40K Tournament on September 12th

rokassan wrote: People will need questions answered and decisions made. They don't need you playing and not regulating. Anyhow your gonna get interupted 50 times while your playing and that's not fair to the other guy playing you. You also need to keep track of time. As the organizer I say either run it or play in it. Not both.

What you are saying has never been a problem or issue for anyone I have seen run a tournament while playing it. I know how to play quickly, I know the rules so I don't have to figure them out when asked(most "judges" are really people who spend the day learning the rules on the spot), and there are maybe two rules questions a round, not 50. I see where you are coming from, it would probably be very difficult for you. However you are exaggerating your concerns.

Oh and keeping track of time is easy. Often I have been to tournaments where there is a 30 minute, 15 minute or 10 minute warning. I set multiple alarms on my cell phone to give people a half way warning, 30 minute and 15 minute warning.

All of my games on saturday were done before any other games. I play an army that is easy and quick to play and that is how I play it. If the TO ever cannot make it I will be happy to step up to the plate and get us out of the store by 7PM. Regardless if you flip a coin and it lands on heads he will have to play anyways. He should be prepared to play in his own tournament without it mucking up the works.

Whether or not they've played, Brian and Chris have run the smoothest, most organized tournaments I've ever played in at Sunshine, and Brian and Chris both have waaaay too much GW merchandise to lower themselves to abusing authority to win. It's never, ever been an issue for me, and no one else has voiced a problem with it, to my knowledge.

It is one thing to play the fill in army, but if you are the judge you certainly can't play and compete to win. You definately can't take a prize slot.

It is a conflict of interest - pure and simple.

If you need it explained more than that, then I question your ability to ever understand.

ShadowMaster wrote:
If you need it explained more than that, then I question your ability to ever understand.

Seriously is this called for?

I was going for the old Harley Davidson quote - it may have come off wrong.

my appologies

This thread makes me lol.

I must say I agree with Bill though. It's one of those things that people have to agree to disagree on.

and if you are invited to a tournament where the judge is also a player, then it's always your decision whether you want to go or not.

I do wonder though, Brian and Nick, how would you feel if you were going to a tournament , where the competition is tough, and the organizer happens to be the best player around, but is also buddies with all of the regulars of the place, and then he decides to play in the tournament. The same guy who already made up few unknown scenarios for the tournament. You're telling me that you'd be ok with that?

The difference is the scenarios were not unknown and made up. They were standard missions randomly chosen by dice roll. Hell, the person that set up the boards/terrain, me, got 4th out of 6

I agree that in theory it is better to have a judge be completely and absolutely impartial by not participating. I also believe there are steps that can be taken so that a judge can also participate, for the most part, in a non-advantageous position.

I think we should be able to make the army list for the judge =p

Actually, I was reading on another site of an interesting idea. Everyone made a list, brought their army, and then would have to raffle them off. So say there were 10 entrants:

IG-A
IG-B
Eldar
Deamons
SM-A
SM-B
Tau
Necrons
Orks

A small piece of paper would be placed in a hat with a corresponding army. Everyone would then pick a piece of paper out of the hat and have to play with that army for the tournament. Brings an interesting element to the game. However it requires people trusting other players with their armies

and praying to god people don't break/chip the paint. It's been discussed...

yeah.... that would be good for an unpainted army tournament.

In what competative situation(NFL,Poker,ard'boy run by GW)do you see a referee,judge,organizer or moderator participate? NONE. If you want to play then play. If you want to judge,regulate or organize.then do that. Not both. Being the organizer shouldn't be getting prize support or ranked if he does play is he gonna bring his A-game? I don't think so and if he is playing for rank and prize support that's BULLSHIT.

Seeing how this is not some kind of "official" event of any kind, it don't mean shit.

People are paying to participate so it does mean shit.

This is one of those things where people are gonna see it one way or another. Bill , you're not gonna convince these dudes that it's unethical .

So I guess whatever floats your boat. Each person has the right to go or not go to a tournament.

If it was a situation where Joel started seeing that tournament attendance was down because the organizer happens to always play and place in the top 3... I could understand laying some rules against it down... but if you don't have people complaining about it..... I guess to each his own.

Im just arguing a point.

yeah, but we only had 6 ppl show up last weekend...

Placing regularly in the Top 3 in a tournament with 6-10 people playing isn't hard, whether or not you know the missions in advance. Someone with the skill to regularly place in the Top 3 would have no need to "cheat" by means of being an organizer and player, both... and ethics? In a board game? Really?

Yeesh.

Ethics : the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.

Is it so hard to imagine that competitive gaming has it's own unwritten rules?

Or if you're uncomfortable with the word Ethics, than how about a sense of courtesy. some may call it gaming etiquette?

The point is not whether you, Chris, or Brian would need to cheat in order to win. The point is, that as an organizer, you are in the unique position to use your knowledge of the event and ability to make judgments in a way that creates an advantageous situation for yourself. Whether or not you use that advantage to win or not is irrelevant. The simple fact that you are not the same as every other gamer in the room, creates an inequality and therefore I can imagine that some people may be uncomfortable with it.

Hmm. I suppose some people may have trust issues. I concede. I'm gonna play regardless, and I don't care who judges or plays, so... no difference to me.

ShadowMaster wrote:It is one thing to play the fill in army, but if you are the judge you certainly can't play and compete to win. You definately can't take a prize slot.

It is a conflict of interest - pure and simple.

If you need it explained more than that, then I question your ability to ever understand.

Who are you, do you even play in the 40k events?

Ovich wrote:
I do wonder though, Brian and Nick, how would you feel if you were going to a tournament , where the competition is tough, and the organizer happens to be the best player around, but is also buddies with all of the regulars of the place, and then he decides to play in the tournament. The same guy who already made up few unknown scenarios for the tournament. You're telling me that you'd be ok with that?

I wouldn't care because I know at best it would give him a 1-2% advantage over the field.

Your entire post makes me sound like you are paranoid about collusion and good ol boys stickin together. I've been playing in tournaments in Miami for many years and I have never seen anything like that. I'm a good judge of character so I could tell if the TO is a shady guy.

I also suggest never writing your own scenarios, using scenarios from the rulebook, ard boyz, and major events that publish their missions is not only better for the players but then there should be less speculation about the intent of the TO.

The Eldar Guy wrote:The difference is the scenarios were not unknown and made up. They were standard missions randomly chosen by dice roll. Hell, the person that set up the boards/terrain, me, got 4th out of 6

I agree that in theory it is better to have a judge be completely and absolutely impartial by not participating. I also believe there are steps that can be taken so that a judge can also participate, for the most part, in a non-advantageous position.

It's appropriate to have a TO who is not playing in a large event. However the problem then isn't anything that people are stating here, it is simply a matter of logistics. Their would be too much requiring his attention for him to play.

When you have a 6-12 player tournament with skilled players who generally finish their games before all other players and know the rules without looking in the book then their is no reason the TO can't play.

At the end of the day I don't want to be the TO. I just want the event to run smoothly and quickly without someone pulling random missions out of their ass that ruin people's fun. If you ever played at Alternate Dimensions you know what I mean.

grix wrote:yeah, but we only had 6 ppl show up last weekend...

If I didn't play it would have been 2 games and some frowning bastard watching.

Seriously Bill and Rokassan have no sense of scale. It's not a 30 player tournament, it's 6-12 guys that show up and there are no significant prizes. What do I care about a model kit that I will probably never assemble? I already have my armies.