Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums - Reply to Topic
General 40k This is the place to talk about everything related to Warhammer 40k.

Thread: Soft Scoring in Tournaments Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

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










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
09-01-13 07:38 PM
big rob
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethis View Post
Thanks for the support big rob, means a lot to me. Wish I had more regular internet access so I could keep the conversation flowing longer. The point was to generate debate and find out what the communities stance was. If a TO happens to read it and reconsiders how he scores his event in the way you've already done, then so much the better.
You got it, Sethis! I understand you are trying to open a dialogue on a matter that has long been a source of friction among tournament organizers and attendees for many years, and hopefully your efforts here will get more hidebound adherents to soft scoring factoring into determining tournament champions to reconsider, and perhaps find the middle ground to make ALL tournament attendees happy, or at least focusing their anger and hostility towards their gaming opponent's army, and not on tournament organizers and whatnot. My way seems to have been pretty well received in my gaming circles for over a decade now, and in a way its simple to achieve the best of both perspectives on soft scoring: simply provide SEPARATE awards for each category or facet of gaming each tournament organizer cares to emphasize. At one point I had 10 different awards, but the biggest by far each tournament was the one for the winner; the one with the best W-L-T record. Thats what most of my fellow players thought the most worthwhile and desired! Let the free market decide!

Great discussion Sethis! I always look forward to your contributions!
08-31-13 10:51 PM
DarKKKKK I have personally yet to participate in an actual tournament, only big game day events where its just a free for all of playing 40k. Although I've been in enough tournament atmospheres to understand your argument. Hobby shops will always have different "add-on" or soft scoring rules depending on their history of hosting tournaments. One hobby shop I go to doesn't have much of the soft scoring in their rules, where as another does because there had been problems in the past with overly-competitive players, so they wanted to reward the players with good sportsmanship. There is even one hobby shop that has a store wide rule asking people to practice good hygiene. Yes its actually there because enough lazy slobs play in Friday card game night and all come together as if performing a ritual for Nurgle (we have learned to never go there on Friday nights ).

Now as to your points, I agree with most of them. It does suck that you can work extremely hard practicing your tactics and reworking your list down to the last point and someone could beat you by a few points based on the Refs "opinion" of another players well painted army or sportsmanship. I think that painting should be judged in a painted army contest as just an add-on to the tournament and not part of the scoring for the games themselves. I personally haven't had much time to paint my army at all, even prime them. So in tournaments where a well-painted army affects my scoring, I'm already at a disadvantage. ALTHOUGH, it brings up my main point, Rewards vs Penalties.

As you mentioned, most sports these days go by the "punish with penalties" way of dealing with negative actions and behaviors. Which most of the time, because of the nature of the sport/game, it has to be that way. Your right, we can't give extra points to football players who make good clean tackles versus someone who still made the tackle, but wasn't as "perfect." Plus most tackles are done with multiple players tacking down one guy so figuring out those points would be.....well I'm trailing off, back to the main points. At its core, 40k is a HOBBY with the main 3 facets of Building, Painting, and Playing. Not to say it can't be competitive, it definitely can be, but playing the game isn't everything this hobby is about.

Now think about it as a hobby store owner. Lets say you set the tournament rules like you want, negative consequences for negative actions a.k.a. penalties. The rules are set that it can eventually escalate to the player getting banned if their actions continue. Yes this can work, but no good comes of this system. A player gets penalized, argues about it for a bit, goes back to game frustrated. Maybe the player gets hit with another small infraction because of some bad sportsmanship, more arguing. Arguing can eventually lead to some tempers flaring and finally the thought of banning that player. That is a lose lose scenario. You have lost a player to your store, the other players in that community may have lost a player, and possibly that player is more likely to stop playing.

With the current, more frequently used soft scoring, it provides positive reinforcement to the players. As I mentioned, I don't have a painted army, but if I think I'm going to participate in a tournament with soft scoring dealing with painting, I'm more likely to actually paint my army and have it look cool. I'll be more motivated to actually participate in all facets of the hobby itself. As well, from what I've been told, sportsmanship "points" or rewards are mostly decided on after the match or near the end of the tournament, whereas penalties are mostly done during a game. We all know if we were deducted points after the match because we said something insulting its going to become a giant argument of "he said - she said." Plus can you imagine getting penalties in the MIDDLE of your games. That can completely throw off your mind set and change your attitude for the night.

Overall, its definitely a good argument to bring up, but I think the common way hobby shops have been running tournaments with soft scoring is a lot more fun to play in than tournaments that would just penalize the players. It would just have a negative feel about it. Yes, the Refs still have the overall opinion of good/bad sportsmanship, but that comes down to your experience in that hobby shop and if you feel the Refs are trustworthy and unbiased in their decisions. If I were to run a tournament personally, I would have the tournament with a side painting contest and would reward good sportsmanship during the tournament with small prizes, BUT it still wouldn't factor into the final standings of the tournament. If someone becomes enough of a problem consistently during the tournament or in multiple tournaments, they will be dealt with.
08-31-13 02:52 PM
Sethis As an FYI, that Q/A was more there to shut down the inevitable use of that response to invalidate the entire issue. Roughly equivalent in purely hypothetical analogy to saying "If you don't like racial segregation, start your own restaurant where you don't have it" without any attempt to actually engage with the topic of "Is racial segregation even a good thing to start with?".

That's just an example. Don't get all het up about it. I'm not claiming soft scores are in any way relative to racial discrimmination on an ethical scale.

Thanks for the support big rob, means a lot to me. Wish I had more regular internet access so I could keep the conversation flowing longer. The point was to generate debate and find out what the communities stance was. If a TO happens to read it and reconsiders how he scores his event in the way you've already done, then so much the better.
08-29-13 03:24 PM
Grins1878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magpie_Oz View Post
If you read through the thread bob you'll see that one of my very early posts suggested pretty much what you too are suggesting.

Such suggestions have been wholly rejected.
He did actually suggest it big rob, it was dismissed by Sethis in post #7. Magpie said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magpie_Oz View Post
The rules of the tournament are there for all to see. If you don't like the scoring set up then don't play in it.

You could always lobby the TO to have the situation changed, if enough object then the tourney can become a fest of dull grey.
To which the reply said to re-read this bit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethis View Post
"If you don't like it, just run your own tournament or go to ones that don't soft score"

Bollocks. This isn't about me, personally, it's about changing the opinions of people too lazy to do anything except mindlessly continue with the tradition of allowing your ability to paint to interfere with your ability to write good lists, play well with few mistakes on the day, evaluate matchups, and ultimately win games. Why are we the ONLY hobby or sport that insists on factoring a judges personal bias regarding what makes an aesthetically pleasing army into the outcome of a competitive event?
Magpie suggested exactly what you did, but was shot down.

Was going to write more but you get the idea. :-)
08-29-13 02:21 PM
big rob Happy gaming, Magpie_Oz.

Thanks for facilitating a useful discussion, Sethis.
08-29-13 04:11 AM
Magpie_Oz If you read through the thread bob you'll see that one of my very early posts suggested pretty much what you too are suggesting.

Such suggestions have been wholly rejected.
08-29-13 03:48 AM
big rob "Actually Bob by the parameters set by the OP that isn't an opion"

What is it you are trying to contribute to with that comment?

You lost me here, Magpie_Oz. I think you are trying to tell me that Sethis would rather not go my route of sponsoring/joining only tournaments where 'soft scoring' doesn't factor into determining tournament champions, but rather keep fighting/debating to change minds so that more and more players see it his way. I am sure Sethis will do what he is motivated to do, and I wish him well in changing minds on this issue. I feel the market, so to say, will respond to demand. There will be some on each side who stick with what they already like, and some will experiment before settling on the type of tournaments they want to participate in. I won't debate much more about it. Sethis may be a revolutionary, and I wish him complete success here!
08-28-13 08:29 PM
Magpie_Oz Actually Bob by the parameters set by the OP that isn't an opion

Quote:
"If you don't like it, just run your own tournament or go to ones that don't soft score"

Bollocks. This isn't about me, personally, it's about changing the opinions of people too lazy to do anything except mindlessly continue with the tradition of allowing your ability to paint to interfere with your ability to write good lists, play well with few mistakes on the day, evaluate matchups, and ultimately win games. Why are we the ONLY hobby or sport that insists on factoring a judges personal bias regarding what makes an aesthetically pleasing army into the outcome of a competitive event?"
08-28-13 06:12 PM
big rob Light a candle instead of curse the darkness!

If you build it they will come!

Early in my 40K gaming career I hated playing in tournaments where army comp, painting, sportsmanship, etc factored into determining the tournament champion. I quit going to those long ago, since I hate crybabies, sore losers and political assholes....

I started sponsoring my own tournaments in my area- I sponsored tournaments for years that were popular and fun, and attracted mostly like-minded gamers/warriors! Even in the tournaments I sponsored that were played in GW stores I often got GW store staff to chip in half the prize money from an entry fee they charged all participants. I never sponsored tournaments where sportsmanship, painting, army comp lists, etc factored into the tournament winner. I simply gave separate small cash prizes to those who painted well and were judged by peers as the best sports, etc. The tournament champion was determined simply on their overall record! Over time I got several co-sponsors from fellow players! A total win-win!

I no longer attend tournaments where such things as army comp, painting, etc are factored into determining a tournament champion.

I always had a 'crybaby' rule however, and even in GW stores where some of my tournaments were conducted GW staff upheld it: If a participant cried too much about the unfairness of it all, was a total dick, thought he/she should get 'special consideration' due to lack of $ to build the army they wished they had, or otherwise undermined the tournament with appeals to 'soft score' namby-pamby crap, he/she was refunded their entry fee, and banned from any future Big Rob tournaments. It was invoked only once...

May we each support what we like, and join together to create what we mutually desire!

I am sure that throughout the 40K gaming universe we can self-select such that everyone on either side of this whole 'soft score' controversy finds or mutually creates their preferred tournament types!
08-27-13 12:11 PM
Magpie_Oz Throne of Skulls it is then.
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

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