<![CDATA[Latest posts for the thread "Tournaments, painting scores, and you."]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/69.page JForum - http://www.jforum.net Tournaments, painting scores, and you.
I've been listening to a few podcasts this week and a re-curring motif seems to permeate its way into every discussion: that of painting scores and whether players should forfeit this score if they didn't paint the army themselves. The case that brought this to everyone's attention was the Salamanders army allegedly painted by a well-known painting service and (probably) sold to the owner at a premium.

My personal view is that it shouldn't matter who painted what army prior to the tournament, the fact is that the owning player is the one who, well, owns the army and thus should get the full score for whatever quality of painting deemed neccesary. The fact is that, whilst I shell out quite alot of time to get my armies painted, other people simply do not have the requisite skill/free time to warrant such attention on their miniatures. Instead of time, they shell out cash to outsource their models to other people who DO have the neccesary time/skill.

I also feel that having to disclose whether or not you painted your army opens up a whole other tin of worms. What if you got some of your friends to help you paint? What if you did all the basing and first highlights but your friend/sister/cousin/dog did all the basecoating? How should you then be scored in comparison to other people? The list is practically endless.

One final thing I have to say is in direct response to Shawn (off of BTP) and his recent interview in the 11th Company podcast. In it he claimed that it would be far more beneficial to remove painting scores altogether for tournaments, as this circumvects all possible negative connotations towards his business. To this I could not disagree more strongly. Tournaments are already a scene whereby a fair portion of the 'hobby' is bypassed is favour of the 'gaming' element, and to remove the painting scores entirely will devolve out tournament scene to an even larger mass of plastic and pewter.

What do you guys think? Should people be penalised for not painting their own army? How would you prove it on the day? If you were a TO, how would you rule it?

L. Wrex]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2100740.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2100740.page GMT Tournaments, painting scores, and you.
Pretty simple for me really. My free time is valuable. Playing against well painted and nicely presented armies is generally speaking more enjoyable than playing against unpainted stuff or obviously carelessly done rushed stuff.

If I am paying money for an event and more importantly devoting a weekend to playing in it anything that can be done to improve the overall quality of the armies present is a good thing. For me it is the time investment. Wargaming is a social and visual experience.

Likewise, it is my responsibility to my opponent and the event to put forward the best army I can both in aesthetics, play and generalship. I should be prepared to finish the event as well as get enough sleep to be in good spirits etc.

Now basement, store, and test games.. I've played and played against some eye sores in my day.

]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101143.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101143.page GMT Tournaments, painting scores, and you.
That said, independent painting competitions within the event are another thing altogether. We had a more simplistic "best single mini / best converted mini / best army" painting competition at the NOVA this year ... and frankly, next year we'll be having a full on golden demon style painting competition over the course of our convention. For THAT, you really don't want someone winning on the merits of someone else, b/c it's not a test of your commitment of resources, but of your actual painting skill.

As far as the rest, I would say that removing painting scoring from tournaments does not yield your fear. You want to have at least a portion of the tournament itself NOT affected by soft scores (i.e. run two tracks within the same event - one that combines all scores, one that is simply w/l or w/d/l or bp).

Whatever you do, simply require fully painted armies on pain of a loss, or on pain of a cap on max bp possible, or on pain of simple disqualification. Options abound.

I do think you want to avoid unpainted armies; as a more competitively-minded player, I still think if you participate in the hobby, you should participate in it fully. I don't appreciate people who only participate in the painting part of the hobby, and refuse to try and learn how to participate in the gaming part well ... I also don't appreciate people who only participate in the gaming part, and refuse to try and learn how to participate in the painting or converting or whatever other part.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101315.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101315.page GMT Tournaments, painting scores, and you.
There is nothing wrong with scoring lots of different 'events' and giving prizes to the winners. The arguments and problems arise when you try and combine these events into a ridiculous 'Overall Winner' score, and thus have to decide how 'important' each part of the hobby is.

Anyway, regarding commissioned painting, I still see the idea of a painting competition an event where the skill of the painter is what is being judged. What if a mediocre player entered the gaming section himself, but paid last years Vegas winner to stand behind him telling him what to do throughout every game? Would it be fair to everyone else if he 'won' Best General?]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101333.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101333.page GMT Re:Tournaments, painting scores, and you.
I agree with Ian that things get very messy when you try to combine paint/sports/general into one award. Three different catergories of competition allows for all types of gamers and armies.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101570.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101570.page GMT Tournaments, painting scores, and you. GW checklist for painting and our paint judge talks to people about their scores at the event.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101692.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101692.page GMT Tournaments, painting scores, and you. TO and what aspects of the hobby they want to promote. If gaming skill is your main focus, then remove painting from the competition and simply award points for generalship. If "the hobby" is what you want to promote, then painting, converting, etc. should be a major part of the discussion.

Perhaps a better way to do it would be to separate the various elements of the hobby out into several major categories... generalship, painting/modeling and knowledge of the game (just for example). Each category is it's own thing... separate from the others and worth equal amounts of total points. You may enter any of the categories you want, and rise to the top in that category as you may (becoming best general or best painter), but the "Grand Champion" would be the person with the highest aggregate score from the 3 categories.

That way the people most interested in gaming can focus on their generalship and not worry about their painting beyond say... a 3-color minimum standard (just my preference). Same with the painters and whatever other category you like. To be Grand Champion though... you'd have to preform in all "X" categories... showing your command of the entire hobby, not just one aspect of it.

As to having others paint for you.... I have no problem with this. However submitting those figures in a painting competition is fraudulent unless the "prize" and credit goes to the actual painter... not the gamer who paid for them. If I can pay someone else to paint my figures and have them count for a score, why couldn't I hire a really good 40k general and have them run my army for me? Same thing.

As in school or life... you gotta do your own work.
]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101709.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101709.page GMT Re:Tournaments, painting scores, and you. OP.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101749.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101749.page GMT Tournaments, painting scores, and you.
ArbitorIan wrote:There is nothing wrong with scoring lots of different 'events' and giving prizes to the winners. The arguments and problems arise when you try and combine these events into a ridiculous 'Overall Winner' score, and thus have to decide how 'important' each part of the hobby is.
This.

In an event that. . .neglects to mention that one must paint ones own models, I see actual no issue with buying a win.
I think it is assininely silly to actually condone this, but. . .to each their own.

Most events I have been to that give awards for painting specify that the painter be the presenter. So this is less of an issue.

As a side note, I totally fail to see how allowing people to buy awards at a tourney promotes the hobby.


Editing to add:
I am a bad painter. I acknowledge this.
However, I paint my models well enough to be presentable at GW tournements.
I take part in every aspect of the hobby, so it is somewhat insulting to have the "Best Overall" Hobbyist be someone that does not take part in the overall hobby, merely select parts of it. Spending money is part of this hobby, but it is NOT the hobby overall.]]> http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101809.page http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/327064/2101809.page GMT