Soft Scoring in Tournaments - Page 4 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
General 40k This is the place to talk about everything related to Warhammer 40k.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #31 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-23-13, 01:39 PM
Senior Member
 
falcoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,384
Reputation: 23
Default

I have absolutely no idea, I think he was staying at his friend's the night before and forgot to bring his army with him, but I was still scared of the guy, he had this really weird 'man shake' which is a weird handshake but you grab their wrists but he crushed my whole arm...

Me: To be honest im amazed there isn't a chaos god of not revising or at least chaos god of procrastination

MidnightSun: There will be, when enough people do it. Y'know when the Eldar were all engaging in their hedonism and Slaanesh ripped open the Eye of Terror with his creation? Slaanesh will have NOTHING on the God of Procrastination, and his vile minions will carve the galaxy asunder in a thousand year reign of blood.... Tomorrow
falcoso is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-23-13, 02:17 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Sethis's Avatar
Sethis's Flag is: United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Alston, Cumbria
Posts: 4,190
Reputation: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magpie_Oz View Post
So you're saying that Tournaments are won by dickheads with too much money who buy an unbeatable army, win the painting comp by paying someone else to do the work and are able to avoid being a total mong.

Ergo tournies are total shit because they are not "... a chance to compete for a prize, by being the best player there, with the measure of "best player" being determined by how many games you win, and how much you win each game by. " but rather, by your own definition, a comparative measure of one's wallet.
No, I was replying to Neilbattes stance which was "Soft scoring helps to prevent it" - I don't believe it does. I'll steadfastly defend the point that a good player with a mediocre list can easily beat someone with a top tier net list who has no idea how to play. Ergo skill matters, therefore tournaments are not just a measure of your money and are, by extension, not shit.

90% of people think they are above average.

Statistically Improbable. Psychologically Inevitable.
Sethis is offline  
post #33 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-23-13, 02:28 PM
Banned
Magpie_Oz's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Not every shadow, but any shadow
Posts: 7,889
Reputation: 74
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethis View Post
No, I was replying to Neilbattes stance which was "Soft scoring helps to prevent it" - I don't believe it does. I'll steadfastly defend the point that a good player with a mediocre list can easily beat someone with a top tier net list who has no idea how to play. Ergo skill matters, therefore tournaments are not just a measure of your money and are, by extension, not shit.

That's not what you said before

"dickheads with too much money winning tournaments, because if you can afford to buy 5+ flyers," that reads to me like if you can afford to buy 5+ flyers then nothing else matters.

If a good player with a mediocre list can beat a no hoper with a top list then it seems that a mediocre player with a bucket of cash can field a list that will beat even the "best".
So cash becomes a skill multiplier and really what is being compared.

Last edited by Magpie_Oz; 08-23-13 at 02:45 PM.
Magpie_Oz is offline  
 
post #34 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-23-13, 04:06 PM
Senior Member
 
coke123's Avatar
coke123's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,846
Reputation: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hydraulix View Post
I fail to see how soft scoring really changes the score so severely that people are that upset about it. If its part of the tournament rules then its part of the rules. You might as well complain about people spamming lists built by pro players that other people steal cause they didn't make them themselves if you want to complain about commission painting. If you don't have time to learn to paint your models to a high standard, you could just as easily claim its unfair cause you don't have time to practice the game enough. It seams like an easy thing to get around... you get X number points for something that you are already doing... YEHA! Oh, you didn't do these basic things that are expected? Well you miss the free points...
"Netlisting" isn't even really a thing- mostly because most "netlists" are so painfully obvious that anyone with more than two brain cells to bash together is capable of creating these netlists. The thought that people wouldn't have been able to come up with Cronair, Serpent Spam, Double Heldrake, IG mech, two Riptides + infantry, Flying Circus, or Bolter Banner armies is ridiculous. The people who seriously needed to copy these lists are generally new guys who don't understand how the game works, and hence can be easily outplayed.

However, 90% of the regular tournament scene is absolutely more than capable of coming up with these same general ideas, albeit with minor tweaks, so the comparison between people bringing already established archetypes and commission painting is nonsense- you're assuming that they couldn't have made their list without the help of another person, whereas with commission painting we KNOW they had to have someone else help them in order to bolster their score.

Being OK with commission paintjobs getting points in a tournament is more equivalent to having someone else play your games for you, and then you just come in afterwards to pick up your prizes- and I doubt most people would be OK with that.

And if you fail to see how soft scores often affecting around 30% of your tournament scores is worth being annoyed over, maybe you need to consider that people who want to have an event based around gameplay tend to be annoyed when something not relevant to gameplay is used to greatly affect their score.

If you go to a painting competition, no-one judges you based on how strong your model is in game. So why should a competition based around gameplay be subjected to a paint score?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hydraulix View Post
And as far as people being dicks or not, I think if someone was being a true dick he would get kicked out. The award is there for that guy that keeps the places mood good while everyone is stressing out over rules. I have a guy that does that in my Army unit. If someone is being an outright ass then he gets a stern lecture, that's completely different from what the award is for.
You clearly don't get how sports scores typically work.

Yes, there is generally a best sports award. I don't think anyone in this thread has complained about there being a best sports award.

What people are saying they don't like is how the "1st place" or "Tournament Winner" award is often calculated. It generally has something like 60-70% Battle, around 20-30% Paint, and typically 10% comes from your sports score. People don't like that 10% of their overall placing comes from simply having to demonstrate that you're a decent human being, and that something like 20-30% comes from a section where you can literally pay to have it done for you via commission. Rather than have this bizarre system which is utterly open to being gamed by the very people it is supposed to punish, why not just boot people who are being problematic from the event? It's what literally every other competitive event ever conceived does.

"Knowledge is knowing tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in fruit salad."

Also known as BaselessElm
coke123 is offline  
post #35 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-24-13, 09:34 PM
Critique for da CriticGod
 
Kreuger's Avatar
Kreuger's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Posts: 3,350
Reputation: 43
Default

Just my two cents, and I don't think anyone mentioned it.

Warhammer tournaments were traditionally put on by GW especially in the earlier days of the hobby. GW is in the business of selling miniatures and selling the hobby. Publicizing photos of poorly painted armies doesn't do much to advance the hobby as a whole.

Additionally, I don't believe GW have ever considered their hobby as designed for serious player competition. It isn't built to be a sport or to be played like a sport. The game by the necessities of production schedules and sales will never be totally competitive.

While I understand your frustration, Sethis, I think your thesis is based on an incorrect assumption. Soft scoring is only inappropriate if you accept that the purpose of the game is strict competition. I believe the makers of the game (from every era) would disagree, and the constraints of army books, models, player income, skill, and development cycles combine to make strict competition inherently unbalanced and something of a non-starter. GW TO's seem to have always wanted subjective qualities to their tournaments, in my opinion because the game itself isn't well suited to serious competition.

If one intended to make a tournament entirely competitive then I think your philosophy of meet X, Y, Z standards or forfeit your slot world have to be the way to go. And in order to make it equitable your TO's would need to have a very clear and impartial system for judging wysiwyg, paint color/quality, and army list creation. And by very clear I mean writing a tournament rules packet with photo examples of correct models for visual and wysiwyg standards, as well as rubrics with detailed descriptions showing the grading appropriateness of entries including showing bad examples.

But as I said earlier, all of that seems . . . wasteful in an inherently unbalanced play environment.

Chaos Army Showcase with photos (Updated 2013/12/02)
"To endure one's self is perhaps the hardest task in the universe." Frank Herbert, 'Dune Messiah'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dethklokk
"CHEESE!" is the battlecry of the ill-prepared.

Originally Posted by Deathscythe4722
Could someone please call the police on this guy? I can hear the English Language screaming in pain. This has to be illegal somewhere.
Kreuger is offline  
post #36 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-25-13, 01:30 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 268
Reputation: 3
Default

How do tournaments compare to something similar to Warhammer that isn't a sport? What's the closest tournament to a Warhammer tournament?
Jonny B is offline  
post #37 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-25-13, 01:52 AM
Banned
Magpie_Oz's Flag is: Australia
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Not every shadow, but any shadow
Posts: 7,889
Reputation: 74
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonny B View Post
How do tournaments compare to something similar to Warhammer that isn't a sport? What's the closest tournament to a Warhammer tournament?
Chess?

It's pretty hard to compare across other genres or hobbies.

Flames of war have a presentation and painting component.

The Infinity ITS tends to focus more of pure gameplay. They do require good sportsmanship but painting is optional.

Privateer Press run much the same as Infinity.

GW Throne of Skulls has a fairly rigorous system of points based purely on gameplay and sportsmanship, however your army MUST be painted and based for you to compete. There are separate prizes and awards for a range of things that reward prowess on the table and skill with the brush or converting.

Last edited by Magpie_Oz; 08-25-13 at 03:12 AM.
Magpie_Oz is offline  
post #38 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-26-13, 07:34 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Sethis's Avatar
Sethis's Flag is: United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Alston, Cumbria
Posts: 4,190
Reputation: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreuger View Post
Additionally, I don't believe GW have ever considered their hobby as designed for serious player competition. It isn't built to be a sport or to be played like a sport. The game by the necessities of production schedules and sales will never be totally competitive.
I'm not sure that most sports or games (Chess, Football, Skiing, Ice Skating, Rifle Shooting, whatever) were ever "Originally" designed for tournament play, however that doesn't prevent you from having competitions in those sports or games.

The thing is, I believe GWs stance of "We're aiming to sell to beer and pretzel gamers, so we don't need to write rules of sufficient quality to play tournaments" is fundamentally flawed in and of itself.

Who enjoys rules arguments? No-one. Even the most well natured, friendly and casual game can be slowed by imprecise wording and debate, and on the other end of the spectrum you've got "that guy" at your local club who cries/gets into screaming matches/becomes an asshole when you question his interpretation of the rules.

Because rules arguments are a not-fun part of the game, I believe that writing clear and concise rules doesn't just help equip 40k to be better suited for tournament play (therefore generating more revenue and promotion for GW with no investment on their behalf) but also benefits the target audience they claim to be aiming for - the casual player. However that's something of a digression from the topic at hand.

Regarding your actual point, that 40k is unsuited to rigorous competitive play, I believe in trying to ameliorate problems, instead of exacerbating them. If 40k isn't quite suited to tournaments, then skewing the results even further with biased and subjective scores only damages the hobby more.

90% of people think they are above average.

Statistically Improbable. Psychologically Inevitable.
Sethis is offline  
post #39 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-26-13, 08:21 PM
Critique for da CriticGod
 
Kreuger's Avatar
Kreuger's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Posts: 3,350
Reputation: 43
Default

I whole heartedly agree that more concise and clear rules benefits everybody.

GW should probably have a team of actual lawyers and technical writers review the rules for consistency before release.

As for the fitness of 40k for competitive play . . . I generally agreed with you, but I think both perspectives have potential problems. The more subjective style hinges on using human judgement to preserve and ensure 'fun' while a more rigid system of scoring is more or less effective based on the current meta game and player resources.

For instance, when relying on 'more' subjective criteria the validity and impartiality of the judging is of paramount importance. The main outcome is intended to be fun, and the secondary outcome is competition. At best it means that a skilled player who is a jerk is not rewarded for being a jerk. And at worst means that the TO's could be capricious or corrupt.

On the other hand, relying on a more strict, 'harder' scoring system means implicitly that while fun is intended the first desired outcome is competition. At best it means the best player wins, and at worst that the player with the newest, most powerful codex and the most money has a distinct advantage.

Chaos Army Showcase with photos (Updated 2013/12/02)
"To endure one's self is perhaps the hardest task in the universe." Frank Herbert, 'Dune Messiah'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dethklokk
"CHEESE!" is the battlecry of the ill-prepared.

Originally Posted by Deathscythe4722
Could someone please call the police on this guy? I can hear the English Language screaming in pain. This has to be illegal somewhere.
Kreuger is offline  
post #40 of 62 (permalink) Old 08-26-13, 10:11 PM
Senior Member
 
big rob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 129
Reputation: 2
Default

Sethis, once again you totally impress me, and I am grateful for your thoughtful, quality effort here on a topic near and dear to my heart! I generally love blind tournaments, and used to sponsor them regularly, and participated regularly in ones I couldn't sponsor. I come down squarely in your camp, Sir!

I hate painting and sportsmanship scores factoring into tournament winner scores. Now, I routinely had a separate award for best-looking army and runner-up, as well as best sportsman, and for the most bloodthirsty player, etc- yeah, you had to be around the San Francisco Bay Area scene to see it, but I always offered separate awards for all kinds of participation modes I wanted to reinforce and see regularly. I even had awards for people who made the best "Waaaagh" cry, and awards for most violent kill! Yeah, I was a true hard core gaming zealot, and still am to some degree, from time to time.

However, I take the view that in the end there can be only one, and always made my largest cash prize by far to the player who had the most wins, or prevailed in some kind of tie-breaker if records were the same. Painting and sportsmanship didn't factor into this award at all!

Now, I love to see beautiful armies, and I much prefer that all participants be reasonably good sports, and gave cash awards accordingly for them, but the Lion's share of the prize money went to the winner, then a smaller amount to the runner-up, and a smaller amount still to the third place finisher.. People who were acclaimed good sports and had beautiful armies got smaller cash prizes.

I try now to find those types of tournaments out here. I stay away from tournaments where soft scores factor into determining a tournament champion.

Big Rob out....
big rob is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Warhammer 40K > General 40k

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome