Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So what do you guys think of the qualifying system having played it?

Personally i don't like the auto-qualify for the best painted nominations, at first i thought it was a good idea, but with the majority of entries from my heat being stuff i'd seen before i started to think maybe that wasn't so good.

I think bringing back points for painting would be better.
Each game get 1 pt for 3 colours, 1pt for based models, 1 pt for detailed. -2pts not 3 colours,
Then the bestpainted nominations get an extra 1pt total, meaning they would qualify above someone on the same points as them but not people who have done better gaming wise. also everyone whos made an effort gets a reward.

Anyone else got idea's on this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
I'm still not to sure about it. I love how it's improved the standard level of painting for the armies. I saw lots of really ugly weakly (and barely) painted armies last year. This year it felt like there were hardly any.

The reduction in places for generalship scores (winning) has hurt. Though it didn't seem to have any negative affect on the atmosphere. Which was odd considering how much more difficult it was to qualify.

I want to see lovely armies at the final. A free ticket to the final for bringing a beautifully painted army is I think a good reward. (Especially considering that GW aren't big on prizes for these events.) It doesn't seem quite right to reward people with bonus points towards their generalship score when painting has nothing to do with how well you can play. Maybe they shouldn't get these places to the final but some recognition should be given to them and this isn't a bad idea in my opinion.

I don't think they should have reduced the number of places for the top finishers. Warhammer world can cope with over 150 people and there's always a number of people who don't turn up on the day. If they'd added the painting places to the top finishers then I think it might have been better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
I like the idea of auto places just not the implementation. Knowing you have qualified on Sunday morning just seem a bit cr*p.

Plus the 10 fewer places for Generalmanship really hurt.

I personally think it should be that:
The Top 45 Pointswise should get through.
The top 3 of the 6 painted armies should get through (that way it is still all to play for)
2 Places left for 'Wild Cards'

Also the old painting criteria should be left in place BUT you loose points for not meeting them rather than gaining them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
well supposedly there was 170 ppl at heat 3.

So based off that you could still have 50 gaming spots and 6 nominee's per heat and there would still only be 168 Tickets for the final.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
I don't think they should have reduced the number of places for the top finishers. Warhammer world can cope with over 150 people and there's always a number of people who don't turn up on the day. If they'd added the painting places to the top finishers then I think it might have been better.
I quite agree - they did not need to reduce the gaming places, as it did seem to make things more competitive and cut-throat this year. (the atmosphere was fine - but the lists seemed filthier)

I also think they should not nominate just 6 for painting and have those 6 go through - but nominate as many as they think (anywhere from 5-10 or wharever) and have the best 5 from votes go through. (the suggestion of just 3 painting places seems a little slim)

This also means those nominated for painting still won't know if they have qualified or not until the end - so keep on playing as hard as they can.
(I had a few people wandering about who I think expected me to just roll over and die in my games on the Sunday because I had already qualified. This ironically made me try all the harder because to do less wouldn't have been fair to the other players there who were not 'lucky' enough to pull someone who wasn't bothered to play.)

So in the end you would have 150 from gaming, 15 from painting, then up to 5 extra places for wildcards and best sportsmen - for 170 total, which WHW can cope with.

I like the fact that they are supporting painting though and this should definitely stay (In some form), as I think that this is an important aspect of the hobby.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,988 Posts
Actually if you get nominated there's some argument for throwing your remaining games. It doesn't actually hurt anyone, just means another guy gets through to the final for a free weekend.

If you qualify both from painting and gaming then you "waste" a qualifying space. Basically if all the good painters don't do well on games then 46 people go through. Otherwise it could only be 40.

Personally I don't like the auto qualifying thing. People should get points for painting so that people do actually paint and maybe the nominated armies should get a bonus or something.

I would think that it makes sense to allow a maximum number of people through. Take the maximum capacity of warhammer world, divide it by 3, that's how many people go through. If you only have 120 people at the final then the place will be half empty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Actually if you get nominated there's some argument for throwing your remaining games. It doesn't actually hurt anyone, just means another guy gets through to the final for a free weekend.
Actually I think it hurts the other gamers on similar points level who don't have an opponent who will throw their game - as it is unfair on them.

In essence, it could mean someone getting through the final just because of lucky random opponent draw, rather than by earning their place through winning games or having a well painted army.

It seems very unreasonable to expect someone nominated to throw their games just so someone else can qualify without effort.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Abuse the system.

Then they'll have to change something.

I'm at the distinct advantage of only being able to roll 1 dice at a time. You could say playing me is an advantage too.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,988 Posts
I don't like it, but that is how it is in the current system. You can "give" somebody a free ticket if you want. I'm not saying you should, only that you can. I'm not sure what I'd do, but I guess that yes, I probably would. More likely in game 6, where there's no chance of the guy then going and knocking out somebody else, than in game 5.

It doesn't mean that any other people who would have qualified otherwise now won't. It might put you out of the top 40, swapping with the guy you are playing, but not anyone else.

I guess if I was in a position to actually win the heat then I would play for that. In that situation by game 5 this wouldn't really be an issue anyway, since we would both probably be through anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
The fact that you can influence paying customers chance of qualifying highlights how shit the system is and how big an error GW have made.

Like they care about Joe Public and his GT dreams?

Theres no argument to justify the cock up they've made.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,988 Posts
I don't view it in such strong terms as cock ups and abusing the system. No system is perfect and I don't envy the events guys having to design a tournament. I do think it gets better, in general, over time. They do listen to constructive feedback and I think they do care about the players.

For me it comes down to a simple question. If I could give some guy a free weekend at the finals without hurting anyone else then the chances are that I would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
333 Posts
If they had referee judged painting points that would not only remove the complaints about auto-qualifying but would encourage people to paint better. I got whacked on painting at the WPS GT (although I didn't agree with losing points for squad markings when there were no duplicate units) and I will make more effort when going to the Club Challenge. Positive result.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
I'm still not to sure about it. I love how it's improved the standard level of painting for the armies. I saw lots of really ugly weakly (and barely) painted armies last year.
Have to disagree, two years ago I was making sure my army had details, squad markings, etc, as I gained a few pts here and there for doing so- it was rewarded.

Now, me and 100 others are not dumb enough to think we stand a chance in hell of being Nominated, so have nothing to gain by putting in that extra effort.

So how does that improve painting standards over all?

I hope Gaz is waiting for his Golden Demon auto-entry.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,988 Posts
Jeridian makes some good points.

If you aren't going to get into the top 6, why bother.

Why 6? What if there are 5 or 7 really good armies? Before this wouldn't have been a problem.

Golden daemon exists to reward great painting and modelling. Tournaments should be about the game. Both have their place but at the moment I don't think it's right for painters to be taking places from gamers at the GT finals.
 

·
Slave to Heresy!
Joined
·
8,803 Posts
I agree with Jeridan.

Two years ago (my first GT) I took my Guard and was gob smacked by a drunk in the bar..

Nah seriously the painting then was so much higher than the next two. I prefer the current system but the standard has definately dropped.

I made an effort that year. This year I drew wobbly black lines down the middle of all my models. They even had parts of Blood Angel transfers hanging off them ffs. A total mess.

The way I see the guys that can paint make more effort and the ones that know they cant win (like me) dont bother.

I'm opposed to the auto qualifiers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Golden daemon exists to reward great painting and modelling. Tournaments should be about the game. Both have their place but at the moment I don't think it's right for painters to be taking places from gamers at the GT finals.
Firstly Golden Demon is a completely separate event and has nothing to do with a GT.

Painting a whole 1,500 point army is a very different thing to painting a Golden Demon piece, and Golden Demon winners don't earn places at the GT final just because they did well at Golden Demon. So it is erroneous to make comparisons in this way.

Secondly, Games Workshop hobby is not just about competitive gaming.
Games Workshop (whether or not you agree with it) are trying to raise all aspects of the hobby at their GT - thus it is not a 'competitive gaming' event but should be seen as a 'best of the hobby' event.
The tournament is about the 'game' in the general sense, but competitive play is only one aspect of the wider picture.

So, painters are not 'taking' gamers places, GW are merely trying to ensure a good spread of all hobbyists.

Is it a perfect system? - No.
Like anything it will take time to sort out, evolve and change and GW may well play about with the balance of gaming to painting and sportsmanship, but complaining about it in the meantime wont help.

I can't see GW changing their stance on this any time soon - they want to make their event a flagship event for the whole hobby.
At the end of the day, if you don't like it - you don't have to go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
318 Posts
No offence, mate, but this is a thread asking for opinions on the Qualification System.

Including negative opinions.

If we're just supposed to put up or shut up, then this thread might as well close.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top