Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Taylor

Three Colour Minimum - discussion

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, StreetPizza said:

Sportsmanship is not something you put "effort" into it should just be a given for any competitive environment and those who display poor sportsmanship on a regular basis (we all have off days) should not be welcomed back.  The problem with linking a subjective sportsmanship score to final results is that everybody has a different definition of it and it also turns into a popularity contest.

Again... it's never an issue at our infinity tournaments, but it is presented in a different way than just a numbered score. It is answering a series of questions about the game that determines your final score. 

@kyriosepoch is a scholar and a fine gentleman for making the scoring program we have going, and no one ever seems to complain on how they are scored. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ambiguous sportsmanship applications like "timing out" are solved with good game rule sets like death clock or timed turns.

Exactly how slow does another player have to play to earn this black mark from you?  Has that been clearly communicated before the event?  Do you give them any indication of when you think they're slow playing you?  What if they're new to the game and were hoping to get exposure to the tournament environment.  You doing to ding the newbie on his score because you're just frustrated with him?

These are all really negative consequences of an ambiguously defined "sportsmanship score".  I'm also sure we all don't want to be handed a rubric on how to evaluate our opponents so that the score is consistently applied.

Edited by StreetPizza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, StreetPizza said:

Ambiguous sportsmanship applications like "timing out" are solved with good game rule sets like death clock or timed turns.

That's kinda biased..  lol. Also, not all forces are created equally. Marching a horde of orks or guard across a table or managing a 20 man Ariadna list is going to take much longer than an elite primaris marine force or a team of crack PanO operatives. 

WMH generally (at least in my experience... it's been a very long time since I've played) has lists that are roughly equal in size. With 40k, you can have 150 guard models to work with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Taylor said:

That's kinda biased..  lol. Also, not all forces are created equally. Marching a horde of orks or guard across a table or managing a 20 man Ariadna list is going to take much longer than an elite primaris marine force or a team of crack PanO operatives. 

WMH generally (at least in my experience... it's been a very long time since I've played) has lists that are roughly equal in size. With 40k, you can have 150 guard models to work with. 

You would be mistaken sir.  ... lol?

Josh can run a horde of 60 drudges while my Cygnar Colossal list moves 5 models.  Again, as long as the rules are defined before hand then the player know what they're getting into and can ensure their own capability to play within the rules.  Design your list to accommodate your own clock management capabilities and things work out fine.  Clock limits are generally pretty generous to so only the slowest players run into problems.

Admittedly I can't say if clocks are really a solution for other game system with mechanics that occur on your opponent's turn but its still the preferred solution.

Edited by StreetPizza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I'm mistaken - like I said - I haven't played WMH in years, let alone W3H. I remember it being tight and don't remember any horde armies. I don't think I saw anyone outnumbered to a 2:1 ratio, let alone a 3:1 ratio. In infinity and 40k, I know that's a very common scenario. 

If clocks work for you, great. I know most of our players don't have a problem keeping within the 1.5 hour time limit I impose on tournament games. I also know some players who find the time limit on turns stressful, especially if they are playing against the guy with just a few models who has loads of extra time on his clock. 

I'm not saying it's a bad thing... to each their own. Personally though, I know if never impose a clock or timed turns at a tournament I run. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really this has strayed a long way from the original topic.  The crux of this and other forms of competitive rules tweaking is that some players have a preferred idea of the way the game should be played.  They lobby hard to have that way imposed upon the community or they run their own tournaments in that manner and either do or do not consider feedback.  As such the community either grows and accepts that method and it becomes the default for the meta or they rebel and demand something different hosting their own rule set or moving on to other games.

Lucky for me I play a game where the company that produces the game has released a robust tournament rule set for the community to follow and standardize upon.  I like that as it removes this kind of discussion from the equation and we can land on the international standard for how the tournaments should be run.  Also lucky for me is that their tournament standard works quite well so I'm happy to apply it.

What you've been arguing for here Taylor, is tweaking the competitive environment to suit the aspects of the hobby you personally enjoy.  I think there are better ways to do that by dedicating the proper play spaces to those aspects and emphasizing those aspect during those times.  Painting is the one aspect that gets the least attention in the community and that should probably change.  To me it looks like the following:

Tournaments - for the competition aspect and nobody should be shamed for trying to win as long as its done in a friendly manner.  Only the game rules matter and victory should be judged purely on game performance.

Painting competitions  - are unfortunately few and far between.  This should be remedied with more stuff on the forums for people to jump in and have models judged by the community for prizes or tacked on to competitive events as a side competition.

Sportsmanship is for all the time.  This will determine who wants to play you on game nights and how welcome you are at other events within the community.  Don't be a dick!

 

Edit: realized that forum formatting may make it look like i'm calling you a dick, Taylor, but that's totally intended as a general statement on sportsmanship.

Edited by StreetPizza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Taylor said:

I've seen people go in with the mentality that they are going to table their opponent and make them feel bad about how bad I smoked them. To me, that's probably not the person that should be going home with a prize, as it fosters that mentality within the scene. 

I go to every tournament with this mentality. Whether my list and me can pull it off is another matter entirely. There is nothing wrong with being enamored with the strategy aspect and wanting to better yourself/win. I don't berate my opponents or rub it in their face, but you're damn right I wanna win the games I play. That's why I practice so much leading up to a tourney.

 

1 hour ago, Yarium said:

The only time in a tournament that I feel someone is doing a disservice to their opponent is when they are unable to get just a few turns in, due to rules bickering, overly-finnicky measuring, and chatting with anyone and everyone around them. I like games coming to natural conclusions, and the 2 to 2.5 hrs we often set for games is really difficult to make when you're spending 1 minute between each roll considering your options. Winning or losing a game because you couldn't finish your plan due to the game ending part-way through turn 3 of a normally 6-turn-long game is infuriating. It feels like being part way through a video game multiplayer match and dropping your connection. It doesn't matter if you were winning or losing, it didn't end the way it should end.

You see slow rolling far too much in this game. At the same time, I don't want to lose a game because I "gave" an extra inch to a guy on the charge because he was being lazy at measuring. I also don't think its in poor sportsmanship to ask them to measure it again or explain a finicky rule.

28 minutes ago, StreetPizza said:

Sportsmanship is not something you put "effort" into it should just be a given for any competitive environment and those who display poor sportsmanship on a regular basis (we all have off days) should not be welcomed back.  The problem with linking a subjective sportsmanship score to final results is that everybody has a different definition of it and it also turns into a popularity contest.

For example I've read even here on these boards, that people at 40k tournaments will be marked down on sportsmanship for taking what other players deem a cheesy list.  I'm sorry but that's a complete load of bull shit.  If somebody has decided to play the game in a friendly and cordial manner using models that have been selected according to the rules of the game and event and do well they should not be penalized because another player decided to bring their favorite model X that happens to be equipped with butter knives.  Beating your opponent in the most efficient manner possible is the core objective of a TOURNAMENT.  Save the not tabling them and bringing sub optimal lists for the casual stuff on game night where it belongs.  We should not be shaming people who want to bring their A game once and awhile. 

Not all lists are created equally and not all players are created equally.  Its up to the person to decide what they want out of the tournament then build and play with that goal in mind.  You can't control how other people are going to try and have fun and its not up to you or others to give them a grade on that.  The sportsmanship score is infantalizing and paternalistic and should never be applied to final scores.   Otherwise every competitively minded player should be marking down every painter/fluff player that brings sub-optimal lists to tournaments and that's a horrible solution.

Somebody who wants to rub their opponent's face in the fact that they lost, and gloat about the victory ad nauseum  is a whole other ball of wax.  Those people are cancer and need to told to cut it out.   If after repeated warnings the behavior persists then stop allowing them entry to events.  That's what good TO's and judges are for.

 

28 minutes ago, StreetPizza said:

You guys need game clocks.

All of this right here. This is why I absolutely loved playing warmahordes - you were forced to get better and were punished for your mistakes on the table, most of the times brutally. I've been on the receiving end of bad or zero sportsmanship scores because they didn't "enjoy" playing against my list. This was actually something I've voiced my dislike at at multiple tourneys. In fact, in a lot of the GT's now, if they mark a zero or a low score they sit down with both players and actually ask what the game was like and basically do a face to face interview to find out the issue. A zero or low score usually means being expelled from the event. But people hide behind their secret marks and feel slighted when they get demo'd.

I've always been extremely vocal about sportsmanship being included as an overall score because locally (and I speak for the north) people score you down regardless if you were a blast to play with or not because they didn't like fighting 3 riptides, 4 flyrants, or the war convo. Sometimes, even personal grudges creep into these scores and really no one is checking to see why it was "such a bad game". A zero would be "worst game of my life".

If the tournament is about friendship and painting that's fine but it should be stated.

An ITC tournament by nature is competitive. We have 1 ITC tournament a year and anywhere from 2-6 casual good times here locally, not everyone needs a trophy. Going back to the original thread, there's nothing more infuriating to someone who has practiced and practiced for a big event to get scored down because their models were not up to snuff or somebody "didn't like your list".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, StreetPizza said:

What you've been arguing for here Taylor, is tweaking the competitive environment to suit the aspects of the hobby you personally enjoy.  I think there are better ways to do that by dedicating the proper play spaces to those aspects and emphasizing those aspect during those times.  Painting is the one aspect that gets the least attention in the community and that should probably change.  To me it looks like the following:

Tournaments - for the competition aspect and nobody should be shamed for trying to win as long as its done in a friendly manner.  Only the game rules matter and victory should be judged purely on game performance.

Painting competitions  - are unfortunately few and far between.  This should be remedied with more stuff on the forums for people to jump in and have models judged by the community for prizes or tacked on to competitive events as a side competition.

Sportsmanship is for all the time.  This will determine who wants to play you on game nights and how welcome you are at other events within the community.  Don't be a dick!

It's fine. I get it. Honestly, I think you think that somehow I posted this as a lobby or petition or to advance some sort of agenda.

I don't play nor would i play in most 40k tournaments, or any WMH tournaments, and my investment as such is really minimal.

I do not have the time to learn all the competitive nuances in 40k and i dont want to be that guy who shows up and has to ask people questions about what everything does, nor do I have any interest in playing WMH again.

I run Infinity tournaments, and have stated I thought the scoring for painting and sportsmanship for the BPO is pretty great - as for the rest of it, Lol, I give a rosy red fuck what they do with it. Trust me, I'm not petitioning or lobbying anyone to run their tournaments differently than they do if it is working for them, and just sharing my experience with those that care to listen.  

Again, I just posted this as I thought it was an interesting article that would provoke some discussion.

Looks like I was right. 😐

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have the discussion unless you're lobbying for your opinion?  That's kind of weird.

Also your post seems really aggressive.  This was a cool discussion no need to make it hostile.  If you took my posts as hostile then sorry but that was not my intent.  I'm just really passionate about this subject.

One question though.  What would you suggest that a competitively minded infinity player do in Sudbury?  Seems that there aren't any events that would scratch his itch and if he played the way he wants to he would be dinged for it at your events.  This isn't a 40k, WMH, Infinity or even x-wing issue.  Its  an issue that's been around as long as there has been sport.  Minimizing it as belonging to just one or two systems is big red herring.

Edited by StreetPizza
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, StreetPizza said:

some players have a preferred idea of the way the game should be played.  They lobby hard to have that way imposed upon the community or they run their own tournaments in that manner and either do or do not consider feedback.  As such the community either grows and accepts that method and it becomes the default for the meta or they rebel and demand something different hosting their own rule set or moving on to other games.

That's where I got the idea. If someone was competitively minded and didn't like our gaming community, I would recommend that they contact Corvus and become a warcor, which I would sponsor them for. I would also invite them to hold events and use our terrain for said events.

Fortunately, not a lot of people have expressed any sort of dissatisfaction with the way I'm running the community over at GCC. 

Sorry if it came off as hostile - but i really wanted to express that I really don't have a dog in this fight.. lol.. nor do I want a dog to have in this fight, so to speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dreadpirate said:

I've been on the receiving end of bad or zero sportsmanship scores because they didn't "enjoy" playing against my list. This was actually something I've voiced my dislike at at multiple tourneys. In fact, in a lot of the GT's now, if they mark a zero or a low score they sit down with both players and actually ask what the game was like and basically do a face to face interview to find out the issue. A zero or low score usually means being expelled from the event. But people hide behind their secret marks and feel slighted when they get demo'd.

I've always been extremely vocal about sportsmanship being included as an overall score because locally (and I speak for the north) people score you down regardless if you were a blast to play with or not because they didn't like fighting 3 riptides, 4 flyrants, or the war convo. Sometimes, even personal grudges creep into these scores and really no one is checking to see why it was "such a bad game". A zero would be "worst game of my life".

Bumping sportsmanship scores for playing hard is something that I don't personally believe in. I wholeheartedly disagree with people who use sports scores as a method for arbitrarily punishing players, but I can empathize with their motivations.

I can't speak to any game but 40k, but I can continue to push my own agenda. Set expectations for you event. If you are billing your tournament as a competitive destination then your players should accept and expect it. I went 1-4 at the Barrie Bash this year bringing a list that was woefully underequipped for what other people were bringing. I got smashed four games in a row before winning my last game on the absolute bottom table. I will not complain about my experience one bit and frankly I don't think that the people who whooped me would complain about getting an easy game.

As long as they were courteous in play and respectful of the fact that we have to share 2.5 hours to interact then they got top scores.

 

I am always able to pick out a favourite opponent out of 3-5 games every time. There will always be that one person who went out of their way to make sure that we had an enjoyable 2.5 hours, even during a roflstomp.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sportsmanship should be scored as a yes or no basis. With the option of favorite opponent. If a no is voted for sportsmanship there has to be a specific reason given (poor winner/looser, very ragey... etc). Because you lost badly does not mean he was a bad sportsman especially if it was marked as a competitive event.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×