizers acknowledged the issue and disavowed it. It's time for you and everyone else who's making this player out to be a boogyman of competitive warhammer to learn from it and move on, because everyone actually involved are.

It's almost like nothing is being accomplished aside from the same small group of anonymous Internet warriors calling for the head of a guy they've never met over and over, and the thread should have been locked ages ago.

Mods intervened in the NOVA thread after 8 pages and we're going on 25 here.

**Primark G**

- edit

Hobbs

**ghostvalley**

The vitriol, hyperbole, and demonizing going on in this thread borders on the absurd. The self righteousness is suffocating. It is the biggest tournament yet for grown men to play with their space toys. It will get bigger next year. I've been. Reece and Frankie pull off a great event. Nuff said.

**Primark G**

I am so happy to hear Reecius say that FLG will solve slow play. He is a man of his word. As a side note I loved it that off camera Marina brought it up to which he responded.

**TzeentchNet**

ghostvalley wrote:
Reece and Frankie pull off a great event. Nuff said.

As someone who was considering attending next year, what was shown this year seems to be a good indication that it wasn't a great event. Unless maybe you like playing two turn games against rules sharks, which I can do at the local store and it doesn't cost me a dime.

**djones520**

Reading through all of that, I don't like how Reece isn't responding to any of the questions about slow play. Or maybe I missed it?

**Audustum**

Primark G wrote:
MVBrandt wrote:
greyknight12 wrote:
Primark G wrote:
Seriously did any of us actually believe they would do anything?

LVO is run by Frontline Gamine, which owns/started ITC. We all know this. What people often forget is that Frontline Gaming is also a RETAILER. They are a business that sells models and gaming supplies. So, they benefit from an ever-changing list-based meta, and they especially benefit from celebrity 40K players advertising those lists. Exalting people who win big tournaments makes those tournaments more attractive to competitively-minded players, and when the price of victory is advertised as the cost of a few boxes of Eldar then Frontline doubly benefits. The culture of "Celebrity 40k" has to continue, because without it eventually the cost of our plastic, hotels, and airline tickets isn't worth it anymore cause winning a GT means nothing. The "A-list" of celebrities is pretty much set at this point, and it will stay.

This is just ....

Lol.

No.

Upon further reflection and reading this article from an FLG staff member it does seem like there is indeed an "A" list of players. Basically the article says the offending player is a good guy so it's okay.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/2018/02/01/a-teachable-moment-from-lvo-40k-championships/#comments

I mean, this is one of those things were it doesn't really matter if it's true or not. There's a (growing) perception that certain 'well-known' players get benefits the rest don't. That's going to need to get addressed in some manner eventually. The perception does as much harm as whether it's actually there or not.

**Byte**

DJ3 wrote:
andysonic1 wrote:
And he goes on to say what he did was not good, was a dick move, was not sportsmanlike, and says they don't support it. Do you want them to spank Tony on the bottom now? Maybe burn his models in front of him? Give him a year long ban for a mistake of judgement that he understands he made and vocally regrets?

Or maybe you need to get off your high horse and realize people make mistakes. No one who participated in the LVO says this ruined their experience, and even the other player Alex took it in stride. The organizers acknowledged the issue and disavowed it. It's time for you and everyone else who's making this player out to be a boogyman of competitive warhammer to learn from it and move on, because everyone actually involved are.

It's almost like nothing is being accomplished aside from the same small group of anonymous Internet warriors calling for the head of a guy they've never met over and over, and the thread should have been locked ages ago.

Mods intervened in the NOVA thread after 8 pages and we're going on 25 here.

Why? Because valid points are being made? Because issues are actually being talked about and not being squashed? Tournament discussion in a tournament forum?

Dakka not being a NOVA/ITC echo chamber?

This has all been excellent discussion. Im glad more people are taking the time to peak behind the curtain.

Grow the game right? Lives streams? Permanent video history. Whats the problem?

Its called "public scrutiny". Its a "thing" when one puts themselves out there.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

TzeentchNet wrote:
ghostvalley wrote:
Reece and Frankie pull off a great event. Nuff said.

As someone who was considering attending next year, what was shown this year seems to be a good indication that it wasn't a great event. Unless maybe you like playing two turn games against rules sharks, which I can do at the local store and it doesn't cost me a dime.

This is my conclusion. But this opinion carries no wait as its not inline with "brohammer" and slap on the back hammer. They want to establish top players but want to pretend its puppy dog tails and butterfies along the way. Finally some top level WAAC players was caught in public.