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.

Thanks again everyone for a good, cordial discussion, that is much appreciated.

It feels like the majority of this line of thinking is based on fear of getting cheated. Whether intentionally or not. I just don't function that way when playing with toy soldiers.

Hulk I don't like to play that way either, but bottom line, if he was playing that stratagem like that the whole tournament, intentionally or not, his previous opponents may feel they were cheated out of a fair game. Is that ok and nothing should be done to make that right?

I have been thinking about this a lot, and would like to post some ideas and see what people think. First, let's start with participants having their books available.

RULE

For the tournament, all players will be required to have all pertinent source material available which is needed to play the base game and the army they have brought to the tournament. Saying this, the organizers understand that things happen (dead I-Pad, forgot them at the hotel, lost, etc.). In this event, it will be up to the player to immediately tell the event judges that he/she will not have his rules immediately available and to tell each of their opponents at the beginning of any games this will effect. We will try to have rules available that players can reference if needed, but if not, it will be up to the player in question to find someone in the hall that can make the rules available if they are asked to produce them. Although, as we have said, we understand things happen. The lack of immediately-available rules has the chance to affect your opponents enjoyment of the match; because of this we will be applying the following penalties:

1) For each round a player does not have their rules immediately available at their table, they will be docked 1 point. If they end up with zero points this round, the point will be deducted from their overall score.

2) If the player does not inform the judges or his opponent before the game starts, and is found not to have his rules immediately available during the game, they will be docked 5 points from their overall score.

This could be accomplished with two additional check box's on the score sheets for the round.

Please check one box if applicable:

1) My opponent informed me before the round that he/she would not have their rule immediately available during our match -1 point.

2) my opponent did not have there rules immediately available when asked and I was not informed at the beginning of the round -5 points.

What do people think? Every point at "top tables" can win or lose games and potentially take you out of prize support. So I think it is enough incentive for the competitive players to make sure they have there rules with them, but a small enough penalty that it really won't effect the people that are there just to have fun.

Hmmmm. This sounds strangely familiar.

Hmmmm. This sounds strangely familiar.

Byte, did I subliminally steal your idea? Let me know I will update my post!

EDIT: I removed the I came up with part just incase. But you didn't answer do you think something like this would be satisfactory for the issue?

 ChainswordHeretic wrote:
Hulk I don't like to play that way either, but bottom line, if he was playing that stratagem like that the whole tournament, intentionally or not, his previous opponents were cheated out of a fair game. Is that ok and nothing should be done to make that right?

"Cheated out of a fair game" implies that the person intentionally did it, meaning it was meant to be malicious. Without evidence of that, it is always best to give the benefit of the doubt. Remember every opponent had an opportunity to ask about the same rule, question it and call for a judge. If they did not, then that is technically on them as well for not questioning it.

In Magic or WoWTCG something like this would normally be a game loss for the unintentional misplay or incorrectly playing rules. The game loss and playing correctly would eventually even itself out in a tournament. If for whatever reason they made it to the top playoff and no one questioned it until then... seems sucky but at the same time, every opponent had the same opportunity as another to question it. If intentional than a disqualification but that tends to be rarer.

It is part of competitive playing. Know your rules, have your documents to back up your rules but also know enough to understand when you should question your opponent to back up their rules. In most cases, this rarely happens or resolves itself pretty quickly.

Cheated out of a fair game" implies that the person intentionally did it, meaning it was meant to be malicious.

Fair point, I did not mean it that way so lets say they could feel like they were cheated out of a faire game. Cool?

It is part of competitive playing. Know your rules, have your documents to back up your rules but also know enough to understand when you should question your opponent to back up their rules.

Agreed 100% but in that order. 1) your opponent should know their rules, 2) they should have their rules available, 3) you should be paying attention that they might make a mistake. Them having their rules and knowing how to play, I believe should be primary, catching mistakes should be secondary. Lets face it no one can possibly know all the rules enough to catch any mistake made. The onus should be on your opponent to be playing correctly in the first place?

EDIT my point has already been addressed by others.

EDIT my point has already been addressed by others.

@ Red Corsair, Even if someone posted similar beliefs as you I would still like to see what you think. I wanted to see if there was a majority consensus among players. I was thinking about doing a poll but there really is no way to narrow this down too a few questions. Also how would you like to see issues that arise handled?

 ChainswordHeretic wrote:
Fair point, I did not mean it that way so lets say they could feel like they were cheated out of a faire game. Cool?

That is fair but "feelings" don't have a place in rulings. No matter what someone rules, someone will "feel" cheated. People feel they are cheated by dice rolls all the time, that doesn't necessarily mean they were cheated or that it is true. That is just how it is sometimes.

Having both players responsible means that there are more chances for things to not get through the cracks. Yes you are correct, no one is expected to know all the rules which is fine. Which is why if the 1st match players didn't catch it, then hopefully the 2nd match players did catch it. If no one caught until much later, then chances are it may not have been that significant as effective as more "veteran" players who would have caught it would think.

As far as people being concerned about draconian measures being taken to enforce having your rules, let me put it another way: how many times do you forget your models at a tournament? And if you did, what would you expect the consequences to be?

 ChainswordHeretic wrote:

Hmmmm. This sounds strangely familiar.

Byte, did I subliminally steal your idea? Let me know I will update my post!

EDIT: I removed the I came up with part just incase. But you didn't answer do you think something like this would be satisfactory for the issue?

Something like this. I'm sure some part of it might be useful. But it is an idea.

1. Have hard copy of army lists for your opponents(for real)
2. Have army reference material in any authorized form(for real)

3. Something like add a 5pt max rules score for each player for each match. Not sportsmen, but "Rules Acumen". This is not a secret score. Its discussed openly by each player at end of game. no list -1, no references -1, etc. If there's a dispute in weight of penalty, call over a judge and work it out. If I'm teaching you the game -5!

A grievous "mistake" can than be back tracked and docked from the "Rules Acumen" score by a judge is deemed necessary.

If as a result a high bracketed player goes from first to worst, so be it. None of the pairings changed. Still the final group(table). Just like golf. Also, If there was a post play penalty for some reason, i.e. 3 players coming forward and saying they got face raped by 'zerks 3 times in a single charge phase, or something like that.

I know all this seems hardcore. It begs the question. "Are GT tournament play supposed to be competitive?" Should each event clarify its intention? i.e. Is "Soul eater" the top award or is it the "Gentlemen Warlord". TBH I'm not even sure. I know my local events tend to be very competitive with very high standards of conduct. Take all for bragging rights, top prize, etc. with just a $15 buy in. Its strange to think the bigger the event the looser the play/expectations. I just don't understand.

Thank you.

That is fair but "feelings" don't have a place in rulings. No matter what someone rules, someone will "feel" cheated. People feel they are cheated by dice rolls all the time, that doesn't necessarily mean they were cheated or that it is true. That is just how it is sometimes.

Alright Dark Severance I think you and others have brought me too the other side as far as previous opponents. I would still respect the player a little more if he made the effort between rounds to contact previous opponents and apologize if warranted. As far as the tournament goes I get it, there is no way to change what happened in previous games and trying to do so would most likely cause more problems than would be fixed. I guess I can be cool with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

3. Something like add a 5pt max rules score for each player for each match. Not sportsmen, but "Rules Acumen". This is not a secret score. Its discussed openly by each player at end of game. no list -1, no references -1, etc. If there's a dispute in weight of penalty, call over a judge and work it out. If I'm teaching you the game -5!

I would be a little worried about players grading each other. In my area back in the day the GW LGS Tourney packs had a sportsman ship score, There was a group of players that if they thought you would be competition for them any of their group that played you would ding you. Not enough to be obvious but it was enough to take you out of the running for overall. Do you think there would be a way to game the system if the players were involved with grading their opponent?

Sportsmen was secret. This wouldnt be. It would be open and blatant. So a dude could be like, what! A zero! For what! Wheres a judge?

Judge than says you cant dink him -5 because you hate his face. Type of thing.

Not sportsmen. Sportsmen and composition scores are horrible.

This might not be the answer but currently there isnt any reprocussion for showing up to one of these and just doing you own thing.

Agreed,I would like to find some middle ground everyone can agree on and see some tournaments enforce it. The current lets just move on as fast as we can and not hold anyone accountable thing needs to change.

If this is such a big issue, shouldn't the company sponsoring the event allocate funds to a "travelling compendium" that their rep lugs around with the prizes and other representation material? Leave it on a cart in the middle of the room and TOs can have access to it at any time?

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
If this is such a big issue, shouldn't the company sponsoring the event allocate funds to a "travelling compendium" that their rep lugs around with the prizes and other representation material? Leave it on a cart in the middle of the room and TOs can have access to it at any time?

Because the parent company understands it's an excuse to get people together and play with toys. Something a few people on here have a differring opinion on

If this is a 40k event, I don't think GW sponsor events, do they? Unless things have changed recently all 40k tournaments outside Warhammer World are run independently.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
If this is a 40k event, I don't think GW sponsor events, do they? Unless things have changed recently all 40k tournaments outside Warhammer World are run independently.

Yeah, Riot this ain't. It was amazing this year that GW even showed up.

GW does provide trophies and to my knowledge some prize support. But they are also sending reps to pretty much 100+ event that reaches out this year. They've had full streaming rigs at nova, adepticon, and lvo this year.

There is a difference between sponsoring and running though.

Because the parent company understands it's an excuse to get people together and play with toys. Something a few people on here have a differing opinion on

That is disingenuous and you know it. It is billed on GW's site as an epic 40K GRAND TOURNAMANT. If it is just some big pick up game why aren't the parings random? why is there a rules packet if we are just going to handle things at individual tables? Why are there judges, we're just there to have fun who needs a judge? Why are peoples future opponents based on how well they have done? why are there placing's? why are prizes awarded by how well you have done?

The organizers own words,

Basically, you're going to see an event where the things you have to accomplish, for which you score points and wins, will be the same by round. BUT, to keep it balanced and varying, the primary and main tiebreaker will constantly be changing, as will deployment.

This system is still in pretty intensive play testing among people who will NOT be permitted to participate in the tournament, as we want to make sure it's functional and evaluative.

I'm happy to answer any questions you have to the best of my ability. The point here is to have an event that very clearly identifies both the best players , and the best hobbyists, without shenanigans or corrupting amalgamations of the two. There are awards for softer players,harder players, and people who pursue both equally.

You're also likely to see "best in" for each of the non-4-0 brackets (so lesser top prizes for those who lose once, twice, etc.).

with EQUAL awards and recognition for all style of hobbyist and gamer from the ultra competitive to the extremely artistic)

We host a 256-slot, 8-round Warhammer 40K GT

It is a tournament, and the two people involved in the described situation, sit very far on the ultra competitive side of the fence.

Ultimately they can do what ever they want, it is their tournament, but stop posting rules expectations if you have no intention of enforcing them. Very simple, all rules issues will be settled at the table by the players. If it cannot be settled a judge will be consulted and he will make the final ruling. No penalty will be involved for improper play and the competitors will continue on with their game. Easy Peasy.

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
If this is such a big issue, shouldn't the company sponsoring the event allocate funds to a "travelling compendium" that their rep lugs around with the prizes and other representation material? Leave it on a cart in the middle of the room and TOs can have access to it at any time?

Because the parent company understands it's an excuse to get people together and play with toys. Something a few people on here have a differring opinion on

Im actually really surprised by this response. You use to post your Tourney achievements in your sig with a running count on your blog. So in your mind GTs arent intended to be a best to worst format. What are we talking T-ball?

How does your post advance this thread and the premise behind it?

If you take some time to actually stop looking down your nose and realize people are trying to be productive.

My not be your expectations. However, others apparently do have them.

I also remember you providing input to the +1 to go first because auto win issues. Because fun?




Automatically Appended Next Post:


This is a great exchange IMO and pretty much sums up everything being discussed.

Actually the +1 to going first yes was aBout fun. Random going first pulls ravens down the final peg which are some of the least fun units in the game to play against for 90% of the field.

Indeed I did use to keep my record in my signature and on my blog. I stopped mostly because it doesn't matter. All false modesty aside I tend to play at the higher level of the game. With the same guys at the same tables 90% of the time. I don't expect my opponents to be perfect over the course of a long weekend when we're all short on sleep and generally a bit tipsy. Add in that 6th and 7th release cycle caused most people to know they didn't know all the rules that were out so asking about weird gak became common.

All that said my thought is that if a rule gets played wrong it gets played wrong. I assume it's an honest mistake and take it in stride. I might discuss it with other guys and if a pattern starts to form then that information tends to disimitate through the community. Reality is that the people hurt by things like "rules competency" scores are the middle to lower pack. It's an additional item that will get gamed at the higher level (it's still he said/she said) and add another thing to cause tension at all tables. You think sports scores were bad wait for this

The difference might be that I'm pretty active in the tournament scene and have been playing in 100+ person gts for over a decade. I pushed for a more competitive scene in 5th and that honestly led to a poorer community when it was in full swing for 6th and 7th. The community is starting to rebound with the intro to 8th.

Fear mongering about rules knowledge and creating more issues for to's and players just isnt something i approve of. It's easy to stand on the side and pick things apart. I'll say it again, this isn't a competitive sport. Dont expect it to be or you'll be disappointed. For god sakes even the prizes we win rarely cover the cost of the trip let alone the food and drink for the weekend.

Tldr - if you care about being cheated be willing to ask questions and learn ALL rules. If your opponent doesn't have his rules with him and can't find the answer get the to's involved. Anymore is to much for your average players and to's. And it's likely to lead to less attended events.

 Hulksmash wrote:

Fear mongering about rules knowledge and creating more issues for to's and players just isnt something i approve of. It's easy to stand on the side and pick things apart. I'll say it again, this isn't a competitive sport. Dont expect it to be or you'll be disappointed. For god sakes even the prizes we win rarely cover the cost of the trip let alone the food and drink for the weekend.

You speak to me as if I'm a village idiot. Really, fear mongering? I've been playing 40k competively and otherwise for 22 years. I've lived the evolution of the game since RT.

Maybe they(GTs) shouldn't be billed as competitive? Manage expectations. Placings including "1st" overall generally require competition of some sort

I literally think this is/becoming an exercise in futility.

@Thread, its blatantly obvious these guys REALLY don't care what anybody other than themselves have to say about any of this. Accept it.

I have.

AoS has not used plus one forever and it was never questioned. Using plus one is a big part of the problem.

Your findings don't matter if your premise is wrong.

The TOs believe attendance is the most important thing. They will do what they think is best to accommodate that. Concerns about mistakes/cheating are not rated that high of a concern by them. Attendance seems to be growing for these events. So they feel vindicated in their belief. To get them to change their minds will require a scandal or tournament with strict rules enforcement becoming popular. If you want a change the status quo it's on you to do it. Let know how your tournament works out.

 Primark G wrote:
AoS has not used plus one forever and it was never questioned. Using plus one is a big part of the problem.

40k doesn't have double turns. They are unrelated. Plus aos has battalions which 40k doesnt.

@byte

I don't think your an idiot. Just wrong. I think you're trying to make the game some thing it isnt. The thread is about expectations and I'm giving mine. You're the one getting upset I don't share your beliefs.And just because something is competitive doesn't mean it's a sport, just that people are competing.You could make clothes folding competitive

@Hulk Do you believe that there is no one gaming the systen now? Playing small rules mistakes to their advantage knowing they can probably get away with it and if not nothing will happen anyway? I don't think my suggestion for having you're rules was draconion, don't have them lose a point that round. Did you read my suggestion? Do you think being hungover, tired, etc. Exfects your opponents enjoyment? Bottom line this is a social contract and all your answers are what you think. Can you find a middle ground where everyone feels they are treted fairly? Lastly and I am asking this with all seriousness, do you think you might be looking at this through rose colored glasses because the person this thread was based on is a close personal friend?

Well to the last first Nick is a buddy sure. But reality is with a rules mistake or not 95% of the field isnt going to beat them on their best day. And that's when he's drunk. That's partially why this is so nuts to me. I could care less if it was Nick or Joe somebody playinh for thr 200th spot. I only care if its a repetitive seemingly intentional issue whcih generally presents over several events. It's a single instance on a filmed game where a guy got called on a ruLe before it could be misplayed that game and subsequently didn't have his stuff with him but it was resolved with no issues.

I'm coming from a place where the first 3 rounds of a 6 round gt it's super rare for me to take a loss. In those 3 games I have my opponents generally misplay quite a bit. If it's game changing I correct it. If it's not then I tell them something along the lines of "don't worry about it right now but you should double check that as it might not work that way". Should those first 3 opponents get hurt because I do know the rules more than they do? I don't think so. At a higher level people question if something is weird.I think everyone having their stuff is good. If for some reason they don't involve the to and let them take appropriate action be it removal of the unit if they don't have the fw rules or just answering the rule question.

Are there people that game the system with intentional small mistakes now? Yep. I'm positive there are people doing that. And they have reputations. But how is having a penalty for no source materials going to prevent it if a person isn't going to ask anyway?

Yes, it's a social contract. My goal is for my opponent to have fun and I hope that's their goal too. I'd like to win but as long as it's a good time I could care less. Literally no one plays a perfect game of 40k. Honestly for the type of event we're talking about we shouldn't expect one while we try to have one

The problem here is clashing perceptions. These events bill themselves at Grand Tournaments. They have rankings and awards. They also require that you bring your rules with you.

A lot of people who aren't the 'regulars' take these at face value and there's no reason they shouldn't. Every other game that is fielding these, including the increasingly common e-sports scene that these players are familiar with, uses the same terms and treats it like a strict competition. The 40k tournaments like NOVA aren't operating in a vacuum.

This is compounded because the winners of these events get talked about on blogs like LoL pros. Their lists get analyzed to the grain and when the players post on forums they talk about skill and "high level" playing. That all contributes to the perception more normal players have and are bringing.

So when they turn around and say "no big deal, this is brohammer and we're just trying to have a good time", it's not only an unintentional bait and switch on these people at large but it's also incredibly disingenuous. If we're having a relaxed brohammer tournament, say so and stop treating it like a serious competitive event. If it's a serious, competitive event, treat it like one.

And in case anyone wants to doubt GW is looking for serious, competitive events, just look around next tournament. We're getting shout casters. They have booths with cameras. Our 'high level' players (who increasingly just seem to be the regulars who showed up for years) participate in game balance discussions and testing with the developers (akin to Blizzard and Riot). GW is hungry for some of that e-sports money (even if it's not technically an e-sport). It's definitely the direction they want to go.

 Hulksmash wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
AoS has not used plus one forever and it was never questioned. Using plus one is a big part of the problem.

@byte

I don't think your an idiot. Just wrong. I think you're trying to make the game some thing it isnt. The thread is about expectations and I'm giving mine. You're the one getting upset I don't share your beliefs.And just because something is competitive doesn't mean it's a sport, just that people are competing.You could make clothes folding competitive

You "think" I'm "wrong", but I'm I. Are you just lost in the status quo? I'm not trying to do anything to the game. I'm pointing out there's unchecked "fast and loose play" at the highest level with no checks and balances.

You didn't give an expectation, you chastised/dismissed others for trying to.

I'm not upset at what your saying. No idea where that can came from. I don't care that you don't share my former expectations. Seems your actually part of the problem/concern. Good for you, I guess?

At this point I think I would consider folding clothes more competitive and most importantly... fair. Maybe it wouldn't be thrown in my face that "folder x" can beat all of us drunk. That's was just priceless. A special lot indeed.

Post 2017/09/10 09:49:08 Subject: Expectations of a tournament player and handling issues that may arise.
The problem here is clashing perceptions. These events bill themselves at Grand Tournaments. They have rankings and awards. They also require that you bring your rules with you.

A lot of people who aren't the 'regulars' take these at face value and there's no reason they shouldn't. Every other game that is fielding these, including the increasingly common e-sports scene that these players are familiar with, uses the same terms and treats it like a strict competition. The 40k tournaments like NOVA aren't operating in a vacuum.

This is compounded because the winners of these events get talked about on blogs like LoL pros. Their lists get analyzed to the grain and when the players post on forums they talk about skill and "high level" playing. That all contributes to the perception more normal players have and are bringing.

So when they turn around and say "no big deal, this is brohammer and we're just trying to have a good time", it's not only an unintentional bait and switch on these people at large but it's also incredibly disingenuous. If we're having a relaxed brohammer tournament, say so and stop treating it like a serious competitive event. If it's a serious, competitive event, treat it like one.

And in case anyone wants to doubt GW is looking for serious, competitive events, just look around next tournament. We're getting shout casters. They have booths with cameras. Our 'high level' players (who increasingly just seem to be the regulars who showed up for years) participate in game balance discussions and testing with the developers (akin to Blizzard and Riot). GW is hungry for some of that e-sports money (even if it's not technically an e-sport). It's definitely the direction they want to go.

Thank you, much more elegantly put than I have been able too.