|
Post by jay on Aug 21, 2010 7:35:25 GMT -5
Sportsmanship was done simply. After the first day, you rank your opponents 4 (Best) to 1 (Worst, or in most cases, Least Best). No chipmunking, no "I lost so he must pay", just a simple ranking system. Sports had no effect on actual tourney placing, just the Renaissance Man and Sportsmanship awards. Same with painting. The 2nd day, the finals, didn't even have Sports or Painting scored and those 2 games were probably the most fun of the entire tourney. We are doing something very similar for our sportsmanship. We are giving almost a yes and no score for sportsmanship after each round. To give a bad score you really need to be a D.i.c.k (judges are going to be watching this very closely). Then at the end of tournament you will rank each of games (best to worst). With the Comp score if you want we are going to pre-judge each list, so you can almost choose the score you want before the event.
|
|
|
Post by skyth on Aug 21, 2010 8:07:44 GMT -5
. We are giving almost a yes and no score for sportsmanship after each round. To give a bad score you really need to be a D.i.c.k (judges are going to be watching this very closely). Then at the end of tournament you will rank each of games (best to worst). I believe that this is probably the best way to grade sportsmanship (I've actually thought of that method myself if I was ever to run a tourney). As long as there is a valid reason to give a no score. I would require a written explanation of any 'No' score.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Dude on Aug 21, 2010 8:34:29 GMT -5
Also, the assertion about local tourneys is a bit off too as I believe there was one player that went 3-0 and didn't make the top 3 because of his comp. He may not have been vocal about it but I'd wager it wasn't the result he was expecting. Not to mention the judge call on Steve at the last MG tourney knocking him out of "Best Overall" without any warning, or any similar call on any other player present. Or ask Jer about the same judge giving him a 0 comp score because he used (GW) horse cavalry to represent Thunderwolf Cavalry and (GW) spiders to represent Fenrisian Wolves. A lot of "fluffy" players would call that writing fluff and converting, especially since he had actual marines on the horses with WYSISYG wargear. Actually, as I believe it was Mike who got the 3-0, I would bet he wasn't too surprised. And as for MG, I would like to point out (once again) that MG is NOT DaBoyz. Yes, they support the group, but their judge is not one of the people involved in this GT. They have a slightly different view on things that DaBoyz have. As for supporting all aspects of the hobby, you have to consider that the hoby community AS A WHOLE has to do this. Some areas promote the Ard-Boyz style tournies. This area isn't one of them. We support comp style tournies. But, it all balances out. If ALL Tournies were ard-Boyz style, which is what Chumba and others seem to want, then you would be alienating those of us who LIKE comp, doing to us exactly what you accuse us of doing to you. How about, like moosifer, you accept that we are promoting comp even though you don't like it. Accept that it is a style of tournament with just as much validity as an Ard boyz tournament because there are just as many people who like it as there are people who like Ard-boyz. I accept that ard-boyz has validity. It's not my cup of tea, and since I have to choose carefully where I spend my money, I don't go. I have no problem facing someone with that style list if I have to, but I will not choose to face that style list. A tournament like DaBoyz allows me to enjoy myself because that style list is in the minority.
|
|
|
Post by chumbalaya on Aug 21, 2010 9:03:37 GMT -5
We are doing something very similar for our sportsmanship. We are giving almost a yes and no score for sportsmanship after each round. To give a bad score you really need to be a D.i.c.k (judges are going to be watching this very closely). Then at the end of tournament you will rank each of games (best to worst). With the Comp score if you want we are going to pre-judge each list, so you can almost choose the score you want before the event. That sounds like a great system for sportsmanship. Will there be an option for an awesome game, like Bad/Good/Great? Knowing how you'll comp beforehand is very handy and would limit any problems/drama that might arise. Ranger, I'm not promoting 'Ard Boyz. 'Ard Boyz is not my preferred tourney style. Games are too big, no rewards are given out for other aspects of the hobby and the system itself encourages seal-clubbing over actual competition. It's better than leaving your overall standing in the hands of biased parties, but not by much. What I promote is something for everyone, like Nova. A format where all aspects of the hobby are encourages and rewarded without anybody left out. The way things are around here, it's very much a "my way or the highway" attitude that stifles the community.
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Aug 21, 2010 9:03:44 GMT -5
That's all well and good, but Chumbalaya is not and has never said there should only be 'Ardboyz style tourneys. He has only expressed the desire to remove some of the subjectivity of comp scoring. For instance, the GT style scoring has no quantifyable matrix, just avoid SC's, dupes, and promote diversiy in list writing. However, since scores will be "ranges" and they are dictated by 6 people, it's entirely possible people with similar lists can receive different scores. There's very little transparency or objectivity as it's already been stated that just by choosing one codex over another, you can receive a lower comp score.
Also relating to Tommy's statement about supporting all tourney types, in the 6 month's I've been a part of the hobby community, Ardboyz has been the only non-comp tourney in Rochester. Not much diversity there.
I also am on a limited income. I can't afford to have a full comp collection and a competative collection right now. Since Rochester only supports comp, I'm forced to buy appropriate models. Compared to Europe and many other regions, comp is becoming a minority playstyle (not talking about painting and sports, only list comp). So now, if I want to play outside of Rochester and in the tourneys I prefer, I can't because I've spent my money on "one of everything" like Courtney promotes, and not a competative collection.
These two schools will always disagree. That's totally fine with me. What bothers me is when "comp" followers put words in the opponent's mouth and make falsified statements along with the "it's the better way" mentality.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Dude on Aug 21, 2010 12:26:26 GMT -5
Notice, I never said, "It's better". I said, "I prefer."
As you point out, so many other tournies out there are either no comp or comp light. If we did the same, then that would eliminate one of the few places where comp heavy is still possible. You are all about promoting diversity, as long as it is YOUR diversity. As for the rest of us, yeah, we may not have the diversity here at the local level, but as far as overall, we are promoting a form of tourney that is not seen often anymore, because we like it, and we know there are people out there who do too. Apparently we are doing something right as the GT has been steadily growing.
Chumba, you are right, I misspoke. When I said ardboyz before, I should have been saying non-comp. There is a difference, and I am not blind to it. Just a little slow on the mental uptake today apparently.
As has been said before, if you want a non-comp tourney here, it isn't that hard to say, "Hey, I want to run xxx...anyone want to help?"
|
|
|
Post by moosifer on Aug 21, 2010 13:24:15 GMT -5
If Europe asked you to jump off a bridge would you do it?
While comp is something I dont really care for (Who is this council to judge my vision) I feel it is more necessary than ever now with the proliferation of power build lists on the intertubes. No longer do you have to actually build lists based on experience but instead see that X player won the Y tourney with Z list.
If the ETC taught us anything(grats btw kemp) it is that players from a relatively comp region can stack up and place 5th in an event where folks have forgotten that we are playing a game based on a universe that offers us something more than flaming swords and wizards with peaked caps.
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Aug 21, 2010 14:26:18 GMT -5
Gonna bow out of this one. If anyone actually wants to continue the discussion, I have more complete thoughts in my blog (sig).
|
|
Iron Warrior
Moderator
The Iron
Iron Within! Iron Without!
Posts: 2,573
|
Post by Iron Warrior on Aug 21, 2010 16:04:06 GMT -5
As George Washington once said:
To please everybody is impossible were I to undertake it, I should probably please nobody.
|
|
|
Post by chumbalaya on Aug 21, 2010 16:26:31 GMT -5
This is so wrong it's not even funny. You can't effectively run an army without understanding how it works, how to use it and why it is built the way it is. This little article covers it quite well. www.yesthetruthhurts.com/2010/08/myth-of-auto-pilot-why-non-competitive.htmlRanger, it's not my diversity, it's straight diversity. You see more different armies and builds when you aren't straight-jacketed into a handful of "approved" armies. People can take what they enjoy playing. Problems arise when somebody takes a poorly optimized army to a tourney and expects to be handed wins because he is so "creative" for fielding Vespid. I'm not a great painter, but I'm not going to submit poorly painted models for a contest and then demand bonus points because I can't be bothered to get up to Golden Daemon quality. Give everyone an incentive to show up and enjoy the hobby their way, simple as that. Once you start rating one over the other, people get alienated. Best Painted = Paint only Best Sport = Sports only Best General = BPs only Best Theme = Theme only Best Overall = everything in equal measure Nice and simple with something for everyone. We can do the comp thing all day until we're blue in the face (fingers?), but the crux of the matter is this. I want to help make this GT the best it can be, and I assume y'all do to. Best way to ensure success is to encourage hobbyists of all stripes to show up and have a good time and that comes from promoting and rewarding all aspects of the hobby. Let the competitors compete, the painters paint, and just make it a great big weekend of nerdy love.
|
|
Iron Warrior
Moderator
The Iron
Iron Within! Iron Without!
Posts: 2,573
|
Post by Iron Warrior on Aug 21, 2010 16:33:50 GMT -5
I am reminded of another interesting quote.
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
Winston Churchill.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Dude on Aug 21, 2010 16:39:08 GMT -5
Thanks Ron. I needed that laugh.
Bowing out....
|
|
|
Post by Horst on Aug 21, 2010 23:20:52 GMT -5
you know, the NOVA open was fun and all, but really, I do NOT like how the differences in codex were clearly shown. Its not fun at all to play against an army that you KNOW is superior, and there's really little you can do to stop it. You've seen my army list I brought to nova...dual raiders with terminators backed up by razorbacks, predators, and dreadnoughts. Quite powerful, power-gamey. I went up against 3 VERY TOUGH armies that tournament... horde orks that spammed rokkits and trucks, blood angels that spammed transports with troops (who cost less than my troops, and pack 2x meltas each, in fast transports, again for less than codex marines pay for a BARE tac squad in a razor) and a mech guard army of doom being played by a rules-lawyer who called me on everything I tried to do, weither I was right or wrong (arguing things like I don't have LOS from a vehicle even though the laser pointer clearly showed I did)...
It was just exhausting. Sure, had I brought a space-wolves army of doom, like chumby, I could have just blasted away with missiles the whole time. But no, I didn't have the option in my codex for decent missile support teams. Sure, I had access to the same rules (could have gotten a SW codex) but really, my army is a codex marine army, and i'd feel like a traitor if I switched just because something is more powerful (obviously more powerful, SW and BA are better and cheaper in every aspect, I feel almost as bad as a dark angels player here) I'd feel like a traitor.
I got into this game for fluff reasons, because I liked the black library books. I've been slowly drifting towards being a competitive gamer for a while now, in subtle shifts of my lists. I was going to bring a bike army to nova, because I thought it would be fun... but I switched it out because it wasn't doing well in games. I went from an army I thought was fun and cool, to a significantly more optimized marine list. And you know what? The wins I had felt hollow, and the losses I had felt like I had no control. I don't at any point in time feel like I was a "better gamer" than the guys I beat, just that I picked a better army. It was obvious against my first opponent, who brought a nicely built blood angels army, that was quite well comp'd for our GT. I summarily crushed him, there's not much he could have done to win that game. Does that make a "better" gamer? Because I can pick better things out of a codex? No, it does not. Is the guy who beat me because he took 14 melta guns to blow away armor, and mephiston to kill whatever came out, a better gamer, because he has a list almost perfectly tooled to kill mine? No, it doesn't he picked rock, and I picked scissors.
NOVA was a wake-up call for me. I need to either get a space-wolves or Blood-angels army if I want to be a competitive gamer (look at the results of the open for ANY races besides space wolves or blood angels, they are almost uniformly at best break-even)... but like I said, the reason I play in the first place is because I like the fluff behind my army. So, I'm going back to my bike army. It looks cool. Its fun to play. It may not win games all the time, but d**nit, it looks cool on the table, to see 40+ bikers slugging it out. I'll look forward to the DaBoyz GT, and tournaments like the Rouge Trader tournaments in binghamton, where people are similar minded, and there's never a missile-spam army of doom in sight for space wolves, and people are more interested in fun armies than winning.
And there is a difference.... don't let yourself be fooled into thinking that all games of 40k are fun, that somehow you can overcome all challenges. Trust me, there is nothing fun about playing against an army that just entirely decimates you. Its baically a drive-by colonoscopy. I can only imagine what the single daemonhunters player at the nova open was thinking, as he went 0-4. The guy I played against last round, with his 2x psyker battle squads and 2x inquisitors with the psychic power to force moral checks... thats the kind of thing i'm talking about. Its not an army built for both sides to have fun... its an army built to win games by crushing your opponent.
I'll equate it to a cannon-rush in starcraft II... sure, you can win, but it defeats the purpose of the game.
I'd also like to point out that while I do waffle back and forth on "comp good" or "comp bad" opinions, i've never outright posted that comp is a terrible Idea... the ONLY thing I think is a terrible idea and needs to be done away with is arbitrary points reductions from judges without a clear rubric specifying why such things may happen, be it from comp scores, paint scores, or whatever. ANY AND ALL scoring systems must be completely transparent at all times, or the validity of a judge's decisions is questionable, and it undermines the whole system. It sounds like jay is doing that for this year's DaBoyz GT, and I know last year's was quite good, so I have faith that this year's tournament will rock.
|
|
|
Post by fishboy on Aug 22, 2010 6:30:02 GMT -5
I think you made their point. There is a nation full of events for the power gamer. Trust me I have been to many of them. I typically play a list because I like the models. This usually means my lists are not top tier. I still do well but it gets annoying playing net spammed power list game after game after game....This will be the one event that I am hoping this does not happen. Shawn you and Jay should come with me next year to the Kalm before the Wagh. It is an invite only tourny held in a bar. The largest trophy is for the guy with the biggest bar tab. Fun for all hehe. @horst- Those are some great points and pretty much how I feel about it. The only thing I would add is don't let players choose your comp score. If you win they ding you and it just gives them to much control.
|
|
|
Post by chumbalaya on Aug 22, 2010 9:58:59 GMT -5
Sorry to hear that Steve. I had the most fun in my losses, going up against a strong army and good player behind it is an awesome challenge and I love it. It's not the result, it's the game you play to earn it. None of my games were over at deployment (well, one was) and were competitive til the end. Read that article I linked to. Competitive armies are not run on auto pilot, they just have easy going when offered no resistance. Any game can be fun. It's not the list that determines how much fun you have, it's determined by the players. Once you start expecting your opponent to roll over for you or get it in your head that trying to win is being mean then you run into problems. It's just poor sportsmanship. I disagree completely with your assessment of the "best" Codices. You saw so much SW in the final because the book is so flexible. Each army was distinct in playstyle and composition and the guys running them happened to be d**n good (myself excluded, modesty is a jerk ). Every Codex is capable of putting out at least 1 competitive build, but newer books just have more viable builds and options. I like the dual Raider set up, but you do run the risk of having your ~900 point investments getting banged up. fishboy, how does the existence of 'Ard Boyz encourage people to be competitive at the GT? If you play an army because you like the models, why does it matter if you win or lose? I thought it was just for fun. Net lists aren't as dominant as you think, they do require an understanding of how and why the list works in addition to normal game skillz to operate properly. It's not like you don't have access to the exact same rules and models. This makes me emo /
|
|