Garou24
Chapter Master
Posts: 1,530
|
Post by Garou24 on Nov 17, 2010 13:34:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jay on Nov 17, 2010 14:06:04 GMT -5
What he did not mention was splitting the tournament into a comp and non-comp tournament. This is what we have been discussing for a couple of weeks. Remember don’t always believe what you read on the internet.
|
|
Garou24
Chapter Master
Posts: 1,530
|
Post by Garou24 on Nov 17, 2010 14:45:55 GMT -5
What he did not mention was splitting the tournament into a comp and non-comp tournament. This is what we have been discussing for a couple of weeks. Remember don’t always believe what you read on the internet. Best Idea I have heard yet Jay! Caters to both groups. that way both types of players still can attend a large, complete GT. The article stated the terrain was great and the armies and tables looked awesome, which they did. Hope to see more positive reviews about the GT in the coming weeks.
|
|
|
Post by chumbalaya on Nov 17, 2010 15:34:52 GMT -5
Glad to hear things went well. I wish I could have gone, but I got to endure the worst weekend of my life instead.
I don't know if having a split tournament is a good solution to the comp issue. Events like this should bring folks together, having two separate events, likely with unequal prizes, is sure to invite sore feelings and drama. I don't have a lot of time to go into detail what with the madness that is my life, but hopefully I can throw out something more substantial when I get settled.
|
|
Garou24
Chapter Master
Posts: 1,530
|
Post by Garou24 on Nov 17, 2010 15:51:33 GMT -5
Glad to hear things went well. I wish I could have gone, but I got to endure the worst weekend of my life instead. I don't know if having a split tournament is a good solution to the comp issue. Events like this should bring folks together, having two separate events, likely with unequal prizes, is sure to invite sore feelings and drama. I don't have a lot of time to go into detail what with the madness that is my life, but hopefully I can throw out something more substantial when I get settled. Hard feelings and unequal prizes? People get to choose which tournament setting they want to play in, should help prevent the Drama I would think. There would be no hard feelings from people bringing hard 'ard Boyz lists against a compy army, since those players would most likely be playing in the no comp section of the GT. As far as unequal prizes, if 70 people signed up for no comp GT and 30 signed up for the comp GT, then common sense would assume more Prize support would go into the Larger GT. But there would still be enough prize support for the smaller GT also. And for me at least, its not always about prizes. We will have to see what Jay and company have planned for next year, but having a comp and no-comp GT seems like a step in the right direction. Players now have a choice, there cannot be any complaining about comp if they offer a no-comp tournament. While I am sure people will always find something to complain about, this seems like the best compromise to cater to all types of players in one Event.
|
|
|
Post by evil_red_orks on Nov 17, 2010 17:00:56 GMT -5
I read that article on BoLS, of course I disagree with just about everything that was said about how comp should just die.
We have some of the best 40k players on the east coast, most of them play with nice compy lists and still manage to win tournies.
IMAGINE that, winning with a compy list.
DABOYZ have always exemplified how the game should be played, that includes all aspects of the hobby. Comp, painting,modeling, and good clean fun.
Now im not the best 40k player, but i managed to place 11th at this years DaBoyz GT with a comp score of 98. Sure I never blew anyone out, but the only game I lost was by the typical termies w/ thunderhammer and stormshield unit, that MOST marine armies play.
I also placed 2nd at the last boston brawl with a seriuosly friendly list.
Excuse me for saying so, but any moron can win a game with some of the armies I saw at the GT. Some of us prefer to challenge ourselves with playing different units, with DIFFERENT PAINT SCHEMES.
I for one think our club should stand up and be an example to the rest of the hobby, and not "cave in" to all the LAZY gamers that take no original thought in creating their army lists.
I WILL ALWAYS STAND FOR COMP IN ANY ARMY I CREATE. No matter the prevailing wind.
I know we would all like to have the big turnout at the GT, but i would rather have a smaller turnout WITH comp, than a bigger turnout WITHOUT comp.
I will continue to play regardless of what happens to comp, BUT I WILL NOT ABANDON MY VALUE OF COMP IN 40K.
Why should our club, which has been a shining example of how the game should be played, give in to the demands of people who refuse to put a little creativity into their listmaking.
Jay I hope u take my rant into consideration before u make any changes.
|
|
|
Post by chumbalaya on Nov 17, 2010 17:31:11 GMT -5
Garou, having proportional prize support makes sense. If that doesn't end up being the case, then problems come up. Having separate events running at the same time is going to see somebody feeling marginalized. It's not anybody's fault, it's just human nature. Prizes aren't an issue for me, I never get anything myself but I just enjoy meeting and playing new people. I'm more referring to a further split between groups when there shouldn't be one. I hate to bring it up again, but Nova catered to everybody with the Tournament Ace (pure W/L) and Renaissance Man (2/3 soft, 1/3 W/L) awards in the same event. Drama follows anything subjective, which is what comp ultimately is: somebody else liking or disliking your army based on their own experiences/biases. E_R_O, of course good players will want to challenge themselves by taking suboptimal units. Of course, how much of a challenge is it when you get bonus points to make up for a lack of optimization? Play what you like and have fun, but don't try and enforce a particular style or belief system on others. It's not hard. Like I said before, this past week has been absolute hell for me and I wish I could have gotten to play. I wasn't there, so I don't know how everything went or how everyone felt about it, I'm just sharing my feelings based on what I've heard and what's been discussed before.
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 17, 2010 17:39:56 GMT -5
Just curious, how did the survery results on the dreaded topic tally up?
For the record, I brought a non-comp list partially as a knee-jerk to some of the lists the "internet celebs" planned on bringing, and partially due to the "play what you want" posts from doug and ron, as comp isn't my flavor of choice.
Had I another chance, I would have brought my comp list after seeing how the pairings and scoring actually played out. I played on the top 12 tables for 4 games and only paired off against one player with comp over 50.
|
|
|
Post by trichloro on Nov 17, 2010 19:18:48 GMT -5
Was I the only one you played with a high comp score? And how did that game go? I got one point.
I liked the comp restrictions, it just makes it a different event. If they split it into 2 different events, I don't know which I would choose at this time. I know I voted for comp on the survey and playing 6 games, the more the merrier.
Now if I could have not play 3 Nid player out of 5 games I might have done better.
|
|
Garou24
Chapter Master
Posts: 1,530
|
Post by Garou24 on Nov 17, 2010 19:30:42 GMT -5
Garou, having proportional prize support makes sense. If that doesn't end up being the case, then problems come up. Having separate events running at the same time is going to see somebody feeling marginalized. It's not anybody's fault, it's just human nature. Prizes aren't an issue for me, I never get anything myself but I just enjoy meeting and playing new people. I'm more referring to a further split between groups when there shouldn't be one. I hate to bring it up again, but Nova catered to everybody with the Tournament Ace (pure W/L) and Renaissance Man (2/3 soft, 1/3 W/L) awards in the same event. Drama follows anything subjective, which is what comp ultimately is: somebody else liking or disliking your army based on their own experiences/biases. E_R_O, of course good players will want to challenge themselves by taking suboptimal units. Of course, how much of a challenge is it when you get bonus points to make up for a lack of optimization? Play what you like and have fun, but don't try and enforce a particular style or belief system on others. It's not hard. Like I said before, this past week has been absolute hell for me and I wish I could have gotten to play. I wasn't there, so I don't know how everything went or how everyone felt about it, I'm just sharing my feelings based on what I've heard and what's been discussed before. We have a whole year to work things out. I hope the next GT can cater to all players. Maybe Nova might have something we should look at. I like comp, but I don't want to see people not go to the GT because there is comp or have people not go because of no comp. In the end getting as many people to go to the GTs and spread the word of a good event helps us all. So maybe we can get a system that will work for both parties, the comp and no comp.
|
|
|
Post by lordnurgle on Nov 17, 2010 19:51:59 GMT -5
Hey, I had a comp score of 76, and I started off on table 2 on sunday, playing the winner of the tourney. I almost beat him, That is if it wasn't for a dumb mistake that cost me my death company and failing 3 out of 4 storm shield saves to an avatar charge.
I remember back in the late 90's when people really started complaining about comp (and Painting AND sportsmanship). Some people seem to think they should be top 5 in every tournament and complain about the way the tourney is run if they don't. It upsets me that alot of people turn a blind eye, while we let them complain and then we pay them(in prizes) to make our games no fun at all. I wish the people that complained would put 1/3 of the effort into coming up with a better comp system.
|
|
|
Post by fishboy on Nov 17, 2010 21:32:16 GMT -5
I have no problem with a comp event. I scored very bad in comp and was suprised by that but I still would have brought what I brought and played what I played. It is a new list for me that I enjoyed painting and I had fun with it. As you can see by the battle points it is anything but overpowering. Sure there are a few lists that can not handle it but there are more lists that can.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Dude on Nov 17, 2010 21:42:27 GMT -5
One of the things I like to point out is that we should be looking at the GT system as a whole. How can we make the GT system as a whole appeal to all types? Could someone tell me of one other GT that has comp so largely figured into it's score? I can't think of any. So out of all those GTs, is it really too much to ask for ONE FREAKING GT to have comp? It makes it different. IT makes it fun for those of us who like comp. It gives a change of pace for those who like it. It's not like people don't have choices for no-comp GTs. Where are the choices for comp GTs?
I hear so many people talking about wanting to include everyone. But the most often spouted way to do this is to ditch comp. How is that inclusive for someone who LIKES comp?
While I'm not entirely enthused by it, I think the split tourney idea has potential. I'd like to know more about how it would work. Maybe it's the answer, and maybe it isn't.
|
|
|
Post by fishboy on Nov 17, 2010 22:14:03 GMT -5
I admit I am less of a fan of the split tourny thing. I agree with the above poster that the event should bring people together. I think there is middle ground here on the comp issue. I do not think it should go away but I also do not think it should be the focal point of the event. I also think it should be up front and open/consistent rules. Even with all the female doging about comp at this event it still sold out pretty quick and I have not seen any posts from people stating they had a miserable time. I just think less opinionated comp scores with more openness would be a lot better. Maybe even take a look at some of the lists this year that you scored bad, the reasons for scoring them like that, then the overall results of those armies. I think you can use this to tweak and even out the comp system.
|
|
|
Post by chumbalaya on Nov 17, 2010 22:14:11 GMT -5
Comp gets axed because comp is divisive, subjective and easily abused. What's to like about an arbitrary set of restrictions that are defined differently by every person? If you don't like playing "power armies," don't go to competitive events. Play Apoc, campaigns (something I want to run or help with) and the like.
I'm not going to bring my Loganwing to an Apoc game or a laid back pickup at the store (unless asked) and I certainly won't complain if somebody brings too soft an army for one either.
You don't see this kind of discussion/rant/drama from a non-comp tourney, simply because everything is clear and defined. As transparent as the guys judging have been with comp and the like, it's still way more nebulous than "did you win? y/n".
|
|