|
Post by Wolf Lord Snorville on Apr 26, 2006 23:22:30 GMT -5
paraplegic snotlings
|
|
|
Post by Ranger Dude on Apr 26, 2006 23:26:56 GMT -5
What an interesting visual. Lot's of little green men squirming onthe ground trying not to look like immobile nurglings.
|
|
|
Post by cirrus on Apr 26, 2006 23:27:40 GMT -5
Hmmm, going 5-0 and not winning? Hmmm, not playing any of the top finishers in any rounds? Yes, Cirrus, thanks for addressing the issues. If you went 5-0 and didn't place. Check your scores. You knew going in that Battle is not the only score. BTW, this is our board here too, watch your tone, oh and thanks for helping me make up my mind on playing in your tourney. If your answer to "Is this a legal conversion?" or "Why wasn't there positioning rounds?" is "Grow up.", then I guess we all will be saving some gas by not visiting you. This is precisely my point. I did not answer "is this a legal conversion" with "grow up" nor did I answer "why wasn't there positioning rounds" the same. I didn't even address the positioning issues, because I don't feel there should be any address, it was random within it's constraints, it happens that people get nerfed, I have been before. It's a part of the game. And reread my post for the conversion issues. "grow up" was meant towards those making deragatory comments and the like. Which is against your board rules, from what I have read. Which also means it wasn't directed towards you, since you made no comment of the like. Thank you for your help.
|
|
|
Post by johnboo on Apr 27, 2006 7:44:14 GMT -5
John, that's not fair, I tied for fourth and did beat the eventual winner to give him his only loss. . I stand corrected - I knew you had beaten him, I quickly looked at the final scores and saw you listed 5th, didnt notice you scored the same as Mike Rossi. As for the 4-1 vs. the 5-0 issue... it seems to be the trend that all the Indy GTs are following, battle scores counting for a smaller and smaller percentage of the overall score. The Marauder GT actually give battle a higher % than most of the Indy GTs. Some people like this, some people don't. If battle scores are counting less and less, doesnt it stop being a competition and just a big exhibition? Maybe stop being called tournaments and called something else. I suppose I can understand trying to tone down the cut-throat nature by lowering the percentage of battle vs the soft scores, but as I said, something is still out of whack when someone wins all their games, has a top comp score, and a neatly painted, shaded & highlighted army(admittedly not stunning, but certainly tabletop or better quality) and doenst win any catagory. Essentially, what I'm saying is if a guy with and average nice quality army doesnt stand a snowball's chance at overall, why bother? Might I suggest a (re)instating a best general catagory combining Battle & Comp?
|
|
|
Post by johnboo on Apr 27, 2006 8:22:46 GMT -5
If you went 5-0 and didn't place. Check your scores. You knew going in that Battle is not the only score. Hi Cirrus, Thats not the point. Everyone knows battle isnt the only score. The one person who went 5-0 (4 of which were as many points as you can get) also had 2nd in comp (one point less than the top), 3rd in sports (same as the overall winner), and tied 9th out of 20 in painting for a nice neat shaded and highlighted army. This should be enough to put you over the top. End of story. Painting is always subjective, but 3 players actually got points (approx half what the average army scored) for a partially painted army! I just think scoring need to be tweaked.
|
|
|
Post by adsvampire on Apr 27, 2006 8:33:47 GMT -5
I second John's motion for a best general category! I too was disappointed with its absence in the first tournament. Battle + Comp with the tie breaker being sports/judges + players rated comp sounds good to me. Either way, the tickets are going fast with only 16 of 50 left. You guys have some of the best players in the region and it would be a shame to not have your representation at the tournament (secret motive of revenge ... removes nose from collective asses ;D ). Personally, all griping aside, I hope you guys go. But if you don't someone else will fill the spots. And where is the info for the Boldo GT ... or did I miss it?
|
|
Sanguinary
Sergeant
WOW, his son looks strangely like Shaun,
Posts: 341
|
Post by Sanguinary on Apr 27, 2006 9:48:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jay on Apr 27, 2006 12:12:22 GMT -5
Is anyone going from Rochester?
|
|
|
Post by johnboo on Apr 27, 2006 12:55:06 GMT -5
Is anyone going from Rochester? No one has pre-registered yet. I'm 99% sure Jason is not, Matt had mentioned it as a possibility, And I'm still on the fence. That pretty much all Ive heard.
|
|
boldo
Moderator
The card carrying
Posts: 646
|
Post by boldo on Apr 27, 2006 13:04:41 GMT -5
Cirrus,
We are beating this to death here. Perhaps we have to agree to disagree. It seems you are involved in the tournament and know you will be fair with conversions and not disallow anything reasonable. Unfortunately I feel the rules are written to sound very strident and confusing as to whether to bring your latest and greatest conversion. It is just my two cents but so far you have 30 some people so my opinion is irrelevent.
Also Cirrus i have played a lot of tournaments in the area and run more than anyone else but I can not place you at all. Have you been up to rochester for a tournament? I was wondering, without any accusation, why you do not travel to events? And what would encourage you to attend a tournament out of town?
Boldo
|
|
|
Post by cirrus on Apr 27, 2006 14:40:29 GMT -5
I have been to Rochester for but one tournament (small RTT I think), I have tried to make others, but have not been able to (school, work, family = 3 full time jobs.) I am attempting to make it to more this year, because I am getting tired of the same 6-8 people. :-) I really need no encouragement to attend out of town, just time and funds, :-) I am of teh opinion that one experience, good or bad, doesn't make or break anything, I'll always try again. Even if I don't get along with someone, being civil is not beneath nor above me.
When I went to rochester I had to, unfortunately, take the only painted army I had ready, which was my Khorne Dragonlord army. D'oh, so I was down waay too many VP, because of that comp system that was used at the time. I think I remember discussing Chaos Knights with you and Jason.
As for teh conversions, it was really just to stress the importance of having reasonable conversions and not to take anything extreme. It was an attempt to deter anything confusing, which could possibly take away from some of teh players experience.
I also have to say, if anyone took any offense to anything that was said, I apologize, nothing was meant to be that way.
|
|
MajorSoB
Moderator
The oldest
THE GRUMPY OLD MAN!
Posts: 2,135
|
Post by MajorSoB on Apr 27, 2006 16:57:40 GMT -5
No offense was taken, but the issue still stand in my mind.
1) Conversions. Seems to reason that if it would be legal at a GT, it should be legal elsewhere. An all LOTR army would never be legal there, but Warmaster dragons substituted for standard giant eagles and based appropriately should be more that acceptable, period. The system proposed for approval seems cumbersome and biased, yet it does not seem likely that your club will change it, again giving a "homer" advantage to anyone from your club who doesn't have to take picture, e-mail them, etc to get approved.
2) Scoring. Again, you can hide behind your notion that battle points aren't the only factor to determine overall victory, however finishing undeafeated, second in comp and third in sportmanship should spell victory in most any tournament. Coupled with the fact that there was not any attempt at positioning rounds like in GT's again could be taken as another "homer" advantage.
Both these issues are unresolved and the attempt to address them has been met with "Grow up." If there is a real attempt to address these issues, I am sure that interest in this tourney could increase, but as it stands now I understand completely why many people will take a pass on this one. Again, no offense taken.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Lord Snorville on Apr 27, 2006 17:11:01 GMT -5
horse..... dead.....
|
|
|
Post by cirrus on Apr 27, 2006 17:37:40 GMT -5
Both these issues are unresolved and the attempt to address them has been met with "Grow up." As I said before, I was not addressing these issues with "grow up." To clear it up, I was addressing the chinese factory statements and the like. I have taken a similar blow as Jason did, in the first Bearded Dragon RTT. But I have to point out that finishing 1st in BPs by only 4 points jeapordizes everything when the army is a middle of teh road paint job, by no means bad, but also not stellar. And when the 2nd place BPer has a stellar paint job and scores just as good comp and sportsmanship wise.... the points work out. Conversions: it has been addressed, and stated several times that if it's reasonable, by all means, have fun with it, but just don't bring something that's, I am going to have to say it, forgive me corey, a doomwheel rhinox. Because someone is bound to complain about it despite everything, which puts pressure on teh judges, which makes things not so happy anymore. That's just teh way it is. If YOU and your fellow players find your conversions reasonable, then go for it. If for some reason you think it may be OTT, then question it, and check on it. Positioning: it was done by computer based on game play... so... yea! :-) lol. Have fun guys.
|
|
|
Post by x2rock on Apr 28, 2006 8:14:32 GMT -5
Yes this horse is quite dead... but I will address these 2 points 1) Conversions. Seems to reason that if it would be legal at a GT, it should be legal elsewhere. An all LOTR army would never be legal there, but Warmaster dragons substituted for standard giant eagles and based appropriately should be more that acceptable, period. The system proposed for approval seems cumbersome and biased, yet it does not seem likely that your club will change it, again giving a "homer" advantage to anyone from your club who doesn't have to take picture, e-mail them, etc to get approved. "What You See Is What You Get (WYSIWYG). If you wish to use an item, it must be represented on the figure. Army list choices whose models aren't available must be converted. If a reasonable person familiar with the game can not identify what your conversion is then do not use it. We dont want you showing up with something you cant use!" This is from the DaBoyz GT rules... very similar to the Marauder GT. The only difference that I see is that Marauders has an approval process for "questionable" conversions, whereas DaBoyz just says don't bring 'em, which is fine. But there isn't really a "homer" advantage, because the judges are from different regions, so for approval, everyone has to take a picture or give a detailed description, regardless of where they're from. 2) Scoring. Again, you can hide behind your notion that battle points aren't the only factor to determine overall victory, however finishing undeafeated, second in comp and third in sportmanship should spell victory in most any tournament. Coupled with the fact that there was not any attempt at positioning rounds like in GT's again could be taken as another "homer" advantage. This is true, but finishing 2nd in battle, 3rd in sports, 2nd in paint, and 1st in comp could be enough to win too. There was a 4 point difference in battle, and 6 point difference in paint, and paint was graded early on in the tournament, that's just the way it worked out and that's how close it was. Paint is what tanked me out of a top 3 finish as well. And rounds were seeded appropriately, unfortunately, I beat the eventual winner in the 3 round, throwing him into a different bracket, all of the undefeated armies played eachother on day 2, just how it should be.
|
|