Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Deadkitten

Competitive Event Game Concessions

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, stato said:

The point with this is, you assume everyone there is only there to be competitive.  If people who just wanted to play for fun didnt go to these events you would have half the attendance and probabaly less events to play at as a result.

If im playing someone who's sole goal is to win, then i dont mind conceeding.  If im playing someone who wants to win and is also having fun with it/me, then ill keep playing.

Also, events that use Kill points as secondaries are rapidly vanishing (in the UK it seems anyway), they were never great and secondary objectives are generally the preferred approach now.

They kind of need to go... The last tournament I played, the ruling was that summoned units counted toward the total. It was a massive advantage to players that didn't have summoning, but could farm players that did...

 

Besides, it's a hold-over from the 40k tourney scene, and those guys can be pretty poisonous.

Edited by Waiyuren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Waiyuren said:

They kind of need to go... The last tournament I played, the ruling was that summoned units counted toward the total. It was a massive advantage to players that didn't have summoning, but could farm players that did...

 

Besides, it's a hold-over from the 40k tourney scene, and those guys can be pretty poisonous.

That’s not a judges ruling, that is the core rules. 

 

Edit. I was wrong. 

Edited by The Jabber Tzeentch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd never concede because I'm losing.  Even from a purely competitive mindset, playing while at a massive disadvantage is still excellent practice for honing your gameplay skills.

I'd very quickly concede a game for sportsmanship reasons.  It's never come up, but I'd concede at the drop of a hat when faced with very bad sportsmanship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats the offset for being able to summon in bonus points.  It gives your opponent a higher score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

That’s not a judges ruling, that is the core rules. 

Page and paragraph please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Thats the offset for being able to summon in bonus points.  It gives your opponent a higher score.

In armies where that ability is factored into the points cost of units, it's a penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're playing normal Matched Play, the Glorious Victory section of the first couple of battleplans I randomly flipped to say "...each player adds up the points value of any enemy units that have been destroyed during the battle (excluding any new units that were added to the armies after the battle started)."

Pretty clear, in vanilla AoS summoned units don't count toward tie breakers, when you are just using Major/Minor victory to declare a winner.

However, the second you are doing anything other than simply deciding major/minor victory in a single game, it's house rules already.  If you apply different weighting to different types of victories to decide an overall winner, or track any kind of tie-breaker across multiple games, it's all made up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Waiyuren said:

Page and paragraph please?

Actually I am wrong and I apologise. You exclusively do not add points for summoned units. 

4875D8A4-1DBA-4A63-A845-4433FC24FF95.jpeg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Waiyuren said:

In armies where that ability is factored into the points cost of units, it's a penalty.

I have never seen any confirmation that units were raised in cost artificially because they can be summoned.  Where was that covered by the dev team?

From my spreadsheeting, the units that summon are usually either costed as if it didn't matter, or even are undercost.

Edited by Dead Scribe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

however continuing to play will effect the ranking in some way then you really should play it out.  So let's say a tournament is using Kill Points as a decider and continuing to play will result in you possibly gaining some and preventing your opponent getting a full 2000, then play to the end

This.

It's a point often overlooked. At a tournament, it's not just about you. Your result impacts not only you and your opponent, but the result for all other players.

It's why I have a hard time with players who enter tournaments for the lulz or with suboptimal lists. They are messing with everyone else there. 

Never, ever concede in a tournament. Ever. You owe it to every single other player there to give it your all to the end. 

 

I also believe anyone who quits the event if it becomes clear they cannot "win anything" or who does not hang around for the awards ceremony to support and applaud the winners should not be asked back for the next event. It's about as bad as it gets in terms of sportsmanship, about as selfish as it gets, about as anti-community as it gets to leave early.

Edited by Sleboda
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Jabber Tzeentch said:

Actually I am wrong and I apologise. You exclusively do not add points for summoned units. 

4875D8A4-1DBA-4A63-A845-4433FC24FF95.jpeg

 

Like I said, the only application for this is for a single match - the leader in objective points wins a major victory, if objective points are tied then the winner of what are colloquially called "kill points", not including summoned units, wins a minor victory.

If an event tracks anything other than major and minor victories, they are already making up house rules.  If they track "kill points" across a series of games to use as an overall tie breaker, whether or not including summoned units, it is all made up house rules.  You could prefer one set of house rules to the other, but they are still both house rules.  The core game doesn't include any rules for events - literally every event ever uses house rules for determining winners.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

I have never seen any confirmation that units were raised in cost artificially because they can be summoned.  Where was that covered by the dev team?

From my spreadsheeting, the units that summon are usually either costed as if it didn't matter, or even are undercost.

Specifically? Pink horrors doubling in cost.

They are costed with the idea that you will get at least 50% of the "split"/"split again" mechanic to fire, but player skill/army match-up factors into whether you will at all. 😅

Raw points data is nice, but it isn't going to tell you how likely it is you will be able to even place a new unit... 

If you do however, and the TO is running the scoring I mentioned, those 200pts are worth 370 to your opponent, and you have to gift your opponent the initial 200 to have access to the rest in order to play them... I can understand killpoints in 40k where the reinforcements rule still exists, but in AoS? Secondaries are a vastly more honest measure of player ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saying that things like skeletons and the like are already undercost so there doesn't appear to be any way that the designers made them overcost to compensate for them being recycled like they can be.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with most situations it depends. With my KO last year at adepticon this applied to most of my matches. I only conceded once in a match where I had one man alive facing down a star drake and some judicators. I generally attempt to play the game to its entirety, but if all I have to work with is a crater where my men were once standing it's time to throw in the towel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never been in a game where a player conceded, but I have been in games where say, my 40 block of skeletons was making 70+ attacks into a unit of wych aelves and my opponent decided to save us time by removing his unit. The only real toxic thing I've experienced is when a game takes to long and the players argue over how to settle round 3 by assuming averages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SwampHeart said:

It basically is 'my opponent beat me so I'm going to punish them for winning' - I don't consider it poor sportsmanship and I've never received poor sportsmanship scores as a result of it. I'm still going to be the same generally nice and convivial guy that I always am, but I am going to attempt to block your efforts to take a podium spot. 

Holy ****** this made me realize, does this include kiting?  If you know you're beat on VPs and you're almost tabled, can you retreat and force the enemy to chase after you?  Has this ever been a part of your "make em work for it" strat?  I have the hilarious mental image of a Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-Charger flying around the board to deny your enemy the kill points for the last two turns haha

Edited by relic456
Profanity filter makes it look worse than it is!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, relic456 said:

Holy ****** this made me realize, does this include kiting?  If you know you're beat on VPs and you're almost tabled, can you retreat and force the enemy to chase after you?  Has this ever been a part of your "make em work for it" strat?  I have the hilarious mental image of a Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-Charger flying around the board to deny your enemy the kill points for the last two turns haha

Absolutely - if I can deny VP by not engaging I absolutely will. Again I'm never going to make it easy on my opponent, win, lose or draw. I've done the same thing when winning - fall back with characters, deny opportunities for combat, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

Absolutely - if I can deny VP by not engaging I absolutely will. Again I'm never going to make it easy on my opponent, win, lose or draw. I've done the same thing when winning - fall back with characters, deny opportunities for combat, etc. 

There should be an award for least kill points conceded whilst losing the major.

Edited by The Jabber Tzeentch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually thought this thread was about what food and drink you could buy at tournaments.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sleboda said:

This.

It's a point often overlooked. At a tournament, it's not just about you. Your result impacts not only you and your opponent, but the result for all other players.

It's why I have a hard time with players who enter tournaments for the lulz or with suboptimal lists. They are messing with everyone else there. 

Never, ever concede in a tournament. Ever. You owe it to every single other player there to give it your all to the end. 

 

I also believe anyone who quits the event if it becomes clear they cannot "win anything" or who does not hang around for the awards ceremony to support and applaud the winners should not be asked back for the next event. It's about as bad as it gets in terms of sportsmanship, about as selfish as it gets, about as anti-community as it gets to leave early.

Joe I agree with much of what you've said but I'll take issue with calling out  those who are at tournaments for the 'luz' (fun of it I'm assuming) or with suboptimal lists.  There are lots of reasons folks come to events and lots of awards they are competing for.  I've definitely show up to events with an army I know isn't that hard but I think gives me the best chance of a painting award because I've hit on a painting and converting theme that I think is just awesome.  I've also consciously chosen not to field 'broken' choices from a book that had a reputation as game breakingly unbalanced (Daemons of chaos in 7th ed)  because I think it didn't give the kind of games I wanted to have with my opponents.   

There should be room for all of that in competitive events.   And there is room for the player who has a certain set of models and doesn't have the time or money to optimize their list for the changes in the meta or with the most recent army book release.  

I absolutely agree play hard to the wire and recognize your results effect the placings for the whole room not just your own.  But I don't think you have to play 'hard core competitive' lists to be a responsible tournament goer.     If we only had those folks in the room we'd have much smaller events.   

Most importantly try and 'give good game' competitive,  polite, pleasant, and nice to look at armies.   We're all going to have variance on how well we do with each of those by virtue of our personal skills but we can give it a good shot.  

 

 

Edited by gjnoronh
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sleboda said:

It's why I have a hard time with players who enter tournaments for the lulz or with suboptimal lists. They are messing with everyone else there. 

I somewhat agree which is why I have absolutely no interest in attending any of the big events. I go to my local stores small monthly tournaments where I know that most of those people are not taking things too seriously. I usually take whatever I feel like and have fun playing different people than normal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a chess player I have no problems conceding. 
I've been resigning lost games for years!

I don't find kill points philosophically justifiable which factors into my opinion here.

If a game is lost and secondaries are available, I'll usually tell the opponent I'm resigning and ask if they want me to continue if they still have secondaries available to go after.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, gjnoronh said:

I also believe anyone who quits the event if it becomes clear they cannot "win anything" or who does not hang around for the awards ceremony to support and applaud the winners should not be asked back for the next event. It's about as bad as it gets in terms of sportsmanship, about as selfish as it gets, about as anti-community as it gets to leave early.

It's also good not to judge people in these situations.  Once my appendix got inflamed so I dropped from a tournament and got shade thrown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tolstedt said:

It's also good not to judge people in these situations.  Once my appendix got inflamed so I dropped from a tournament and got shade thrown.

Hey man just to be clear _I_ didn't say that.  I was quoting someone else.  Please fix post.  While I love Sleboda his opinions are his own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...