ITC AOS (USA)

[svnvaldez]

 

2 minutes ago, JamesT said:

I would completely echo what @svnvaldez said. There needs to be a discussion had with the east and west coast about how to bring the communities together. As to why he mentions ITC, I think it's just because it's already got the infrastructure. The BCP app makes being a TO sooooo much easier. You download the app, setup the event, and then every round the pairings and stuff are done for you. No manually pairing 90 people, no organizing WL records on some spreadsheet, none of that. Every player knows exactly where he/she stands at all times thanks to the app, and wins some ITC points as recognition for their accomplishment. 

 

There's no need for ITC in the UK or Australia because they have already have it. Not the name, but the idea of tying together a country or region with a national rankings system that's uniform. 

 

In the ITC, there's no need to follow a rules pack. You can do doubles tournaments in ITC, 500pt, 1000pt, 2000pt games, whatever. You can say you're playing GHB1 instead of 2017, all you have to do is submit the result. So I guess the main question is: With there being no restriction to the type of event or mission packet, why not?

I guess it's just weird for us West Coast guys. Not being critical at all. I think it's awesome to hear how thriving the AoS scene is over there. But was just wondering if someone could better explain the reticence to go for ITC events. Is it the brand that's offensive or causes bad reactions? Players that it may bring, or associated attitude? Loss of identity?

This ^

Call it whatever, let someone else run it. I don't care. The above is all correct.

[Sleboda]

14 minutes ago, JamesT said:

But was just wondering if someone could better explain the reticence to go for ITC events.

My reticence is based on the feeling that it seems inappropriate to say Person X is better at AoS than Person Y is when there is no uniform AoS.

It's a bit like saying I'm a better Chef than my friend when he cooks only seafood and I only make desserts. Are we both Chefs making food? Yeah, sure, but you can't really compare the two to fairly say who is better.

[cburns]

I play in tournaments in the Midwest and Ive talked to a few of the community/tournament organizers.  From what I have found it seems the biggest concern amongst the Midwest TO's is that the ITC 40k Champion receives a cash prize (I don't know if that is the case for the AoS ITC champ), and that to promote prizes like that (as well as just points and ranking) pulls people away from the hobby and makes them purely competitive.  I would love to see ITC implemented widely in the Midwest AoS scene just to be able to track myself against my friends etc and see how I compare against others across the country.  I don't believe that this should come at sacrifice of the hobby, TO's have the ability to clamp down on standards, if someone is abusing the painting requirements or not meeting them, have them remove the models form the game.  As long as players have a player pack before the event I think this policy is fine (though I know it can be hard on TO's to boot someone).  

 

But after all it is a tournament, most people go to tournaments with at least some hope/aspiration of winning (regardless of how realistic that is or not) so there is already an inherit competitive nature. Yes I want to win but I also want to socialize with cool people who share similar interests with me, look at cool armies and play some good games that make me think.  Form what I have observed in both the AoS and 40k competitive communities I have to say I like the AoS one much more. Not to say 40k is terrible or toxic, bc its not, I just prefer the overall feel of the crowd of AoS.  You just have to set a community standard of what is acceptable to bring or behave like at a tournament as a TO.  Most players won't just accept this they will embrace it and support it (a community standard)!

 

TLDR: Bring more AoS ITC to the Midwest! It can't be that bad!

[Requizen]

Having spoken to many of the TOs in the Midwest (organizers for Paca, ACon, and Meltdown), the reason they don't want to do ITC has little to nothing to do with prize support, Overall, or anything like that. They just don't like the ITC folks or anyone who does. It's a grudge from who knows when and since those are the people in charge of the bigger midwest events, that's just the way it is. 

I attended LVO and I had at least 3 AoS players look at me with disdain when I told them I was from Chicagoland and then regale me with stories about how they got into shouting matches with many of the TOs in this area over the way they run things. Which is disappointing, not just because it prevents the ITC from being the centralized scoring system, but also because it divides the community. Other regions treat us like pariahs and only attend Adepticon because of the crowd. 

And I don't really understand why it's continued this way. While the ITC isn't perfect, it's a way to bring the tournament community together and encourage competition between people from all over the country, and even internationally. But it seems that we'd rather be insular and argumentative than be part of that. Which is... very frustrating, honestly.

[svnvaldez]

9 minutes ago, Requizen said:

 

Having spoken to many of the TOs in the Midwest (organizers for Paca, ACon, and Meltdown), the reason they don't want to do ITC has little to nothing to do with prize support, Overall, or anything like that. They just don't like the ITC folks or anyone who does. It's a grudge from who knows when and since those are the people in charge of the bigger midwest events, that's just the way it is. 

 

Yea I didnt want this to go in to complaining, name calling etc but this is my understanding as well.

I don't what to get into it but there is so much regional and 8th ed vs 40k hate. I have plenty as well. I had hoped it died with the coming of AOS but it has not.

I too hope it comes to an end and there is some merger of East:West Acon:LVO

[Requizen]

Just now, svnvaldez said:

Yea I didnt want this to go in to complaining, name calling etc but this is my understanding as well.

I'd also prefer to have no drama but sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. When people you've never met from all corners of the country (and Canada) are telling you that they view your tourney scene as a bit messed up, maybe something's amiss.

 

21 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

My reticence is based on the feeling that it seems inappropriate to say Person X is better at AoS than Person Y is when there is no uniform AoS.

It's a bit like saying I'm a better Chef than my friend when he cooks only seafood and I only make desserts. Are we both Chefs making food? Yeah, sure, but you can't really compare the two to fairly say who is better.

While I can sorta see that, it's also not really the case. Couple things, in my opinion: 

First, good players are going to be good no matter the event they play in. You see the same people in top 20 of Adepticon 40k champs then show up on Saturday and take Best General for Team Tournament. Same people who do well in Adepticon AoS Doubles go and play top tables at Championships. Etc. Good at the game is good at the game, no matter what the local TO is organizing.

Second, the TOs are generally going to run what tourney players want to run, especially if it's an ITC event. 2000 GHB is the standard, so that's what TOs will run if they want tickets to sell. If people start asking for smaller games and those events are selling out at big name tournaments, they'll be provided as well. Most events that will be submitted will be of similar layout even without guidelines from the ITC.

And if people really are playing for those top spots, they have to go to GTs and Majors to get the points, which are pretty much always going to have the same or at least extremely similar layouts.

[Rhellion]

6 hours ago, Ryan Taylor said:

I agree I like the rankings system.  It provides competitive players something to analyze and aim for if they desire. I would love to hear the people like @Rhellion etc who compete at a high level but are not part of the system. 

 

If everyone is not in the system it does invalidate the system slightly as the number one player is not necessarily the best player in the ?US

I think rankings hurt tournament attendance as much as it helps, as it drives casuals away as people try to slaughter each other on mid and bottom tables end games for rankings points, when it means nothing in the scheme of things at the event and can lead to poor games. I speak with experience. It happened in 8th edition. I like rankings and winning as much as the next powergamer, but not at the expense of my wife's enjoyment of the hobby as a mid to lower table player at the end of the event. It has happened when rankings were here in 8th.

I also vehemently disagree with cash prizes as this year's LVO was a prime example of terrible sportsmanship in a cash prize event and a rankings system with cash prizes (40k). This year wasn't there also a 40k TO that falsified tournament results to increase his own rankings? 

I also disagree with their scoring systems being based on wins. Not battle points. They also don't include soft scores in their app? Or they recently added them, about the same time I got an email about the apps subscription service? Another reason I say no thank you.

I think everything they do is under the banner of their business, and whatever is in the best interest of their profits will have an effect on their decisions. I don't fault them for this, they are a business and they have done great work in the community. If anything it is motivation for them to want everything to succeed. Some of the things they have accomplished are amazing. I just personally disagree with it.

[Rhellion]

5 hours ago, svnvaldez said:

e heard the complaint that ITC/LVO gives cash to first place, $4000 dollars to the 40k winner. But as of today there is no cash on the line for AoS.

If you think this would not happen in the future, with all due respect I think that is delusional.

[Rhellion]

3 hours ago, Requizen said:

Having spoken to many of the TOs in the Midwest (organizers for Paca, ACon, and Meltdown), the reason they don't want to do ITC has little to nothing to do with prize support, Overall, or anything like that. They just don't like the ITC folks or anyone who does. It's a grudge from who knows when and since those are the people in charge of the bigger midwest events, that's just the way it is. 

This is untrue. Flat out.

I've been in discussion groups with Frankie, Reese, Domus, and Alex and they were respectful, cordial, and ideas were presented from both sides. Because someone doesn't like the way they run things and wants to do their own thing, trying to say they won't because they dislike the other persons is wrong.

Start your own and run it with ITC. I'll come. I went to the Michigan GT which was ITC, even though I thought the scoring and pairings were poor with Best Coast Pairings. The TO also had his own separate spreadsheet for final results which aren't reflected in the App. 

[Requizen]

38 minutes ago, Rhellion said:

This is untrue. Flat out.

I've been in discussion groups with Frankie, Reese, Domus, and Alex and they were respectful, cordial, and ideas were presented from both sides. Because someone doesn't like the way they run things and wants to do their own thing, trying to say they won't because they dislike the other persons is wrong.

Start your own and run it with ITC. I'll come. I went to the Michigan GT which was ITC, even though I thought the scoring and pairings were poor with Best Coast Pairings. The TO also had his own separate spreadsheet for final results which aren't reflected in the App. 

I'm very sorry that I've misunderstood. I've only heard some very heated opinions from you and some others a couple times and may have missed the mark. Honestly I felt bad when I had opponents telling me that they've gotten in shouting matches with you, because I feel like we've had plenty of really great conversations and you've always been nice to me when we talk shop about hobby and lists.

I truly do apologize if it seemed I was attacking anyone's character, I just have a hard time understanding this divide that seems to exist between our area and everywhere else. I want US Sigmar tournament players to feel like a community, not insular factions. That doesn't necessarily mean that we all have to adopt ITC, because for sure it's not a perfect system and there are plenty of valid arguments against it. It just feels... divisive, for lack of another word. 

I like the Midwest scene. I think it's very competitive without being ITC and I don't have any personal beef with anyone here. I was just trying to convey my experience and I'm sorry that I misrepresented you.

[Rhellion]

17 minutes ago, Requizen said:

I'm very sorry that I've misunderstood. I've only heard some very heated opinions from you and some others a couple times and may have missed the mark. Honestly I felt bad when I had opponents telling me that they've gotten in shouting matches with you, because I feel like we've had plenty of really great conversations and you've always been nice to me when we talk shop about hobby and lists.

*after discussing this comment with Zach, the person who said this to him has never actually met me, and I have spoken to them ONCE on facebook messenger. So I think they might be a crazy person.

[domus]

7 hours ago, Requizen said:

Having spoken to many of the TOs in the Midwest (organizers for Paca, ACon, and Meltdown), the reason they don't want to do ITC has little to nothing to do with prize support, Overall, or anything like that. They just don't like the ITC folks or anyone who does. It's a grudge from who knows when and since those are the people in charge of the bigger midwest events, that's just the way it is. 

Good evening.  You've chosen to call me out, I'm the TO for the Midwest Meltdown. 

I started it last year and we had about 26 players or so.  It's the only event I run so I'm hardly the guy making decisions for the Midwest.  I decide for my event.  Full stop.

This statement above from you is a flat out lie Zach.  I've explained to you personally why I chose not to adopt the ITC and you've chosen to misrepresent me.  I'd like an explanation as to why. 

My personal reasons for choosing not to adopt the ITC are as follows;
Cash prizes in 40k (*its the model, so its not if they end up in AoS but when...)
Run by a For-Profit Organization (ITC terrain packs for sale!)
BCP had no soft score support

We've all seen or heard of the debacle at the 40k ITC streamed event at the LVO.  If THAT behavior doesn't explain why I'm 100% against anything that could ever even remotely possibly turn into cash prizes then I can't make you understand. 

I've also met Reece of FLG at Adepticon and later spoken with him directly about the subject.  And we discussed it like professionals.  I chose a different path.  He accepted that and there was no ill will on either side.   We wished each other the best and went on with our lives.

Since you bring it up, I do have a grudge with one guy, and yes the ITC is involved but not at all in the way you might think.  He is someone that I considered a friend.  He was the first to bring ITC up to me and after some investigation I chose to pass and told him so, stating the same list of reasons why.  He continued to hound me about it for the following 6 months (or so) and crossed a line with me personally after refusing to accept my decision.  That was completely brought upon by his behavior and nothing to do with ITC itself.   I'd also like to point out that his behavior also was a factor resulting in him being removed from the gaming club he's been involved in for at least the 5 years since I've known him.  And that club is filled with some of the greatest men you could ask to meet.  I'm not naming him as my intention here is not to shame him.  I do feel like there is a very good chance he is influencing this narrative. 

So, for my part, my event is and likely always will be ITC free.  If asked my opinion on the subject, I will repeat what I have said on the subject from day one.  Ultimately, all I want is to be done discussing it. 

Domus
aka
James Hyde
 

[SlaaneshCultist]

I played in tourneys all over the country in 8th as well. The Midwest has always been somewhat insular from the other regions, because they tended not to travel outside their region. West Coast and Texas (especially Leadership 2 and the San Antonio and Houston gamers) had a ton of interaction, and the North East guys had some as well, but we rarely saw midwesterners out at tourneys outside their region. Not that they weren't lovely hosts when you traveled to their region. Paca was a blast and I miss going to it. (side note: I heard this year might have been the last Paca? That makes me sad.)

From what I've heard the midwest opposition to ITC can be boiled down to a few points.

1) Cash prizes: Agree 100%. I think cash prizes bring out the worst in everyone (see: drama in 40k at Nova and LVO) and would do nothing but harm to a community that is still in its early growth stages.

2) Homogenization of Events: I understand this concern.  Back when I ran Quake City Rumble, GW at one point tried to dictate the way we ran our event in order for us to be part of their tournament circuit and to receive support. I put my foot down and outright refused. Everyone should be able to run the tournament  they want to run. My understanding of the 40k scene is that the vast majority of tourneys in the country use the ITC packet, which has specific house rules/scenarios/etc. (note: this is second hand info. I don't play 40k, so I don't know this to be true first hand.)

3) Lack of Soft Scores Support: Goes hand and hand with point 2 above. My understanding is that Garrett has already or will soon implement soft into BCP. I don't know whether these scores would also be applied to your ITC rankings (like Rankings HQ was, where just your Overall placement mattered) or if ITC will remain a ranking system for Best General awards. 

4) Hyper-competitiveness: Concern that participating in a national ranking system will bring the WAAC out in players. Fair concern, but probably overstated. AoS is not 8th (which I for one am super glad about). I think the pitfalls it might fall into are different. Even at LVO, with its cutthroat lists, its 7 games, and the final and largest tourney of the ITC season, the stakes just didn't feel like they were as high in most games as they often did in 8th, and I don't see that changing any time soon. Part of that is we all have to be willing to help build the community we want. I had no problem telling my Changehost opponent after our game that I thought his list was abusive and not fun to play against, and to his credit he listened and responded thoughtfully.

Now, and this is just my thoughts on the matter, I don't see why you couldn't use BCP as the powerful tool that it is (assuming it stays free to use, which Garrett has said is his intent), and then if things change down the road (if ITC starts offering a cash prize, starts putting out their own house rules/FAQ, etc.) pull your events from the circuit at that point. Worst case scenario you'd be back where you are now.

Anyone who knows me knows that I love soft scores. I rely on my paint and my drunkenness to win things for me. So I love the hobby focused midwest events. The advantage of a national rankings system is that it can help to build a national community. It wasn't until Rankings HQ that I really got to know people from the scene outside California and Texas (we went way back from the Hillbilly Invitational days), and those relationships that we made in that time period were the most fun I ever had in 8th edition, so I'm grateful to it.

Just my thoughts. Either way, looking forward to seeing a bunch of you at ACon!

[Rhellion]

1 minute ago, SlaaneshCultist said:

 (side note: I heard this year might have been the last Paca? That makes me sad.)

They are bringing back the two day Age of Sigmar GT as the main event next year for "Waaagh!paca X: The Waaaghpacolypse"

[SlaaneshCultist]

Just now, Rhellion said:

They are bringing back the two day Age of Sigmar GT as the main event next year for "Waaagh!paca X: The Waaaghpacolypse"

Sweet! I will actually probably be moving to the Midwest (Minneapolis) around that time frame, so if I'm out there (and it hasn't sold out in 3.7 minutes) I'll try to get out to it.

[domus]

5 minutes ago, SlaaneshCultist said:

Sweet! I will actually probably be moving to the Midwest (Minneapolis) around that time frame, so if I'm out there (and it hasn't sold out in 3.7 minutes) I'll try to get out to it.

Would be great to see you there!!  Rock another awesome looking dragon!

[Warboss Gorbolg]

It would seem to me that a national ranking system would only be relevant if people traveled extensively to play others from the other coast (and in between).  Otherwise I don't see the point of a national ranking.  That just isn't feasible in a country as big as the US.  I can't imagine paying $1.5k to fly from DC to Cali (including hotel, food, etc.) to play AOS.  I imagine most simply can't afford it.  It would basically devolve into a pay-to-play system.  Flying with a Warhammer army must truly be a pain as well.

[SlaaneshCultist]

2 minutes ago, Warboss Gorbolg said:

It would seem to me that a national ranking system would only be relevant if people traveled extensively to play others from the other coast (and in between).  Otherwise I don't see the point of a national ranking.  That just isn't feasible in a country as big as the US.  I can't imagine paying $1.5k to fly from DC to Cali (including hotel, food, etc.) to play AOS.  I imagine most simply can't afford it.  It would basically devolve into a pay-to-play system.  Flying with a Warhammer army must truly be a pain as well.

It will likely end up costing me ~$800 between flight/hotel/registration/food/drinks to play in ACon this year. If you don't have a gaming group that price definitely increases significantly, as the hotel becomes exponentially more expensive.

[Thomas Lyons]

In full disclosure, I have no involvement with the organizing of events in the Midwest or South.  I simply attend events in this area, because that is where I am located.  That said, I've listened pretty closely to the various discussions and it is my understanding that the Midwest rejection can be summed up in the following set of ideas (not everyone holds all of these, but it is these constellation of concerns I continue to see crop up): 

1. People don't want to or can't go to LVO: As the culmination of each "season", LVO is where rewards for that season are granted and, if you were competing, something like this would almost force you to go to LVO.  The problem is that some people are either unable or unwilling to go to LVO, whether it be because of scheduling conflicts, cost, or conflicts with other events.  Heat 1 precedes LVO by a couple weeks.  Waaghpaca and a number of other events were on the same weekend this year.  Holy Wars is a couple weeks later.  Some folks just can't fit LVO in their travel schedules and, as the culminating event, this is a problem. 
2. Creates a negative incentive structure: As has been noted multiple times on this thread, this type of ranking system is problematic on a number of levels. It incentivizes blood thirsty play, even amongst the mid tables in the final game because of kill points. It encourages bad sportsmanship because their are prizes and titles on the line. The most recent 40k debacle demonstrates this perfectly.  It is only exacerbated when prize structures are introduced.  An old piece of wisdom suggests that if you want to know what someone is likely to do tomorrow, just look at what they did yesterday.  If you want to see how AOS will develop if successful, see how ITC has developed 40k.  Folks don't want the incentives this structure brings to their event.    
3. Standardization of format: One of the downstream consequences is that this type of incentive structure is that it can lead to event standardization.  We haven't seen this as much, but it is a fear I have heard.  Different events have very different army composition structures, rules packs and scoring weighting.  Some events like the Holy events are heavily weighted towards the hobby aspects and have very non-standard scenarios.  Other events, like Nashcon, have a multiple list format.  One legitimate critique that would inevitably be raised is that all events aren't created equal and it maybe easy to game the system for events using non-standard structures.  That is, if all events aren't using similar formats, they aren't measuring comparable things.  It is this reality that I suspect generates a fear of pressure for standardization, and I think TOs don't want to be told how to run their events. 
4. Penalization for events that don't use it/smaller: Another downstream consequence of the structure is that it inherently penalizes events that either don't use it or are smaller.  Its already been said here in this thread that people don't come to midwest events because they aren't ITC/using BCP.  As more events use it, people will self select out of events that are either not using that app, or are smaller, since smaller events are weighed less in the app.  This incentive structure thus rewards players for attending larger events (and those using the app), and starves smaller events, thus creating an (un)virtuous circle where more and more events are forced into using the app/structure.  This inevitably leads to the next concern...
5. Centralization of power/control into questionable hands: I've heard not from a few people the concern that ITC is ran by a for profit business.  They are invested in building the community because it helps their bottom line.  But what happens when the best thing for their bottom line isn't the best thing for the community?  They're a business and they're going to do what benefits their business and their bottom line.  This structure arguably cedes lots of power into hands folks aren't sure are trust worthy, especially if there is standardization pressure.  A related but separate consequence of this is also the implicit monetization of the community that follows.  
6. Monetization of the community: As a business, they're in this to make money.  The introduction of official, standardized ITC terrain sets is evidence that they're very interested in monetizing this system.  What happens if and when BCP's subscription fee is no longer optional?  The reality is that these structures are ultimately ceding control of the community  event structure to a business  and they will functionally have a monopoly to do as they see fit.   Now, this may never happen.  But it could, and if it did, the community would have very little recourse but to creating a competing free infrastructure against a competitor with capital and years of experience.  

Again, these are what I've heard.  Some of these concerns are well founded.  Others seem like crazy conspiracy talk.  But these are the concerns I've heard.

 

[SlaaneshCultist]

10 minutes ago, domus said:

Would be great to see you there!!  Rock another awesome looking dragon!

I keep wanting to put my Malekith and his followers on round bases, but I refuse to work on an army that hasn't had a proper AoS release. Pretty much done with my Khorne, next army is Daughters of Khaine, for sure.

[Requizen]

31 minutes ago, domus said:

Good evening.  You've chosen to call me out, I'm the TO for the Midwest Meltdown. 
 

 

Hey Domus, I already apologized above for misrepresenting people who aren't myself and I am further sorry for not remembering that short conversation we had a while ago. I did not mean to put words in people's mouths, only to give my limited experience which was obviously only partial at best. 

36 minutes ago, domus said:

My personal reasons for choosing not to adopt the ITC are as follows;
Cash prizes in 40k (*its the model, so its not if they end up in AoS but when...)
Run by a For-Profit Organization (ITC terrain packs for sale!)
BCP had no soft score support

We've all seen or heard of the debacle at the 40k ITC streamed event at the LVO.  If THAT behavior doesn't explain why I'm 100% against anything that could ever even remotely possibly turn into cash prizes then I can't make you understand. 

I can't say I agree with your reasonings but I do agree it's not necessary to agree in order to respect one another. I do think that the lack of sportsmanship shown in the 40k event could happen at any event where there's a lot of glory on the line, certain people will be WAAC over things that aren't money. However I do see the point that potential money makes it more prominent, no one would doubt that.

As I said, I don't think ITC is the end all be all, I just don't want divisiveness and regional "locking" that seems to exist right now. ITC might be the solution, it might not be, and we can agree to disagree on that front. 

[Sleboda]

2 hours ago, domus said:

  If THAT behavior doesn't explain why I'm 100% against anything that could ever even remotely possibly turn into cash prizes then I can't make you understand. 

Testify.

Cash prizes for a game where imprecision and rules debates are the norm? Lunacy.

Also,  hello you sexy beast. ?

[domus]

8 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Testify.

Cash prizes for a game where imprecision and rules debated are the norm? Lunacy.

Also,  hello you sexy beast. ?

Hey there right back at ya my man!  Hope you are well. 

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, SlaaneshCultist said:

I rely on my paint and my drunkenness to win things for me

Nagash bless you, brother mine.  

[Kirjava13]

Well gosh-golly, this all sounds very dramatic.