|
Post by carlosthecraven on Oct 27, 2011 8:36:52 GMT -5
Hi
Regarding the software, it was the stuff used at the Warmaster's Challenge. We have run a 66 man singles event without a single problem. It normally just takes the click of a button to make it work, and we have never had the problem that was occurring (producing matchups that had already occured, forcing manual checking and changes).
Unfortunately, its designer wasn't down for the weekend, or we could have probably fixed it right after it first occurred after round three.
I don't know what went wrong, but I apologize to Jay, the rest of the organizing team, and everyone that was standing around for an issue that arose from our program. Point the blame for that issue at us.
Cheers, Nate
|
|
|
Post by jay on Oct 27, 2011 9:47:29 GMT -5
I think the only issue we had with the software was the pairings. We using a newer version of excel, then it was originally intended for. So just blame Microsoft. What that was doing was putting people agaist each other that have already played each other. So we had to go through the battle points and put person against the next person in line. It was not that big of deal.
It just took time. This mostly happen in game 3 and 4.
Regardless there is always a problem with the pairings. People playing on the same table. People playing each other.
Only way to 100% fix this is to reduce games to 2 hours and have longer breaks.
|
|
|
Post by Andy on Oct 28, 2011 17:06:47 GMT -5
Thank you Jay, for taking care of the scoring mistake for me. Hopefully I'll be able to make it down next year to say that in person.
|
|
|
Post by warmasterprimus on Oct 31, 2011 9:51:13 GMT -5
Hey Guys, Now that I’ve had a little bit of time to decompress here’s my review of the GT. First off, thanks for all the work of putting this together. I’m glad I could help out the Hobin’s run the Team Tourney. It was a fun time.
Overall, I thought the GT was an okay time. I didn’t think it was bad, but I can’t say that I had a really good time either. The ambiance I got this year was more ‘business time.’ Anyway, here’s a few things that stuck out for me (in no particular order).
The number of rounds/length of rounds/Venue: I think that the biggest thing that I missed this year was the down time in the evenings to hang out and hang out with the guys. I feel a little bad because I voted to go to 6 rounds last year, but that 4th round on Saturday really cut down the amount of socialization time. Coupled with long round times, and a venue that wasn’t associated with a hotel, I wasn’t able to hang out and decompress. I had a few bad games Day 1, and without that time to relax it made the weekend less fun.
Initial pairings: I thought it was weird that the first 2 pairings weren’t done by comp score. My first two opponents scored 60 & 43 to my 101. While the matchups weren’t that bad, I am a little disappointed to have rolled up to my first games of the event and face armies that paid little attention to the spirit of the event (the guy with the 60 was fine).
Stress level: I think that there was a level of stress coming from the judges that may have fed into the player base. When I see you guys stressed out, looking unhappy and sometimes yelling, I feel bad. I talked to several people that thought this year’s GT felt a lot more serious than last. I’m not exactly sure what it was, but the ambiance was different.
Paint scoring: Jay mentioned on Dakka that the top 10 were picked via player’s choice. When I set up the 2nd day, I didn’t bring my entire display base out, nor did I set up all my models until after the voting started. By the time I went back to my car and got everything, there was already a pile of votes handed in. Also, where in the room you set up mattered. I think that there were spots that had more traffic. I know that my 2nd round opponent Justin Cook had a great Genestealer cult army, but was placed in the middle of all the tables and many people didn’t get to see it. The missions: I thought they were all pretty straightforward and the two that people seemed to have the most problems with (Hot Potato & Poker Face) were the most fun for me. I’d love to play either of them again.
The Comp system: I think for the most part, it worked well. Looking at the top 20, you see a lot of armies that normally don’t show up (Tau & Necrons in the Top 10!)
While I think that’s a great foundation to build on, I have to ask, How do we get greater diversification of armies? 2 Dark Eldar, 1 Sisters & 3 Nids isn’t surprising, but is there anything that we could do encourage more people to bring out those armies? Is it even something we need to worry about?
That’s about it. See most of you guys in December!
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Oct 31, 2011 11:45:10 GMT -5
I gotta agree about the atmosphere. I attributed it to the battle over the ETC team spot.
I was initially excited about this aspect because I thought I would have a shot at the spot (hahaha). It didn't take me long to realize through chatter and whatnot that several people came "to win at all costs". I actually overheard a few conversations that I wish I hadn't which made me want to drop out of the event after 4 games. I feel like without the competition for the ETC spot, the player base and atmosphere would have been different.
I also had the most unenjoyable games of my life, easily beating out 'ardboyz. I can't blame a tournament for giving me unenjoyable opponents, but I do have a new appreciation for our local crew of gamers and the enjoyment I get out of our local tournaments.
I had no issues with the pairings or schedule and I knew what to expect after playing 4 games in 1 day at the ATC. I know issues come up too and I honestly didn't even know we had delays. I spent the extra time chatting. My only gripe on the pairings is that out of 6 games, I only played on 4 different tables.
|
|
|
Post by darkwynn on Oct 31, 2011 12:30:56 GMT -5
I gotta agree about the atmosphere. I attributed it to the battle over the ETC team spot. I was initially excited about this aspect because I thought I would have a shot at the spot (hahaha). It didn't take me long to realize through chatter and whatnot that several people came "to win at all costs". I actually overheard a few conversations that I wish I hadn't which made me want to drop out of the event after 4 games. I feel like without the competition for the ETC spot, the player base and atmosphere would have been different. I also had the most unenjoyable games of my life, easily beating out 'ardboyz. I can't blame a tournament for giving me unenjoyable opponents, but I do have a new appreciation for our local crew of gamers and the enjoyment I get out of our local tournaments. I had no issues with the pairings or schedule and I knew what to expect after playing 4 games in 1 day at the ATC. I know issues come up too and I honestly didn't even know we had delays. I spent the extra time chatting. My only gripe on the pairings is that out of 6 games, I only played on 4 different tables. Aaron that sucks that is the way you felt about the event. Though know I am curious about the chatter you heard with the ETC spot. My feeling was and maybe why I had so much fun was really whatever. If I made it great, if I didn't make it great I save myself $2000 Dollars. Honestly the only reason I came up to the event was from talking to Shaun and Jay. We don't have to many GT's and its all about the relationships that these events bring. I would have never met Nate if it wasn't for the first year of Da Boyz. I have huge amounts of respect for him too besides him being cool. (Even though you’re from Canada) Same with Kyle Oman. I guess what I am saying is people shouldn't get worked up so much about winning as its nice but remember that you come to these events for fun and to build relationships.
|
|
|
Post by crimthaan on Oct 31, 2011 12:40:38 GMT -5
I gotta agree about the atmosphere. I attributed it to the battle over the ETC team spot. I was initially excited about this aspect because I thought I would have a shot at the spot (hahaha). It didn't take me long to realize through chatter and whatnot that several people came "to win at all costs". I actually overheard a few conversations that I wish I hadn't which made me want to drop out of the event after 4 games. I feel like without the competition for the ETC spot, the player base and atmosphere would have been different. I also had the most unenjoyable games of my life, easily beating out 'ardboyz. I can't blame a tournament for giving me unenjoyable opponents, but I do have a new appreciation for our local crew of gamers and the enjoyment I get out of our local tournaments. I had no issues with the pairings or schedule and I knew what to expect after playing 4 games in 1 day at the ATC. I know issues come up too and I honestly didn't even know we had delays. I spent the extra time chatting. My only gripe on the pairings is that out of 6 games, I only played on 4 different tables. Aaron that sucks that is the way you felt about the event. Though know I am curious about the chatter you heard with the ETC spot. My feeling was and maybe why I had so much fun was really whatever. If I made it great, if I didn't make it great I save myself $2000 Dollars. Honestly the only reason I came up to the event was from talking to Shaun and Jay. We don't have to many GT's and its all about the relationships that these events bring. I would have never met Nate if it wasn't for the first year of Da Boyz. I have huge amounts of respect for him too besides him being cool. (Even though you’re from Canada) Same with Kyle Oman. I guess what I am saying is people shouldn't get worked up so much about winning as its nice but remember that you come to these events for fun and to build relationships. Thanks for all of the "thank you" guys..this was the first time I've helped run a big event and although it was stressful I had a blast and will be on board to do it again next year. Perhaps the biggest pleasant surprise for me was Darkwynn, yes you! To be completely honest you've always come across as almost arrogant, but talking to you at the GT I learned that you really are a cool guy (for a Texan that is ) that is willing to share his knowledge of the game with anyone. Thanks again for everyone that came up and had a blast! As for the atmosphere I think as the event grows the atmosphere will get a little bit better. We have already talked about getting more people on board instead of having just 5 guys running the entire shabang, so if we have less stuff to worry about the judges stress won't leak to the players!
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Oct 31, 2011 13:34:31 GMT -5
I gotta agree about the atmosphere. I attributed it to the battle over the ETC team spot. I was initially excited about this aspect because I thought I would have a shot at the spot (hahaha). It didn't take me long to realize through chatter and whatnot that several people came "to win at all costs". I actually overheard a few conversations that I wish I hadn't which made me want to drop out of the event after 4 games. I feel like without the competition for the ETC spot, the player base and atmosphere would have been different. I also had the most unenjoyable games of my life, easily beating out 'ardboyz. I can't blame a tournament for giving me unenjoyable opponents, but I do have a new appreciation for our local crew of gamers and the enjoyment I get out of our local tournaments. I had no issues with the pairings or schedule and I knew what to expect after playing 4 games in 1 day at the ATC. I know issues come up too and I honestly didn't even know we had delays. I spent the extra time chatting. My only gripe on the pairings is that out of 6 games, I only played on 4 different tables. Aaron that sucks that is the way you felt about the event. Though know I am curious about the chatter you heard with the ETC spot. My feeling was and maybe why I had so much fun was really whatever. If I made it great, if I didn't make it great I save myself $2000 Dollars. Honestly the only reason I came up to the event was from talking to Shaun and Jay. We don't have to many GT's and its all about the relationships that these events bring. I would have never met Nate if it wasn't for the first year of Da Boyz. I have huge amounts of respect for him too besides him being cool. (Even though you’re from Canada) Same with Kyle Oman. I guess what I am saying is people shouldn't get worked up so much about winning as its nice but remember that you come to these events for fun and to build relationships. Don't worry Nick I still regard you highly and I'm glad you won. My disillusionment comes from my own naivete in assuming everyone else also comes out to have fun and win games through an honest effort.
|
|
|
Post by crimthaan on Oct 31, 2011 13:39:53 GMT -5
Aaron don't let one bad game or something of the sorts ruin the experiance for you! Sure there are "those guys" that will do anything to win and that's all they care about, but for the most part the guys I have encountered in this hobby are out to have fun just as much as the rest of us.
Adepticon is a perfect example. At last year's Team Tournament I played 3 really solid and enjoyable games. The guys were playing against were great and were there to have a great time (and to win, but that didn't effect their interactions with you). The last game though was just nuts. I've seen more personality in a friggin lead pipe. The guys were so entirerly focused on winning that it wasn't even fun playing them (in what I believe in THE PREIMER beer and pretzils event).
Don't let it bother you too much. I think the Toledo guys, the Boston guys, or even some of those roudy Texans are an example of just d**n good players that will out general you, beat you down, and you'll still be laughing the whole time through it....at least that was my take on it.
|
|
|
Post by grubnards on Oct 31, 2011 13:58:21 GMT -5
Wow, it's been a week already... feels longer. Overall I had a blast. I came out with 2 wins so my expectations were exceeded. My only gripe was one bad matchup, which has no reflection on the judges or organizers. I can understand having a bad game, lack of sleep, hangover, rules dispute, etc... but people really need to try to think of the person on the other end of the table. We all invest a lot of time, money, and family time to attend events like these and to have one or two people bring it down is a shame. I would like to mirror what Darkwynn said, I like to meet new people that come from outside the area and events like this make it happen. I have met a great bunch of people these last few years and getting to see them every now and then makes events like these worth it. A big shout out to the group from Buffalo, I played against 2 of you (walter/daemons and Josh/gk, I believe) and had a great time. Hope to see you guys at more events in the coming year. Jay, Andy, Trevor, Smitty, Chris and anyone else... great event as always. Look forward to seeing you guys at some upcoming events. - Kevin
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Oct 31, 2011 14:02:15 GMT -5
Aaron don't let one bad game or something of the sorts ruin the experiance for you! Sure there are "those guys" that will do anything to win and that's all they care about, but for the most part the guys I have encountered in this hobby are out to have fun just as much as the rest of us. Adepticon is a perfect example. At last year's Team Tournament I played 3 really solid and enjoyable games. The guys were playing against were great and were there to have a great time (and to win, but that didn't effect their interactions with you). The last game though was just nuts. I've seen more personality in a friggin lead pipe. The guys were so entirerly focused on winning that it wasn't even fun playing them (in what I believe in THE PREIMER beer and pretzils event). Don't let it bother you too much. I think the Toledo guys, the Boston guys, or even some of those roudy Texans are an example of just d**n good players that will out general you, beat you down, and you'll still be laughing the whole time through it....at least that was my take on it. Nothing "ruined it" for me, just opened my eyes a bit to things I didn't expect to see or hear from other players and hobbyists. I still enjoyed the event as a whole and will continue to support it and participate in it. Like I said, if anything its given me new appreciation for our local community and events.
|
|
|
Post by warmasterprimus on Oct 31, 2011 20:14:35 GMT -5
One thing that I left out of my review that other people brought up, thanks Kevin, Gabe, Bill Keefe, Chris from the Beavers, and the Erie crew. Talking you guys up between rounds really lifted my spirits and kept me coming back. Like Darkwynn said, it's the relationships we build at these events that count, and you guys really made the event for me.
Luckily, most of you guys are local so I get to see you during the year, and not just at 1 event. Like Aaron said, our local crew is great. Thanks guys.
|
|
MajorSoB
Moderator
The oldest
THE GRUMPY OLD MAN!
Posts: 2,135
|
Post by MajorSoB on Nov 1, 2011 3:22:21 GMT -5
Although I did not attend this years event for reasons that I have clearly stated, I admit that I was curious as to how it went and the overall reaction of the gaming community to the event. Here are a couple of conclusion I have drawn from talking with a few players as well as reading the online posts and blogs of several people in attendance.
1) Comp - As stated before this was singly the biggest reason for not attending. To put it bluntly, the system sucked. It was rushed, was not universally fair to every army ( as stated by at least two of the TOs ) and from what I saw did nothing that it was set out to do. Where was the diversity, the armies represented here were almost identical to any other non comp event. The top tier armies still showed up in force and dominated their competition with a few exceptions. Major props to Andrew Norum, Jeff Hobin, and Chris Courtney for making their outclassed codices work against superior ones. The reason that comp sucked was two fold, first being that it did nothing to encourage less powerful codices nor did it offer them a way to compete with the elite newer books. The second problem was the subjective scoring. There was some criticism that specific questions asked as to how the subjective values were created were unaddressed. I read a few posts where people again were somewhat disappointed and dismayed since their was not anything concrete to measure against. The problem with the matrix was that it focused on duplicity of units instead of duplicity of purpose. Some armies have several options to accomplish the same purpose, while other armies do not have equal variety, power or costed options. Some armies rely on repetition to do the same job that can easily be accomplished in another more diverse codex. While I believe this is a simple issue, I feel the solution is quite convoluted. Here are a few ideas to explore. 1) Create a matrix for each army? 2) Limit the number of high strength / low AP weapons that an army can take. 3) Limit / penalize armies with psychic abilities. 4) Address monstrous creatures. 5) Instead of limiting the number of vehicles or transports, limit the total number that can be spent on combined armor values. EX: a rhino is 11/11/10 totaling 32 armor points while a land raider is 14/14/14 totaling 42 armor points. Maybe set a total armor point limit, adding a point or two for a vehicle with a turret weapon ( immolator, razorback, chimera ), etc. Once you have hit your limit you're done, that way there better balance between transports, meaning two raiders don't equal two land raiders. 6) Reward armies that take units that are seldom or never played. Create a list of these units and give bonus points. 7) Address special characters fairly. We all know that certain characters are just plain broken while others are laughable. Shouldn't some characters be exempt ( Belial, Aun Va, etc ) while others be more severely penalized ( Mephiston, Eldred, Vulkan, Ghazgul, etc ) ? Just a few ideas, and they honestly these things are meant to help. I have heard talk about totally throwing out comp, maybe because that would be easier and supposedly 6th edition will fix everything? I am not sure that is the answer either, but now would be the time to get things going for next year, not several months after Adepticon when everything turns out rushed in a fashion and creates a tournament that ends up being less that it could be. Again the choice is yours but I believe this has a huge impact on attendance and the overall experience of the tournament.
2) Location - While people will always criticize and say " I like this better" or " It was better here" I think Jay did a great job with this years location. Yes, i heard the food was just OK, that the beer was OK too, and yes you didn't have a hotel attached, blah, blah, blah, for the money that was involved and the security of locking in a set location months in advance ( U of R was horrible for committing! ), Jay did a good job.
3) Scheduling - This was a point of contention from what I read. Its a huge task for 5 guys to run this and I agree more help would have made things easier, however this was the second year in a row when there were software and scoring issues, as well as time overruns. This needs to be addressed or the event needs to be capped to a more manageable level. Sometimes more isn't better if you are not set up to handle it.
4) WAAC / ETC spot - Please don't take this the wrong way but you got EXACTLY what you bargained for by combining a tournament that was supposed to support the fun aspects of the game with a qualifier for a no-comp ticket to Europe. You cannot criticize anyone who came here with the express purpose of winning that spot and ignoring anything else that you think they should have considered. People play in event for a myriad of reasons, some come to show everyone how great they paint, some come for the fellowship, some come just to play, and yes some come to beat the hell out of their opponents and take home prizes. It is unfair to single out any of these reasons as bad, but if you want your tournament to have a more fun and friendly atmosphere, you need to understand that the combination of prizes and spots attracted some players who were here more for the ETC then for anything you wanted them to be. They are smart, competent players and while you think they may have gamed your system, who could blame them when the prize they wanted was on the line?
5) Pairings - Really a non-issue. If you stated that your would pair the first two rounds against similarly ranked comp lists, then that should have happened, no excuses, however if a player was looking to win and "test his ability as a general" he should be capable of facing and defeating any army that showed up and was legal at that event in order to win the top spot.
6) Paint judging - No comment wasn't there to see it and not enough info to form an opinion. Maybe a designated area and a simple announcement could have helped. 7) Missions - Again, a better job in needed to proof read and play test these things. Avoid overly complex missions because complexity adds to time needed for each game. Begin submitting and play testing them now not a month or two before the event. I understand the desire to keep interest and local flavor with unique scenarios, but get these kinks ironed out now. You have at least two solid years of past missions to choose from, maybe pick the best from those and add one or two well written new missions to next years mix?
So my question is where do you go from here? Overall is this the event that should be run locally and does it serve the wargaming community here as a whole? Why is this tournament being run, is it to promote the hobby locally or is it so that DaBoyz claim to fame is running a big GT too? Do you want the event to continue to grow or is it time to take a step back and discuss quality issues that seem to have crept in with the increase in quantity? Personally I think you would be better served to focus some attention back on the local community and growing the game and player base here. Again its just my opinion, but that is where my heart is. While I am overall happy with my own personal decision regarding this years event, I would have liked to see some of the infamous players like Jeff and Eric Hobin, Nick, Goatboy, and Wyatt to name a few that can make this game fun and worth playing. Figure out where you are at and where you want to be, and plan it now, not a few short weeks or months in advance. Take these thoughts to heart because in all honesty I am not attacking anyone here who worked hard on the event or whose perspective doesn't match up with mine but trying to shed some light and clarity from an outside perspective. Good luck moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 1, 2011 7:33:02 GMT -5
For the record, I think the comp system was great. A big improvement over last year. Just my opinion. The only complaints I heard were about the 30pt judged score, but people who get less than others will always ask why.
I thought the venue was great and a big improvement also. People knocked the food or price of beer, but last year we basically had chips and soda on site with a bit of a walk and time commitment to get to the food court. At the armory, I could get hot dogs while my opponent moved. My pregnant wife loved the nachos she got 15 feet from the table I played at also.
I also had no problem with the scheduling. I appreciate what a huge task it is and I personally would always prefer to play as this is the only GT I can attend. I know people will run late and issues will arise and I just used the extra time to talk.
Painting is like comp, people that score lower will want to know why. I do agree that if special tables were set up for display, there should have been enough room for everyone. However, the schedule was posted well in advance in the player packet so I don't think timing was a valid issue for this. I know there were very few people there at 8:30 on Sunday and the guys did everything they could to prevent people from voting until after 9:30. The lighting was a factor, but I don't think anyone expects their army to look the same at a big venue as it does under their painting lights.
I'll take the blame for any discontent with the missions. My goals were to change the expectations related to book missions. The book provides a KP mechanic, so I created one where units came back to the table. The book provides an objective mechanic, so I created one where objectives were removed. The book says we want objectives, so I created one with objectives you don't want. It was my fault not to first ask what goals or results they wanted to accomplish through missions before writing. I did hear several guys say they were some of the most fun missions as well as some say they were the worst. That goes with personal preference I guess. The ones that bothered me most were people who intentionally agreed with their opponents to ignore certain mission mechanics that they didn't like.
|
|
|
Post by Horst on Nov 1, 2011 8:26:41 GMT -5
The missions were fine for the most part IMO, but the reinforcements or liabilities one.... I played against a GK guy with 2 units of 10 terminators and 2 units of 10 Power Armor GK. He kept his power armor guys back, and attacked me with the 20 terminators. I'm not equipped to deal with THAT much terminator armor... somehow I managed to kill both squads. Then they come back in from outflank, psycannons blazing, and table the hell out of me Other people had similar problems... their only choice of units to bring back in were awesome death units that would wreck them. Didn't like that. Other problem was hot potato, heard a lot of complaints about this one, because of an imobilized vehicle near the potato that meant they couldn't possibly win. Other than those 2 missions, every other one was pretty fun.
|
|