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

SlaaneshCultist

Members
  • Content Count

    88
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SlaaneshCultist

  1. I think Sam just doesn't like it being called "Overall".
  2. There are ways to game any system, and yes "soft scores" are subjective. But in 15+ years of going to tournaments, the ones that have prioritized fun over winning via the use of soft scores have always been (shocker) the ones that have been the most fun to attend. At least for me, and, I think, for a pretty large segment of the player base.
  3. I've never understood this preference. I know that players like you are out to win best battle (or best general, or whatever you'd like to call it). Does having an award that acknowledges the player who best combined all three pillars of the hobby somehow lessen your achievement Sam? You are right though, that there is no "correct" answer and that it boils down to the direction the TO would like their tournament to go.
  4. The standard, back in the day, was to ask everyone if they had painted their own models, and if they had not they were not in the running for best painted. Also, I think you'd be surprised by the levels between the top painted armies at a tournament and those who contracted out their paint. Very rarely are those contracted armies in the top few places for paint, in part because to reach the level of attention and detail that the top hobbyists lovingly apply to their models would be prohibitively expensive for most people to get on a full army. That being said, because of the way Adepticon's paint scoring worked I'm sure there were a few armies that had been contracted who got max paint scores.
  5. Awesome! I'm glad you had fun. KO, in my experience, are win big/lose big armies. A little bit of luck and it probably could have gone the other way for you! But it's always valuable to learn from and build on your experiences. Are you doing any other tourneys this year? I'm doing Nashcon in June and Socal Open in October.
  6. I have specifically and repeatedly said I like Joe as a person. However the shenanigans with the chicken on the balewind are clearly exploitative, and a blatant example of bad sportsmanship. I won't get into the discussion of whether or not the list you take is an extension of your sportsmanship, or whether it is time to bring back the comp score, as this is not the place for it. But I will say that when every major tournament in the past year and a half has been won by either change host or vanguard wing there is something unbalanced beyond the standard deviation, and that bringing one of those lists to a tournament and winning, or placing high in ITC rankings (something I know Joe is super proud of) with one of those lists, does nothing to prove your actual skill as a player, and doesn't give me a good impression of your interest in your opponent's enjoyment.
  7. That is a broad assumption, and having been a rules judge at major events in the past I can tell you that has not been my experience. Most questions asked of rules judges are questions that the players have made an honest attempt to answer, which is why they are calling a judge. This is especially true at tournaments that have a sportsmanship score, as no one wants to be perceived as the guy who calls a judge unnecessarily at the drop of a hat Also, your rules judges should know the game well enough so that on the few occasions those easy questions come up they can answer them without having to look anything up, at which point, if nothing else, it saves both players time and allows them to get on to the fun of playing faster. if you can't answer the easy questions about the game quickly and easily, than I reiterate my point about not being ready for prime-time.
  8. I agree with you entirely here. If players are approaching a rules judge it is because they couldn't come to an equitable decision with regards to a rule question themselves. A TO needs to be ready to make a ruling. If you aren't ready to be a rules judge yourself (or have a reliable rules judge staff) you're not ready for prime time. Back in the height of the QCR days, at around 120 players, we had 4 rules judges walking around at all times, each with a binder with all the FAQs in them, and each well versed in the game and its nuances. The Adepticon tournament should really have something similar. It's both the largest and one of the most prestigious tournaments in the country. Answering a rules questions with "what do the rules say?" is bush league, not to mention condescending and kinda rude.
  9. Thanks! Did you have fun? As long as you did that matters a hell of a lot more than any individual placing, as far as I'm concerned.
  10. Yeah, I think the standard competitive list will be based around a ton of witches/sisters. Which makes sense, because they are spectacular for their points. I also think that the most competitive builds will not have Morathi in them. My list will not have a single witch or sister of slaughter.
  11. Haha! I'm the opposite. It takes me like 1-2 years to paint an army to completion (I actually started my khorne stuff when AoS first came out, but the vast majority of the work was done over the course of a year) and I play them obsessively while I work on them. Where are you located Ryan? Being able to have a weekly game date, as well as having a buddy who comes over every week for a painting day, really helps keep the motivation high. Daughters of Khaine is next for me, with a shadow patrol based list that should be VERY different from what most people will end up playing.
  12. Thanks! I'm always a little iffy on full painting required, only because a couple of the best hobbyists I've ever known got their start by getting sucked into the hobby after playing in a tournament with an unpainted army, Warscroll Builder creator, fantastic painter, and wonderful opponent Tony Pacheco among them, and I would hate for potential fantastic hobbyists like that to be discouraged. That being said, in my crotchety old age and after 15+ years of consistent playing in major tournaments, these days I'm leaning towards paint requirements. It just makes the whole event so much more enjoyable, at least for me.
  13. I think the issue you and I run into there is one of definitions. To use classic award titles, I think the "Best General" award does what you want "Best Overall" to do, reward the single most skilled player (who also happened to have good luck). There are also awards that acknowledge the "pure" best painter, best sport, etc. I think the "Overall" award is intended, at least at the tournaments I used to run, like the Quake City Rumble, to be just that. The reward for the best overall hobbyist, incorporating the aspects of each of the other awards. If a tournament wants to prioritize competitive skill above the other aspects of the hobby, that's fine. It won't necessarily preclude me from going to or enjoying an event. They are, however, not my personal preferred type of event, and if I'm forced to choose between two similarly sized events the one that prioritizes a complete approach to the hobby and the community will be the one that I will lean towards. My one (very minor) issue with Adepticon was not its scoring system in and of itself, but rather the fact that its scoring system, and the weight it gave to soft scores, was very different from what I had understood it to be heading into the event. No biggie, now I know.
  14. Like I said, that wasn't an attack or anything. I totally get value out of your input. I was just wondering what value YOU get out of it, since it seems like you have tended to set yourself a pretty sisyphean task in arguing against soft scores and hobby promotion in opposition to, classically, the majority of the US tournament scene. Also, I must have misinterpreted some of your previous posts, as well as some anecdotes I've heard about your GW days, to assume that your take is that GW games don't lend themselves to balanced competitive play. That is on me, and I apologize for the mischaracterizing your position.
  15. Nope. In that post I was referring to Joe Krier, not you. I realize talking about two separate Joes in the same thread without expressly differentiating between them was probably confusing. My bad.
  16. I played against it. It was my one loss. Khailebron Temple Morathi, Shroud of Despair 2 Hags on Foot, one with Martyr's Sacrafice, one with Catechism of Murder Bloodwrack Medusa (General), Shadow Stone, Mindrazor, Mistress of Illusion 30 Witches with Bladed Bucklers x2 15 Blood Sisters Cauldron of Blood with Hag Queen He played it really well, but I think it's a very beatable list. It was my first game again DoK, and I'll (hopefully) play it better next time.
  17. Fair. Again, this is all just spitballing, as I don't know what Alex wants the end result of his scoring to be. If his intent is simply to encourage a baseline level of paint/sports rather than to reward the highest levels of each I think the current system works fine. I just need to adjust my understanding for next year.
  18. Awesome, thanks for the clarification. Maybe let the top 10% get those last 4 points? It's not much, but it's 4 points that are DIFFICULT to get, which means that they have a higher impact.
  19. That's really interesting! Please pass my thanks on. I don't know if Alex HAS any interest in tweaking his scoring, or what his goal is in his scoring, but if his goal is to create a tournament were battle and soft scores are equally weighted (or more close to equally weighted) for your overall placement, there are definitely some things he could do. Having "best game" votes impact your actual sportsmanship score would create more separation between those scores, causing the individual points to have more impact. My understanding with how paint was judged is that there was a very large checklist, and that each player could fill the checklist up to 50 points, at which point they couldn't get any more points. In order to decide on the best appearance armies the paint judges pulled the top 10% of the armies and decided from there. One idea I had would be for there to be a soft max that everyone in the tournament could reach, and then a hard max that only those top 10% of armies could reach. That means that the impact of having one of the best painted armies at the tournament has a significant impact on your overall placement. Just some ideas, and I'm sure there are a ton of other ways that Alex could go about tweaking his scoring system. As I mentioned before, I'm just nit picking, and had a great time overall, and if Alex is happy with his scoring system that's fine, I'll just go in next year knowing that battle points have a greater weight on your overall placement than soft scores do.
  20. Oh, you're probably right. I didn't think about stretching it out via photoshop. Good call.
  21. It definitely looks like two warp lightning canons on the sides, but I have no idea what the central wheel is from if it's a kit bash. It's certainly not the current doom wheel. It almost looks like it could be like a necron pylon or something, but I don't know the 40k range well enough to know for sure.
  22. Our current name is "Scroll Caddies" in a nod to both previous editions of the game and to the fact that Tony, who created Warscroll Builder, is one of our guys. Keep an eye out for t-shirts with an SC on them.
  23. I don't think anyone is making a character judgement Sam. As I mentioned, I get along great with Joe as a person. But he is among the most single minded, win focused players I've ever met. He has no qualms about telling anyone where he would like the hobby to go, and it is drastically different from where I would like the hobby to go. In this situation the intent of the ruling is clear, and he intentionally found an exploit to get around, one he pointed out to me before the tournament even began that he felt dirty about but would be doing anyway if it would win him a game. That is poor sportsmanship from my personal perspective. I told him that at the time, and if I were playing him in the moment I probably would have walked away from the game. This isn't an indictment of him, or anyone, as a person, it's simply stating that what the hyper competitive high end players (you, him, Andrew Standiferd and others) think of as having a good time is usually VERY different than what most of us hobbyists think of as having a good time. Finding rules exploits and loopholes and exploiting them to crush your opponent is not a thing that lends itself to your opponent having a positive experience.
  24. Joe, I don't really know why you participate in these conversations. That's not meant as an attack or anything by the way. But you have a strong belief that GW games CANNOT be balanced and competitive, and so tournaments, as a whole, are a pointless endeavor. You have apparently held this belief for at least 2 decades, since back in the dawn of time when you worked with Fletch and Ed. It is a fair belief, honestly held, and often well articulated, but if that's the case it seems odd that you spend so much time arguing about the nuance of tournaments and tournament scoring on these forums. I think there is value in listening to your arguments for the rest of us, but I wonder what value you get out of it.
  25. Hey Mathew! I had a really great time playing you! I won't be going to NOVA, as I'm going to Nashcon in Nashville and that pretty much finishes up my funds for traveling tournaments this year, but our club has several guys heading out. Watch out for Tony Pacheco, Joseph Urban, Ed Phillips, and possibly Vlad Nica. All great guys. I think I had a slight advantage on you due to having played on the twitch stream before, so I was calmer. That being said, I only really think you made one serious mistake, and that was not putting Inspiring Presence on either the Warriors or Marauders in the center of the board. I recently watched it and I also made a mistake in turn four. When I won the priority roll I should have let you go first. With my lord and two Juggernauts I probably would have wiped out the two remaining Blight Kings on the left side (my left) in your turn, allowing me to move all three units up to take the far left objective and burn it on the last turn, making it a major win. That probably would have matched me against the change host that won overall in the last round, and I think I could've taken him! But overall, super fun game. Also, you get one twitch subscription for free with an Amazon Prime membership, so if you have that its worth doing. The problem is GW released a FAQ to specifically stop Monsters from being on a Balewind Vortex. When they recently released a separate FAQ, addressing an unrelated issue, they unintentionally opened a loophole that a player like Joe could exploit to get around the clearly stated intent of the rules. I like Joe, he and I get along well, but that is not sporting play. It is exploitative and abusive, and if an opponent pulled something like that on me I would make it clear that he is not the type of opponent I would want, that that would be represented in his sports score, and that I would not be playing him again in the future. All politely and calmly (and possibly slightly drunkenly) of course.
×
×
  • Create New...