|
|
Post by nogle on Nov 11, 2014 15:31:24 GMT -5
"When you charge people to play games and reward those who play the best, is it a fair expectation that some players "pull their punches" to go easy on other players? Where do you draw the line? A part of this is accomplished with restrictions, comp, and opponent rankings. A lot of us come out to have some fun and throw dice, and tournaments may be our only chance, but it's still a competition and some of us still get our warm fuzzies from bragging rights and monthly standings."
As someone who hasn't won in Rochester in almost 4 years, I hate the "I pay, so im going to use crazy list" line of thought. There's a lot of people who pay and never win, their the ones who keep lining Koszka's pockets. If it wasn't for the fact that ive been playing for almost 20 years, all of my friends go to the tournies and it's my one hobby. I would have left probably a year and a half ago myself.
something cool that Erie does is for the first round, they let the perennially lower ranked players/guests from out of town pick their opponent. at most tournies if you lose the first 2 rounds you play someone else that has been beaten about the same, your out of the running and you have a fun, laidback game. it just takes 2 unfun games to get there. Erie lets you start with that experience and then after that the loser of the close game plays another loser and game 3 is against another player that lost. much more enjoyable path to the same result
|
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 11, 2014 15:38:11 GMT -5
"The question you have to ask your self about handicapping yourself is, do you wanna win with a dickish list or do you wanna get more players into the game and want them to play in these tournaments? Getting destroyed is now apart of the game and part of the reason a lot of newer players I feel are going away from these tournaments. Back before 6th I don't think there was even a rule if you tabled your opponent (I could be wrongs it was a while ago). Now adays a lot of ppl tailor their lists just to do this."
I'll throw in my warning here. This forum and our club was created in the wake of some pretty heated discussions involving terms like "dickish lists". The problem is each person has a different definition of "dickish list". Some would consider 45 lootas in 3 battle wagons "dickish". One of our common beliefs related to this being a voluntary hobby with significant investment is: Let people play what they want as long as it's legal in the format.
"Lets be honest here while there may not be spam lists there are death star lists that can cripple any army. I like how you added the seer council in the list for shenanigans but not a beast star, or Nurgle FMC spam i find it odd because they are apart of the lists people run on dakka that win tournys. Massive amounts of deamons that infaltrate and can assault turn 1/2 are amzing aswell, Necron royal air another good list. Im not mentioning these to say you shouldnt play them or your a dick for taking them. But these new players dont have a clue how to beat these armies and they dont play against them in their little groups so they can never get better. Personally i enjoy the challange of trying to figure out how to beat someones army."
Again: Everyone's definition of "dickish" or "spam" is different. Daemons can build a legal list with 5 FMCs so when I bring my list with 2, I see it as self-restraint not spam. I had an opponent tell me 2 FMC's was spam and my list was over the top, but I respectfully disagreed. I'll take the credit/blame for bringing some of the harder lists in the region, but from my perspective they are handicapped by personal choices over what I "could" take if I wanted, such as triplicates/max unit spam, which I never have.
If we really "need a tournament scene where we take weak lists", then mandate it in the format. Highlander or comp or what have you, but don't criticize those who follow the format of any given event. Intelligent list design and table-top implementation is a part of the game.
For this discussion to continue, we need to refrain from personal attacks and disrespectful labels.
|
|
|
|
Post by nettik189 on Nov 11, 2014 16:02:14 GMT -5
Its not a personal attack, it is a observation. I am completely with you everyone should be able to write what ever list they want and play it the way they want. That's how I feel all games and tournaments should be played. Now if we are going to talk about how we can bring new players/old players in the game we need to keep in mind how they see our lists.
Spam is pretty well cut defined, taking an abnormal amount because something is broken, ie 3 Riptides, 6 Wave serpeants, 9 Lazor Backs, that's spam.
If you where at the Beef and wing and you received that 2 FMC was spam and over that top you have to realize that's the mind set off the buffalo guys(minus Beef and wing). These are the opinions of the community we are trying to get into the game. They like mild to medium wings(lists) nothing to fancy.
its hard to put a comp on lists now adays, the codexs give you so much good things you can take that can be abused.
Im soory if you took any of this personal, I was not referencing you or anyone else when I said do you wanna win with a dickish list. I was referencing to what the community thinks are dickish. The think Koszkas Assault Tau/Necron list is broken and abusive.
|
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 11, 2014 16:15:45 GMT -5
The thing about the best players; Courtney, Koszka, Crispy, they can make lists with no spam and "bad units" and still crush people. Their grasp of game mechanics, mathammer, and attrition while staying focused on the objectives is nearly flawless.
Thus they build the reputation and even false perceptions of what is broken, like assault tau. I saw Courtney win a tournament with old Dark Angels and no duplicates. Yet when you speak to their opponents, they've been "crushed". Courtney has a reputation in Erie as a "crusher", yet we can't ever fault his list building because he doesn't spam and takes bad units.
You can keep on limiting "strong lists", but the best players will continue to win. We can ask people to tone down their lists, but we cannot ask them to make bad decisions during the game.
At a certain point, people have to suck it up a bit, admit they were outplayed by a smart opponent, and use their mistakes to learn how to play better.
|
|
|
|
Post by calypso2ts on Nov 11, 2014 16:30:15 GMT -5
I am probably part of the problem when it comes to games - I try my best not to be overly competitive - but it is a struggle. As much as a pain as I can be - that is me really restraining myself!
As for list building - there are no Daemon armies built around infiltrators, it is built around scouting hounds. I try to limit myself to 2x of any unit and to bring a diverse selection. Sometimes it is over the top - and I can understand how someone new would be disheartened.
Even if it is not a typical 'power list', casual games do not tend to end in tabling like they do in a tournament when people are trying for max points. There is a divide there, even if it is better at Millennium than it is in other areas of the country.
The veteran tournament players also tend to be very strong players, have a very good grasp of game mechanics and also just know their list. I have been playing a similar variation on assault Daemons for four years now. I really know what makes that list work and how to win games with it.
There is no solution offered in this post, just general agreement and observations. I am not sure how best to bridge the divide - I like Nogles idea of people calling one another out for the first round of a tournament. Challenges like that bring a ton to the game. I remember/loved the Aaron-Doug grudge match from a year and a half ago - it was an epic 40k and community moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 11, 2014 16:39:31 GMT -5
Here's the thing. Travis would let any of us run an event, and has offered. I'm sure Smitty could use a break from TOing. If you guys want to see a change in format, or a "weak list event" or a "challenge" event, offer to run it one month. I'm sure our friends and play groups will support our ideas and show up in support.
|
|
|
|
Post by nettik189 on Nov 11, 2014 19:04:47 GMT -5
This is what bug me about our area, i dont feel ppl should have to handicap themselfs for others. I think we need something like a mentor type thing to teach these new guys/ old ones. Sorta like how the Zero Comp guys used to do about strategy on their website.
What i think would be fun if we(ppl on grand strat) made lists for other players if we do a lower point tourny. We can list the armys we wanna do then do a drawing for who makes whos list. just a fun suggestion maybe for december sorta like a secret santa
|
|
|
|
Post by Crispy on Nov 12, 2014 10:44:44 GMT -5
I was responding to Crispy, most of the guys at 2 Kings consider themselves "casual players" and aren't into the tournament scene because of "power gamers". I know of a few that have gone outside of buffalo to play at tournaments and just get destroyed. Then go back to 2 Kings and talk about how they got destroyed and discourage everyone else from going. I think that this is a good example of what we want to work on. I think it’s easy for veteran players in our area to be tagged as power gamers due to our experience and knowledge of the game. Like Aaron said, there’s a steep learning curve for the game. Having picked up fantasy, I have an intimate understanding of a steep learning curve. I still don’t have a really firm grip on fantasy, even after playing it for 3 years and helping with GTs. Thinking back to the games I’ve had against newer players (at Millennium & The Brawl), I think that everyone I faced had the tools to take me out, but didn’t have the experience to know how. For instance, my 2nd round Tyranid opponent at The Brawl had an incredibly solid list, favorable terrain, and decent objective placement, but he quickly overextended himself. Having played Nids for a while, I saw his mistake and capitalized. Again, the solution is community. New players should be welcomed, and encouraged to develop their generalship. The question you have to ask your self about handicapping yourself is, do you wanna win with a dickish list or do you wanna get more players into the game and want them to play in these tournaments? Getting destroyed is now apart of the game and part of the reason a lot of newer players I feel are going away from these tournaments. Back before 6th I don't think there was even a rule if you tabled your opponent (I could be wrongs it was a while ago). Now adays a lot of ppl tailor their lists just to do this. I think getting tabled has always been part of the game. Even throughout 5th (the Tournament Game Golden years) tabling was a strategy. I really think that the tabling problem is one of generalship, and playing towards the mission, which feeds back into my previous point. I don’t think it’s so binary (douche lists = lower attendance). As someone who hasn't won in Rochester in almost 4 years, I hate the "I pay, so im going to use crazy list" line of thought. There's a lot of people who pay and never win, their the ones who keep lining Koszka's pockets. If it wasn't for the fact that ive been playing for almost 20 years, all of my friends go to the tournies and it's my one hobby. I would have left probably a year and a half ago myself. I remember the days when I’d show up, then pairings were announced and I’d think, “F*ck, today I get to have my ass handed to me by Nogle.” - There’s been plenty of times over the past few years that I’ve looked at the Millennium tournaments and thought, “$10 bucks to hang out all day with friends? Sign me up!” There’s going to be a myriad number of reasons why people come, but the friends are the reason why we should be coming back. The past 2-3 years have been more stressful than previous for me personally, and tournaments (w/ the wonderful crew we now have) have been a high point, helping me destress. Something cool that Erie does is for the first round, they let the perennially lower ranked players/guests from out of town pick their opponent. at most tournies if you lose the first 2 rounds you play someone else that has been beaten about the same, your out of the running and you have a fun, laidback game. it just takes 2 unfun games to get there. Erie lets you start with that experience and then after that the loser of the close game plays another loser and game 3 is against another player that lost. much more enjoyable path to the same result That’s something I’ve been thinking about. Some sort of pairing, a rolling battle point pairing across events, to pair based on strength of schedule. It may mean that many of the top players keep playing each other. I’ve been thinking about it for a while in terms of Crossroads, and other GTs, mainly to weed out bad 1st round matchups. It’s a developing thing, and something to think about. I'll throw in my warning here. This forum and our club was created in the wake of some pretty heated discussions involving terms like "dickish lists". The problem is each person has a different definition of "dickish list". Some would consider 45 lootas in 3 battle wagons "dickish". One of our common beliefs related to this being a voluntary hobby with significant investment is: Let people play what they want as long as it's legal in the format. Again: Everyone's definition of "dickish" or "spam" is different. Daemons can build a legal list with 5 FMCs so when I bring my list with 2, I see it as self-restraint not spam. I had an opponent tell me 2 FMC's was spam and my list was over the top, but I respectfully disagreed. I'll take the credit/blame for bringing some of the harder lists in the region, but from my perspective they are handicapped by personal choices over what I "could" take if I wanted, such as triplicates/max unit spam, which I never have. If we really "need a tournament scene where we take weak lists", then mandate it in the format. Highlander or comp or what have you, but don't criticize those who follow the format of any given event. Intelligent list design and table-top implementation is a part of the game. To expand on what Aaron’s saying, we want to be inclusive. If you want to bring a specific list, that’s your personal choice, and we don’t want to step on that. I’m actually for opening up many of the restrictions so we can play with more of our toys. I want to see Nogle bring his 30K stuff. I want to see weird and new stuff. I’m also for events dictating their own restrictions. When I come to your house/store, as a guest, I want to play to the hosts. |
|
|
|
Post by dudeisuck on Nov 12, 2014 11:15:11 GMT -5
The problem we run into with the mentoring stuff is many people are convinced that their way is right. An interesting tournamnt idea would be for everyone to bring a list and models for it, then the pairing require you to play you opponent's list and your opponent plays yours.
This would be kind of just to see that some of these "power gamer" lists are really not that powerful. This would be more of an internal to our group tournament style, but could be an interesting concept.
Last night Courtney was telling me about the highlander format they were thinking of running next year. That also sounds promising.
|
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 12, 2014 11:18:47 GMT -5
Yes thank you Crispy for translating my rants more diplomatically.
We want to be inclusive. Part of the rift that lead to the formation of this group was the perception of exclusivity of the last group. There was no recruiting or induction for those of us who wanted to be a part of something bigger, and there were people who vocally portrayed only one proper way to play the game, belittling those who didn't agree.
So we want to be inclusive. We can work towards adding FW and 30k so long as their proponents don't abuse the system to use poor proxies and show up without written rules to share. It also means we need to be more accepting that "dick lists" are just as legal as FW. Bringing 3 riptides is a legal choice and investment until you create a tournament format that bans triplicates. We need to stop berating people because they made a different choice on how they spent their hobby money. This was part of my frustration with the B&W "sportsmanship" scoring. There were several questions which gave opponents the opportunity to penalize based on legitimate list design choices.
|
|
|
|
Post by grubnards on Nov 12, 2014 12:26:21 GMT -5
Let's just all agree that we all like to attend events for different reasons. Some people, like Erich, Aaron, and neiel prefer to build tough lists and try their best to win. Some people, like Nogle, Bill, and myself, like to attend with semi-competitive or sometimes fluff based lists. No one group is right or wrong. We all have valid reasons for playing the way we do. Some people are naturally gifted with logic and mathematics and are easily able to see what units perform the best and the best way to create a synergy with their units. Others, like me, just don't see the game that way. I'll admit I suck at gaming synergy and when I get a new codex my mind drifts to the coolest looking models and how I'd like to paint and field that model rather than how bad this model performs and you should never include it in a list... no matter how cool it looks. One of Nogle's comments hit it on the head for me... sometimes I do feel like I am handing money over to the same people month after month and on some levels it sucks. But I suck it up because I like the people I have gotten to know over the years and consider many of them to be good friends.
So how about this. The next time you are at an event and you are up against someone who is clearly missing the synergy in their game, or maybe they are new to the game. Take the time to point out things they could have done differently during the game, or maybe let them redo a move rather than telling them what they did wrong after the game or not even pointing out their mistake at all. I'm not telling anyone to throw the game... feel free to smash them but I guarantee you that if you do help them out or point out something they forgot to do and go ahead and let them do it, they will be more apt to keep coming back month after month even if you table them repeatedly. One thing that Craig said to me a while back still resonates with me... He said that I have the hobby side mastered solidly but I need to work on the strategy side of the game. He didn't say that to be dick or bragging that he was better, he really wanted to see me improve my game. Since then, I've faced off against Craig many times and he still helps me out or offers me tips and pointers during the game rather than after the fact and I appreciate that much more. Even though he still beats me, my game play has gotten better and those games more enjoyable than other games where I get beat by someone who clearly has a better grasp of the game but doesn't want to communicate with me. More people need to realize that its not just about winning a game, its about building a solid gaming community. Rather than seeing the same people at the top tables month after month, I would think most of the top level gamers would like to see schlubs like me, Nogle, or someone new to the game up at the top tables to create a bigger and better community. It may take awhile but once people start seeing that mentality I would bet that attendance will slowly pick up.
So instead of telling people how to write lists, or what format to play the game, let's try being decent and help each other out. Communicate with your opponent and help them become a better player. I know that when I help someone out over the course of an afternoon it feels a lot better than taking home some store credit.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 12, 2014 12:50:08 GMT -5
Wise words Kevin.
Just like some people seem unbeatable on the table, I've just about given up beating Kevin, Courtney, or Koszka in the painting department. Or besting Bill or Kevin at sports. I don't resent them for it, I'm glad to have them around to learn from and better my own game.
Anyways, yeah. The purpose was to bounce around ideas that would re-excite retired players or new players to boost attendance. I'm sure we'll discuss it in person at the GT and come away with new ideas from our games. Thanks everyone for their input and perspective.
|
|
|
|
Post by nogle on Nov 12, 2014 13:31:32 GMT -5
"I've just about given up beating Kevin, Courtney, or Koszka in the painting department"
When I first read this I didn't see the painting department part. I thought to myself, how the hell does Kevin consistently keep beating Aaron in 40k?!?!?!
|
|
|
|
Post by koszkamade on Nov 12, 2014 15:00:20 GMT -5
Last tourny i fielded a bunch of scions, which promptly got me into the lowest rankings at millennium. I see these tourneys as a way to try out new units / builds so that I'm not completely caught with my pants down when entering a GT.
With the plans to do an entire scion army for adepticon, i'll be slowly wheening off of my blob squads, sentinels, and flyers to get a better handle on how this list can function. As of now this path has been pretty depressing as the loss of the blob makes me feel naked.
Every month I have a new army project which i use in the next upcoming tourney. If it wasn't for these events I probably would have 1,500 pts. less painted for my armies.
|
|
|
|
Post by nogle on Dec 3, 2014 21:10:18 GMT -5
not sure how 2015 will pan out here's how I'm guessing so far
Jan-
Feb- Adepticon Team tourney primer (Adepticon is in March next year)
March-
April-
May-
June-
July- Beef and Wing Brawl Primer(Travis willing, Brawl is in August 2015)
August-
Sept.-
Oct.- DaBoyz GT primer
Nov- no tourney/DaBoyz GT
Dec.- Invitational
so if I'm guessing right there are 7 months open
|
|
