Terrain usage and placement at tournaments

[Arkiham]

ben johnson is the lead? project developer for age of sigmar.

the boss, the person who chooses the direction the game heads towards and how it should be played ( this is my understanding of his job and is probably incorrect )

so if hes bringing alot of line of sight blocking terrain, surely he thinks that this is how it should be played and has naturally designed the game to be played like that? 

 

so who is in the wrong? people who bring next to no LoS blocking terrain or the ones who bring a fair bit ?

ive tried to raise the issue about peoples lack of decent terrain for years.

its quite frankly embarrassing alot of the time, you look at photos of peoples games and you may as well not bother at all, as it has little to no effect on the battlefield at all so why bother? look at the pictures 

 

 

where is the LoS blocking terrain? where is the forced bottle necks? where is the impassable terrain?

in these pictures the terrain (other than that one house the size of a dwarf ) is doing literally nothing. 

something for people to think about - instead of dropping £300 on that next new army. buy some better terrain, and actually make your games more interesting. 

i dont want to dump on To's as i know its a hard job and its alot of effort and cost to provide for tournaments so any reading this please take no offence

but moaning at a guy for bringing some decent terrain is shocking, instead of moaning at him for bringing decent terrain, how about you use that effort and up your own game and bring some

[Tropical Ghost General]

5 minutes ago, Screwface said:

Just as a hypothetical, what would the conversation be like if Ben Johnson had lost the one game where the opponent insisted on generic terrain?

I imagine it wouldn't be happening, as he wouldn't have won the tournament. 

When a player wins with a list that defies the meta (which as a fellow ghost general, Ben's list is not the norm, it's one that not many players would be able to use very well to any positive effect), there is normally a post game analysis, trying to see if there was any 'foul play' a foot or if something was allowed to happen that maybe shouldn't have happened. But as all of his opponents have stated (as far as I'm aware), the scenery didn't provide any advantage and instead added a much deeper immersive element to the games.

A lot of players I imagine are looking at Ben's list and scratching their heads, wondering how it was able to not only win, but table the opponent in all 5 games, but he is a very good player, and that is what this has ultimately come down to.

Also ghosts are a relatively new army, not many people have had a chance to play them, so the usual counters and stuff that most people know about armies don't even really exist yet. Given more time, when more people play more games against more ghost lists, you'll see less top rank spots (at least imo). I haven't had the chance to play against all the different factions yet in AoS, but 95% of the time, when I face a faction I've not faced before I lose, as you have no idea how the mechanics work in the flesh, rather than trying to guess from looking at warscrolls and stuff. I believe this element had a bit to play in how well his list did.

[Dead Scribe]

My opinion is that this is a strong NO.  Players should in no way touch the terrain or be able to provide their own terrain for a tournament.  I've never ever even heard that this could even be a thing until recently in that other thread.  

It is true that terrain is largely ornamental in AOS.  I don't have an opinion on that either way.  If the majors started using more terrain then I would play with more terrain.  As it is, the majors all largely have very little terrain (like showed above is a typical table that I play on in tournaments) and thats how I prefer to play simply to keep my practice games reflective of my for-real tournament games.

[Gaz Taylor]

33 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

My opinion is that this is a strong NO.  Players should in no way touch the terrain or be able to provide their own terrain for a tournament.  I've never ever even heard that this could even be a thing until recently in that other thread.  

Never ever going to happen unless you have someway of fixing the Terrain to the boards. Every event I have been to that uses some sort of terrain (been going for around twenty years), things get moved. Usually because somebody is putting their army case on the board to set up their army or it's been moved to make place for something else (such as a drink, army book, dice, etc). Sometimes it happens because somebody has been playing the same board for a few games and it gets moved around to make it more interesting.

I can not think of any way to stop this apart from fixing the terrain to the boards. A Tournament Organiser usually has enough stuff to do and I think the last thing they want to be doing is rushing around making sure all the boards are okay. 

Just for reference, I'm UK based and all events I have been to are in UK. These have been events at local stores, run by gaming clubs and experienced event organisers as well as events at Warhammer World.  

[chord]

1 hour ago, Arkiham said:

ben johnson is the lead? project developer for age of sigmar.

the boss, the person who chooses the direction the game heads towards and how it should be played ( this is my understanding of his job and is probably incorrect )p your own game and bring some

Wait?  The guy who makes the rules plays competitively at tournaments?  ?

 

[Dead Scribe]

7 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

Never ever going to happen unless you have someway of fixing the Terrain to the boards. Every event I have been to that uses some sort of terrain (been going for around twenty years), things get moved. Usually because somebody is putting their army case on the board to set up their army or it's been moved to make place for something else (such as a drink, army book, dice, etc). Sometimes it happens because somebody has been playing the same board for a few games and it gets moved around to make it more interesting.

I can not think of any way to stop this apart from fixing the terrain to the boards. A Tournament Organiser usually has enough stuff to do and I think the last thing they want to be doing is rushing around making sure all the boards are okay. 

Just for reference, I'm UK based and all events I have been to are in UK. These have been events at local stores, run by gaming clubs and experienced event organisers as well as events at Warhammer World.  

I was referring mainly to players being able to before the game starts move terrain around.  Terrain will get jostled a little bit accidentally, and I think that that is reasonable.  

[Gaz Taylor]

13 minutes ago, chord said:

Wait?  The guy who makes the rules plays competitively at tournaments?  ?

Yes. He's been doing it for probably twenty years as well and is well known on the UK scene. Very nice guy and great fun to have a game with. He is Mr Warhammer and I can not think of a better person to be managing the game. 

 

11 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

I was referring mainly to players being able to before the game starts move terrain around.  Terrain will get jostled a little bit accidentally, and I think that that is reasonable.  

But again, it does happen. I've seen it or done it myself. Sometimes the board just looks dull or things have been moved around from the previous game. In these cases, you chat with your opponent and agree on what you want to do. 

[Dead Scribe]

I've just never seen that kind of thing done over here.  I suppose thats just a cultural difference between american tournaments and UK tournaments.

[ClockworkGeo91]

34 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

In these cases, you chat with your opponent and agree on what you want to do. 

I think this is the biggest take away point - talking over what you are both happy with is, ultimately, the most important part when it comes to setting up the board. If you are unhappy with the way the board is, just speak up and have a hand in how it should look.

[Marucho]

Absolutely weird if a player wants to play all of his tournament games on his home-board set up.

 

[SpiritofHokuto]

8 minutes ago, ClockworkGeo91 said:

I think this is the biggest take away point - talking over what you are both happy with is, ultimately, the most important part when it comes to setting up the board. If you are unhappy with the way the board is, just speak up and have a hand in how it should look.

It's all very well to say that, but to put it into practice is another thing entirely. Especially with the time sensitive nature of tournaments, going up against people who are vying for the top spots and the fact that this hobby has more than its fair share of people with social anxiety/awkwardness/overly accommodating. If said things were succinctly codified in the tournament pack beforehand then a lot of that social pressure would be alleviated.  As @Sleboda previously stated most people don't want to "rock the boat" and become known as "that awkward guy", but if it's set out plainly ahead of time then this becomes much less of an issue.    

[ClockworkGeo91]

1 minute ago, SpiritofHokuto said:

It's all very well to say that, but to put it into practice is another thing entirely. Especially with the time sensitive nature of tournaments, going up against people who are vying for the top spots and the fact that this hobby has more than its fair share of people with with social anxiety/awkwardness/overly accommodating. If said thing things were succinctly codified in the tournament pack beforehand then a lot of that social pressure would be alleviated.  As @Sleboda previously stated most people don't want to "rock the boat" and become known as "that awkward guy", but if it's set out plainly ahead of time then this becomes much less of an issue.    

I don't think you are really 'rocking the boat' if you discuss openly what you expect from a game board. In all honesty too much is being made of this social anxiety concept for game board lay out, and its fairly assumptive making out that people can't speak up for themselves. You can't agree to something (i.e. the lay out of terrain) before a game and then complain that you didn't want to cause a fuss, and that you somehow lost because you were pressured into placing a LoS blocking tower in the middle.

If you don't like the board lay out, but you agree to it. Not really sure what else there is to be said.

I don't think the answer is we have to set out a universal competitive practice that the boards are predetermined etc, all so no one feels awkward because they have to ask for the board to be reorganised. 

[Dead Scribe]

This is a hobby that by and large is full of fellows that aren't really into confrontation or debating or arguing if they don't have to.  Leaving it up to a discussion between opponents often simply becomes the overbearing one will have his way with the fellow that doesn't want to argue or debate so will just give it a pass, and then be angry about it inwardly.  Or even if someone is perfectly nice and not overbearing, if they are a celebrity of sorts there will generally be a disposition to not argue with them even if one disagrees with them.

I prefer rules that take things out of the hands of debate or talking it over with my opponent as it pertains to tournament games.  I don't want to talk to my opponent about what is or isn't fair at the tournament table, because people are self-serving and things tend to be fairest when they benefit the individual, and that leads to problems later.

[Paul Buckler]

I do find this whole discussion a bit weird tbh.  Having played the UK tournament scene from the start, this just seems 'normal'.  SCGT has always had bring your own terrain, historiclaly the biggest event on the Calendar.  (before @Ben says it, yep Blood and Glory is gonna be fighting hard and maybe eclipsing them) Guys have brought whole display boards etc to play on, Steve Footes Endless Deserts was a joy.

Honestly if someone turned up trying to exploit anything with scenery etc the UK TO's are so good it would just be stopped ASAP,  before it became a 'thing'.

Custom terrain for your army should def be encouraged, it just enhances the appearance so much. 

Its just not how AOS plays in the UK, the community is so good that people don't even try to push the boundries with stuff like that.

 

[Dead Scribe]

In the states people would be doing more than pushing boundaries with custom terrain lol.  

[Paul Buckler]

Def a whole different gaming culture here in the UK I think. 

[Arkiham]

1 hour ago, chord said:

Wait?  The guy who makes the rules plays competitively at tournaments?  ?

 

nothing new. happens all over the place in other industries

Typically they arent as good as non employees as they cannot devote their time to being hyper good at 1 strategy 

[Drib]

5 minutes ago, Paul Buckler said:

I do find this whole discussion a bit weird tbh.  Having played the UK tournament scene from the start, this just seems 'normal'.  SCGT has always had bring your own terrain, historiclaly the biggest event on the Calendar.  (before @Ben says it, yep Blood and Glory is gonna be fighting hard and maybe eclipsing them) Guys have brought whole display boards etc to play on, Steve Footes Endless Deserts was a joy.

Honestly if someone turned up trying to exploit anything with scenery etc the UK TO's are so good it would just be stopped ASAP,  before it became a 'thing'.

Custom terrain for your army should def be encouraged, it just enhances the appearance so much. 

Its just not how AOS plays in the UK, the community is so good that people don't even try to push the boundries with stuff like that.

 

The main difference to SCGT is that EVERY player has to bring terrain, not one or two, but every single one of them. If it is preset by the TO you should not be allowed to use your own to ensure that everyone has the same experience and chances in this competitive setting.

[relic456]

I'm definitely coming from a place of ignorance, since I'm still very new to AoS (and wargaming in general) but I too was pretty shocked when I read about a tournament player being able to set up their own terrain layouts every game.  I would think in a tournament setting it would be easiest to divide the 6  2x2 areas of the board between the players after you figure out your battleplan.  Each player would get an even amount of terrain and would alternate set up, with a minimum of 1 or 2 pieces per 2x2 area.  I figured that would be the most fair and also adds terrain set up as a part of the game's skill cap?  I could be way off base though!

[Marucho]

1 hour ago, Paul Buckler said:

Def a whole different gaming culture here in the UK I think. 

I don't think so. But an all flying terrain ignoring army's just pushing the issue a little more further.

[Spears]

Without having attended aos events, why does the terrain follow its owner? Is it just a damage/loss thing?

[Gaz Taylor]

Just now, Spears said:

Without having attended aos events, why does the terrain follow its owner? Is it just a damage/loss thing?

Going off my experiences in the UK, it's very simply it's your Terrain so it goes with you. I have been to events where terrain stays on the table but I think players like to have their terrain go around with them.  

1 hour ago, Dead Scribe said:

This is a hobby that by and large is full of fellows that aren't really into confrontation or debating or arguing if they don't have to.  Leaving it up to a discussion between opponents often simply becomes the overbearing one will have his way with the fellow that doesn't want to argue or debate so will just give it a pass, and then be angry about it inwardly.  Or even if someone is perfectly nice and not overbearing, if they are a celebrity of sorts there will generally be a disposition to not argue with them even if one disagrees with them.

Going off my experiences I'm going to say no to this. Wargaming is a social hobby and you need to spend some portion of the time playing the game talking with your opponent and agreeing upon the ground rules that you want to use during the game. Think of them as the unoffical/undocumented/house rules. This can be things such as what happens if the dice roll off the table (do they count or not) to what each terrain piece counts as. For example, there is a ruin piece of terrain on the board, so how does that count for line of sight? Do you treat it as true or do you count anything on the ground floor as blocking this?

I suspect this is a cultural thing as in UK we tend to operate very much with these types of discussions in every game and most players know these 'rules'. (Either through club games or buy quickly learning at an event).

37 minutes ago, relic456 said:

I'm definitely coming from a place of ignorance, since I'm still very new to AoS (and wargaming in general) but I too was pretty shocked when I read about a tournament player being able to set up their own terrain layouts every game.  I would think in a tournament setting it would be easiest to divide the 6  2x2 areas of the board between the players after you figure out your battleplan.  Each player would get an even amount of terrain and would alternate set up, with a minimum of 1 or 2 pieces per 2x2 area.  I figured that would be the most fair and also adds terrain set up as a part of the game's skill cap?  I could be way off base though!

That is one way of doing it. All events tend to have their own way of setting up terrain and this is usually documented in the event rules pack. 

 

[Mephisto]

2 hours ago, SpiritofHokuto said:

It's all very well to say that, but to put it into practice is another thing entirely. Especially with the time sensitive nature of tournaments, going up against people who are vying for the top spots and the fact that this hobby has more than its fair share of people with social anxiety/awkwardness/overly accommodating. If said things were succinctly codified in the tournament pack beforehand then a lot of that social pressure would be alleviated.  As @Sleboda previously stated most people don't want to "rock the boat" and become known as "that awkward guy", but if it's set out plainly ahead of time then this becomes much less of an issue.    

There are many reasons players are accommodating even against their better interests. You and @sleboda list a few good ones and I really do think it's a factor.

I just placed 3rd at the Gen Con AOS tournament this last week. I have NEVER been accused of lacking self-confidence in my life nor have the words "socially awkward" been used to describe me. I majored in English-Lit, had professional communications courses, managed a book store, worked troubleshooting with tablets and cell phones, and was in debate. To this day I GM/DM one shots at massive events for strangers, shoutcast eSport tournaments, and stream.  But something happens to me when I play competitively. I take the "ambassador of the game" approach and this usually results in "deferring to my opponent." 

If you bring up a rule on these very forums and are wrong, I will debate you (in a reasonable manner, I hope). If you bring up that same rule at the table during a tournament, I will defer to you just to keep the game moving. "Oh, I think it's like this but I'll let you play it how you want." Competitive play can be intimidating and people make mistakes. I'm not so obsessed with winning it stops me from being accommodating and an ambassador of the game.  

As an example, a player I JUST played against at said tournament would set a wound die near his multiple wound models in a unit and not near the specific model. I did the next wound to take a model off and I saw him take from the end opposite where he placed the die. I pointed it out. "Didn't you have your wound die on that one?" (I tend to phrase my disputes as questions. It gives my opponents the opportunity to realize the mistake for themselves without me assuming they're just angleshooting for an advantage). This guy explained "oh, it's just an old habit. I've always done it that way because [reasons]..." What he did, especially with new coherency rules, was a distinct advantage. I corrected the behavior but let him take a model off where he wanted instead of being super insistent. Then he continued to do it. I had a choice going forward. Fight him and "roll off" to let him get away with a rule I know he keeps doing wrong or slow down the pace of the game entirely and call the TO over. Even disregarding the fact that sports score exists, it is a big inconvenience to get a TO involved at a twenty person tournament, let alone nearly 100 person tournament. If a person walks up to me with sweet looking terrain I might just say "yeah!" to be nice knowing full-well they could get an advantage. Players can easily levy the particularly nebulous rules in AOS against you and have convenient scapegoats of "the hobby" or "being a nice guy" as fall backs. I'm not saying people that hobby or are nice do this. I'm saying, you have no way of distinguishing "oh, I didn't know" nice guy from cheater who acts nice and claims they didn't know. The onus of enforcement is too much on the player in AOS and too little on the rules of the game and this causes a lack of parity in enforcement. That lack of parity is at its height concerning things like Terrain. 

I have an entire separate rant on what it takes to be the best player in a game. That you're constantly pushing the rules to their limits in addition to possessing the excellence of execution. I'd talk about how Tomoharu Saito was unquestionably the best player in MTG for a time. That he was the best and he also slow-played his opponents. How frustrating a position you are in to try to call out someone who is unquestionably the best (and friendly) and so on... but I digress because I really don't think that's what happened at Black Out.

My initial point remains. There are a multitude of reasons players just default to saying yes to their opponent in AOS. From social awkwardness to a fear of sports score to simply wanting to be nice. When rules are nebulous or unenforced or deferred to player judgement for enforcement, problems are more likely to occur. Bringing your own terrain is a real easy place to get an advantage - intended or not. I prefer when the TO sets the terrain. Some tournaments require you to bring your own terrain. I don't think you should play with your terrain on your table or the TO should set it ahead of time to avoid any conflicts of interest. 

[ClockworkGeo91]

13 minutes ago, Mephisto said:

There are many reasons players are accommodating even against their better interests. You and @sleboda list a few good ones and I really do think it's a factor.

My initial point remains. There are a multitude of reasons players just default to saying yes to their opponent in AOS. From social awkwardness to a fear of sports score to simply wanting to be nice. When rules are nebulous or unenforced or deferred to player judgement for enforcement, problems are more likely to occur. Bringing your own terrain is a real easy place to get an advantage - intended or not. I prefer when the TO sets the terrain. Some tournaments require you to bring your own terrain. I don't think you should play with your terrain on your table or the TO should set it ahead of time to avoid any conflicts of interest. 

This has been the argument throughout three threads now and again I don't see why this can be seen to be a strong  argument. Way too much thought and discussion is going into this, just so people don't need to say a simple word; no. 

You cannot agree to something, nod your head and give a thumbs up to something and then complain after the fact that you lost due to a factor which you agreed to.

Part of the game, should be talking with your opponent and agreeing to a format and table you are both comfortable with. 

26 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

 Wargaming is a social hobby and you need to spend some portion of the time playing the game talking with your opponent and agreeing upon the ground rules that you want to use during the game. Think of them as the unoffical/undocumented/house rules. This can be things such as what happens if the dice roll off the table (do they count or not) to what each terrain piece counts as. For example, there is a ruin piece of terrain on the board, so how does that count for line of sight? Do you treat it as true or do you count anything on the ground floor as blocking this?

 

I am more in agreeing with @Gaz Taylor. as he says above part of the game is agreeing on the terms. No one forces you into any game or terrain. A positive action, the agreement to the opponent's suggestions, has taken place. Do we really need a TO to set the board for us, because it's 'awkward' to say something? Discuss the rules and if you agree to something, don't then blame 'social pressure' for not having spoken. 

[relic456]

Does saying "no" have a chance of impacting my chances at getting a good sport vote?  Do I have to balance the potential advantage an opponent is asking for with them potentially docking me points? Still trying to wrap my head around what a competitive AoS tournament looks like in practice, so I might be misunderstanding the sportsmanship score side of things.  I checked the Blackout tournament pack but it wasn't clear how it worked.