|
Post by shaun on Jul 18, 2011 19:06:23 GMT -5
Shaun - So sum up your post would you say that you would support a stricter and restrictive rubric with NO judge scores to be handed out compared to the format we are working with now?
Somewhat. My intention was to point out that I believe if we are going to impose restrictions/limitations towards the HQ, elite, fast and heavy selections, we should do the same to troops and dedicated transports. Certain armies have much better troop choices than other codexes. Some armies rely on their troops to get things done where as other armies rely on the other roster selections. Lets take the space wolves as an example. They have several heavy choices - long fangs, land raiders, predators and vindicators. You usually only see long fangs with the occasional land raider. They also have two troop choices grey hunters and blood claws. Again, you usually only see the grey hunters as they tend to be better for the points. If we limit the number of long fangs, we should limit the number of grey hunters. The same can be said for dedicated transports. I believe it was Aaron that brought up about the blood angels land raider option as opposed to the rhino. As such, I liked the original rubric much better (limitation of 3 as opposed to 4 with same weapon options) than the current version. As far as the judged points, I am all for them. I think they act as a buffer to address those areas of "theme/fluff" armies that did lose points because of the rubric. I also believe it allows a correction to those armies that are able to "game" the rubric. I understand now that this thread is looking for specific ideas to enhance the current version as opposed to discussing the philosophy of how to implement comp. Sorry that I didn't make my previous post more clear about these items just highlighted. Although I can't really blame you for not picking up on it Andy. I am fully aware of your "mental limitations" ;D I really am just kidding Andy - you know me.
|
|
|
Post by fishboy on Jul 18, 2011 19:23:15 GMT -5
Heh...I was not trying to be a smart butt there Crim and sorry if I led you in that direction. I was just trying to point out that at the majority of the NE tournies I have been to people are taking minimum sized units to take good transports to get around. My thought was that should be punished to discourage the current MSU mentality. It also helps discourage some of the GK hench lists that are running amuk hehe. I think people that take full squads in/with a transport should be minimized less as this edition is about mobility.
I was trying to add to the conversation and again I am sorry if it seemed like I was being obtuse heh.
I am not sure what all the arguing is about but it detracts from the current discussion and I would recommend it go offline. JMHO and no juding there either. ;D
|
|
|
Post by grubnards on Jul 18, 2011 19:25:54 GMT -5
Andy, I play Chaos and Necrons as well, do I get a beer? Does it sweeten the deal if I play Tau as well?
|
|
|
Post by fishboy on Jul 18, 2011 19:28:53 GMT -5
Heck...I will play my eldar if a beer is on the table hehe. Maybe that should be the comp ruberick....the worse your army the more beer you get heheh.
And Grubbs I have seen you with your Necrons.....play is a very loose term hehehehe.
|
|
|
Post by crimthaan on Jul 18, 2011 19:28:56 GMT -5
Hahah dammit Shaun I hate you...lol. In all seriousness thanks for the suggestions and lightening the mood of this thread (be it at my expense you d**n old pervert).
What do you guys think of 50/50 points wise. 50 from a rubric, 50 blind judge scoring? Need a 20 minimum on the rubric to attend. The idea for more judge points is to have more leway in armies such as death wing and people can buold yo the rubric they will have a generl idea what they will get rubric wise but must also realize judges will look at it. To Jay and Rob or anyone else i would tae responsibility to organizing the judges to do this blind scoring. Also no pre-judging scores like last year. You need to submit your list 10 days before the GT.
Again this is an IdEa throwing out there, don't go all Spanish inquisition on me and throw me into an iron maiden.
|
|
|
Post by shaun on Jul 18, 2011 19:47:17 GMT -5
I may feel 50/50 may be a little bit too much on the subjective side. Again, I think 80 rubric/20 judges might be better. This of course depends on what is used in the rubric. If you go a "softer" rubric then I think more points in the judges category is warrented.
To spell it out for you Andy - if it is easier to score higher in the rubric then the rubric score should be worth a smaller portion of the overall comp scoring. On the flip side of the coin, if the rubric portion is worth less of the overall comp score, the judges subjective would need to be greater.
I see I need to take it another step. Think of it like a see-saw on your playground. As the one side goes down, the other side goes up. Get it?
|
|
|
Post by crimthaan on Jul 18, 2011 19:55:28 GMT -5
I'm going to kill you.
|
|
MajorSoB
Moderator
The oldest
THE GRUMPY OLD MAN!
Posts: 2,135
|
Post by MajorSoB on Jul 19, 2011 0:50:53 GMT -5
I debated whether or not to post this but here goes...
You can take into account my opinion, or you can disregard it, either way I really don't care. Due to some events from last year I will not be playing in this upcoming event so you don't have to make any modifications or concessions to please me. I wont be there, period.
Now on to my OPINION, yes it is an OPINION and it is MINE, so take it or leave it again I don't really care one way or another.
Let's start with comp. You can include comp or you can choose to eliminate it, just pick a direction and go with it. IF you decide you want comp, you need to implement it fairly. That may require extra work and the excuse that its only three months away and you don't have time to make all the alterations that you need to is not a valid excuse. Personally I believe rubric comp does not work. I have seen many players look at the rubric, no matter how extensive or well intentioned , and take it as a personal challenge to break it by fitting there hard list into the system. Let me get out my crystal ball, but I predict that this exact scenario will happen if you try to institute this rubric. I also believe that if you use "judge's points" that they will amount to rewards for friends and armies that they like, which in essences penalizes all the other players not within this elite circle. "Judge's points" are not fair and contradictory to an empirical rubric because of the purely subjective nature that they represent. So if rubric comp does not work, then what? Drop comp....ummm no. Hey we could go back to judge based comp that worked right...ummm no. How about player judged comp? I know you don't trust the players to be fair right? Well it seems to have come full circle because there are now some players who don't trust the judges so what should you do about comp. Simply put, I don't know but since I am not playing I don't care either. Do what you want but understand that comp will have a direct affect on attendance and player satisfaction. If you don't have time to put together the most fair system you can devise, you will have to accept the turnout you get.
Related topic....Painting and sportsmanship.
Last year both these amounted to somewhat of a joke. You had a hard comp system for painting and I was underscored. How did this happen? Also the difference between great painting and average painting really didnt amount to much and was dwarfed by battle scores and comp. Maybe that is alright but didnt DaBoyz stand for supporting the hobby as a whole at one time. Shouldnt painting matter more? Sportsmanship was a huge joke. Did ANYONE lose a point? If you arent going to have some variance in a category then stop scoring it. Simply put have the players score each game, or at the end rank their opponents if you want variance. If you dont want variance then just drop the category. Really its an insult and foolhardy to include a score when its the EXACT SAME SCORE FOR EVERYONE!
Bottom line, its your tournament so do what you like. As it has been pointed out....you have helped me to decide what to do this coming fall and helped unburden my schedule. I do wish you well and I hope you enjoy running this event. Do i feel you are on the best path to do this, no, but its just my OPINION and it is your tournament so do as you wish.
|
|
|
Post by bromento on Jul 19, 2011 9:02:00 GMT -5
To those who give solid feedback, i commend you.
Shaun is definitely right. There needs to be a little more power in the judges, even if that means a little more work. This way if someone does have a themed army, they can score somewhat crappy on the rubric and still end up with a decent comp score as the judges will see the effort they put into creating a fun and interesting list. This would also cover the bases of necrons, chaos and deathwing/ravenwing. Armies that are not going to necessarily do great on the rubric due to codex limitations still have a great fighting chance when it comes to judges scoring.
However if you come with a nasty hard list you have the option of scoring next to nothing. Which is the general idea of having comp in the first place. To weed out all the "d-bag" lists.
Having a good portion of judges panel allows for a lot of middle of the pack scoring too, which i feel is necessary. And if you have a middle of the pack comp score you shouldnt be disheartened. Like in school you would feel bad if you got a C, but technically a C is an average score. Meaning a majority of the people coming this year will get middle of the pack scores, deal with it. Only a select few lists, maybe 10-20 out of the 120 ppl will get a good comp score. And, depending on how many gross lists there are, there should only be about the same on the opposite end of the spectrum.
Aaron was right. DaBoyz is a brand, and we do have to think about keeping customers happy. But do we listen to the 5 unhappy customers from last years tournament or the 100 happy ones? A little of both is necessary. But this is first and foremost a game and a getaway for some people. People travel from great distances to come to this and they want to be represented with a good time. It is very easy to look at this from a local perspective because it's so convienient. "I just wanna win with my kick butt list, drive 5 mins, go home and bang my girlfriend." Out of towners don't have that option, they are up all night in their hotel, with no one to sthingy, thinking about your nasty spam list that tabled them. This is why we NEED to keep comp. Comp will always be necessary to make a fun game. If you have a problem with comp then go to Ard Boyz.
Another possibility is to have everyone submit there lists, then the judges spend a night kicking back, downing some brews, chowing on some 'za and we rank the lists. If there are 120 player, then there are 120 points. Best comp gets 120 points, then you rank down. Worst comp gets 1 point. But then thats full judges discretion and people would have a terrible time with that.
If we do end up keeping this rubric i think the judges portion should either be 50/50 or 60/40, 40 being judges. The judges NEED to have a big impact. Also i think having a minimum score would be awesome, as smitty pointed out. If you come here to ruin the tournament and weekend for everyone else, then we don't want your money.
This is all i have to say. Thanks for reading.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by skyth on Jul 19, 2011 10:13:23 GMT -5
Which is the general idea of having comp in the first place. To weed out all the "d-bag" lists. And people wonder why comp discussions get heated... When you start the discussion on the basis that people that don't play the same way you want to play are bad people, it does not engender a rational discussion.
|
|
|
Post by warmasterprimus on Jul 19, 2011 10:20:22 GMT -5
I think that Shaun brought up an interesting point: So I then poise this comment for thought - when was the last time you rolled up to the table and played someone who had utilized most of the choices from their codex and didn't have a one dimmensional theme (such as razorback spam, rhino rush, too many models to kill horde, etc) - and thought that their army was over the top? Is this what we want from our rubric? I don't know but I personally feel it is a good place to start. Thinking of the last few GTs I’ve been to (Da Boyz, Conflict, & The Colonial), the armies that I liked were ones that utilized a variety of codex choices. The armies that were the least fun to play against all had a one-dimensional feel. I think that one of the biggest benefits to the current rubric is that it is simple. We could make individual rubrics for each army, but I think that the potential for bias is greater there. I think that the basic rubric is pretty good. Can it be gamed? Sure. Just about any system we put together will. If we’re trying to get people to utilize more of their codex choices, I think it works reasonably well. --- Also, a point Zack brought up. If we’re going to do even a little bit of judge-comp, I think we should blind the lists so that no one’s identities are known to the judges. This seems like quite a bit of work, so if no one else wants to do it, I volunteer. I think it’s important to take that potential bias out of the equation. --- In terms of Sportsmanship, for Crossroads GT, Corey and I have each player rank their favorite opponents from high to low. High gets 5 points, low gets 1. We understand that sometimes you have several great games over the course of the event, but we want to avoid everyone getting the same score. Ranking your opponents creates a good spread for scoring, and the people on top really deserve the scores they get. In terms of painting, I always ask myself, “how much is the difference between an average paint score and a top paint score worth?” For Crossroads, that difference is worth 1 battle. A great appearance should be able to swing a loss into a win. It’s an idea that’s helped me weigh painting scores. Hope that helps. -Chris P.
|
|
|
Post by bromento on Jul 19, 2011 10:35:18 GMT -5
if i could "like" your post i would
|
|
|
Post by bfosburg on Jul 19, 2011 11:24:46 GMT -5
Been reading this since it started, I have seen some good feedback, some personal feedback and some heated feedback. Now its time for some Fozzy feedback. I will try not to use the word comp, because that has become a bad word no one likes hearing somtimes. And like many things it is very subjective. I read the rubric, ran my army through it, made a few simple changes and scored 80 which pleased me, showed my new list to a few friends and was told the list would be ineffective on the table to which I shrugged my shoulder. I didn't care how effective it was, it felt like an Imperial Fist force, it is painted as an Imperial Fist force and thats what mattered to me.
Now to be honest and put myself out there, I am an extremist in the lets have fun I don't care about the results kind of guy. I will do my best to not let that interfere with my feedback here. I like the rubric, I like what it represents and would have no problem coming to the tourney if it stayed as such. However, I am by no means right and everyone on the other side wrong, I do not have the right nor the need to tell anyone playing 40k they do it wrong, I may not like or approve but that doesn't make it wrong, much like when they play against me.
This is a feedback forum and you are asking for alternate ideas, now someone brought up sportsmanship and how people scored everyone the same, but each score is up to the opponent. If you wanted a different way of judging comp here is one to consider, even if you feel its awful which I would take no offense to.
There are 6 games in the tourney if I am not mistaken, and that should mean 6 different opponents for each contender. I would have them show up with an extra list for the opponent, equaling 2. The opponent prior to the game gets to read over the list, which I would have placed into two camps, Themed or comped. Themes would be Ravenwing, Deathwing, etc. Comped would be I didn't overload on too many of this choice or I did, Razorspam, Chimeraspam, etc. We have all seen and played against these lists, is there anything illegal about them no, are they fun to play against, well that depends on the opponent, I have faced these lists and left the game upset and I have played them and left the game satisfied. No one in either camp is wrong but the focus, or at least what I perceive it to be, is that everyone leaves every game satisifed with their experience.
Now if players judge prior to the game there shouldn't be any chipmunking, we've all been playing for some time now, different experience for all, so when someone brings a Deathwing army and the opponent sees all the work they went into it, they have ten points to award for theme or comp. Does this list work yes, is it very theme heavy yes, tons of spam, well that is subjective but you give them a comp card, list why you gave the score you did. Every player judges every opponent. Sportsmanship is after the game, wow your themed list worked out great for you and I enjoyed it. Or on the other side, your razorbacks failed to move once prior to turn one and you advocted every assault phase. I did not enjoy this game. It goes all ways.
6 games equals max of 60 points, tally up the comp average out. Judges prior to the tourney will have seen every list there. Pass em around, judges get ten points to award, 4 judges 40 points, with 60 from players you have 100. Judges have a say, players who will be facing the opponents army who may or may not believe it is well themed or comped can ask, what is your theme exactly, based off black library, a movie, your own imagination of what this force should be.
So there is the Fozzy feedback. I loved the GT last year, I have been working on this year's since. Comp, no comp, whatever, I just plan on having 6 games where I plan to leave the game satisfied and proud to have attended. You guys have done that for me every tournament I have attended and I cannot thank you enough.
Fozzy out.
|
|
|
Post by jay on Jul 19, 2011 13:05:26 GMT -5
I hate Comp. This is why. It has too much drama associated with it. Comp is very subjective.
I love the fact that the “Daboyz” love to play comp lists and play into comp events. All major events have dropped the comp system. Even GW GT drop comp from there events. Yes Yes I understand we are the DaBoyz and we play with comp and hobbyist in mind. That is an old mindset and that way of thinking is an illusion. When has Millennium games and boldos truly run a comp or hobbyist event. Was it last year at the finals where you got scored 1 to 3 in comp and you could take the nastiest list and win best general. That is totally fair. People want to slam comp down your throat.
Do we only play comp in your basement.
I understand comp. I really do. I do believe that it is really a list that beats you not the army. I believe and it has been shown locally and nationally that almost any codex can win an event.
I really enjoy Chris beating everyone with his Necron list.
I do understand if have to play 15 long fang missile launchers. It not fun, but all of those spam or “net lists” are being beat by better players. And typically there lists have more diversity and take on multiply different types of lists.
Here are three examples of how comp has been in the past:
Comp done by the judges Comp done by your opponent. Rubric
Or a combination of two of three of these.
Here is my break down.
Comp is done by a panel of judges. There are two problems with it. One is there is no hard guild lines for doing this. It is hard to explain for someone driving 8 hours what we want. We even give examples last year and people still could understand it. In mind the biggest problem is the people disregard the comp system and bring the nasty list and ruins the event. So what do you do? Make people submit lists for approval to play? This is a lot of work very hard implement.
Comp is done by opponents. If your opponent does not understand your list you are going to get a wrong score. This happen to Gabe with Eldar. Nice comp army and people don’t understand it. Or you get people that won’t care and give all positive marks. Or you have chipmunking that would be done. Sure the judges could overrule this or talk to person given out low scores.
Rubric. This is what we plan this year based on the feed back from last year. I don’t think it is perfect and does have loopholes. We could take every codex and create a rubric, but that is only opening another can of worms. One rubric lets you take 3 transports and other lets you take 4 transports before you get negative points. People are going to complain about this because it is not fair. The biggest positive factor about this system is you can limit certain builds and armies. If it was not posted I am sorry , but we plan on putting required minimum score on the rubric. You need to achieve that score before you attend our event.
This is one of the main reasons for the rubric. That is been one of the biggest problems with Comp. People show up with rock solid lists and beat face in and ruin it for the other people.
Are people going to game the system. Hell yea! They did that last year with submitting lists early for a score. And then submitted them again and asked a lot of questions.
It is funny because everyone is beating up on Rob and Andy, but all they want to do is to do the right thing with comp
Sportsmanship
Painting
Are people going to game the system. Hell yea! They did that last year with submitting lists early for a score.
I understand the reason for Comp. it is not because the codex’s are not balanced.
If anyone wants to take my spot and main TO go ahead. Last year I send about 20 hours a week 2 months before the event.
I currently paint out $1000 for deposit for the event. $715 for dice. I also plan on making $500 purchase in terrain in the next two weeks. All of it is my money. I am sorry I am trying to make a GT not a RT. I want 100 people not 30. I want to see players and armies from all across the US and Canada.
It is funny because everyone is beating up on Rob and Andy, but all they want to do is to do the right thing with comp Joe the average gamer show up
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Jul 19, 2011 13:44:10 GMT -5
I am in agreement with Jay on most things. I hope Andy and Smitty didn't think I was beating up on them as that was never my intent.
I want to see this GT succeed and grow. Unfortunately, I believe comp is the largest factor deterring people from coming. However, if that is our direction, I will support it. Believe it or not, Courtney inspired me with taking best general at ATC and my GT (GK) army has no special chars and no duplicate units or transports.
My advice on comp may not be the best because it's a system I don't believe in, but I can offer my experience as a tournament consumer. Being a small business owner, my viewpoint is often biased in that manner.
I've only had 2 bad tournament experiences, both were comp tournaments. Please hear me out before you accuse me of female dogging as I really am trying to help.
The first tournament featured player scored comp after games. I brought a list also with no special characters, no duplicate units, and a majority of my points invested in diverse troop choices. I had several rules disagreements with one player who also ended up docking my comp score after the game. The other two players game me max points.
The second tournament I brought a comp list to the same standards. No special characters, no duplicates, more troops than anything. I even used a max unit of lictors. My first round, I paired off against 9 oblits, 2 princes, and plague marine spam. I did not enjoy that game because it was advertised as a comp tournament. I felt that I lost that game because I made an effort to bring a comp army (which I normally don't like to play) and got crushed. If I had been able to bring whatever list I wanted, I would have had no problem even if I still lost.
That is one of the main drawbacks of comp, you're forcing people to play armies they may not be happy with, or penalizing them for playing a collection they've worked hard on.
Going forward, if comp is built into DaBoyz "brand" and "business model" of the GT, we need to feature it and make it attractive and fun for our consumers. Right now, comp is perceived as a negative thing and telling people "we don't want you or your money" if they don't have a comp army is hurting us.
To maximize customer satisfaction, I would eliminate factors similar to my experiences. No way for players to knock each other out with soft scores, and make comp armies a MUST to even play.
The trick will be presenting the final model in a positive way, marketing it, and building excitement while limiting the negative perceptions and language when it comes to the comp discussion.
My personal preference is to limit subjectivity as much as possible. ETC bans special characters as a majority vote from all team captains from around the world. Why don't we do this instead of the heavy penalties? What if we just said no elites, fast, or heavies in triplicate (even transports) and make duplicates heavily penalized in the rubric. Keep the minimum requirement to participate also.
That's the best I can do as I'm considerably less experienced then some of you. Just keep in mind after all the discussions and drama, we need to build excitement and market this to people outside of Rochester. The TO wants to bring 100 people so we need to do everything we can to make this a positive experience with the final format.
If we want to make it a "fun hobby event", I suggest unusual missions with HEAVY weight on painting and theme.
|
|