Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  squalie on Mon Dec 23, 2013 1:01 pm

Having had a few conversations with a few different people, I thought I may take this opportunity to state the obvious and talk, again, about how we do our events.

Just to make it clear; If an opponent is wearing a clown suit, is buying you beer and told the funniest joke in the world, while ALSO taking only 4 turns and giving you six turns? ...You give him full sportsman points, EVEN IF he brought the most broken net list you have ever seen in your life and completely wipes you from the table.

One has nothing to do with the other. His comp score will be completely destroyed, but his sportsman score should be stellar.

I'm bringing this up as I've heard, and seen it happen where someone was pretty disgruntled after getting their hat handed back to them after a game and then ding the sportsman score because their ego was bruised and they didn't like the army they were playing against. Had it happen to me at the Onslaught and it really ticked me off. Couldn't say anything or my Sportsman would have been affected even further - ironic huh?

Which brings up our events: How should we really, honestly, score our events? And what percentage?

Just for the record, I am vehemently against painting being a big part of a tournament game score. It should be a seperate score/vote, mostly independant of the tournament battles. Completely unfair for a guy that can't paint to compete with a guy that can - and have that significantly inflence every battle of the tournament? Painting should be relegated mostly to a group voted award after/during the event. A Tournament Organizer should not be awarding painting as it can (and has) infer favoratism.

Comp: I'm of the opinion that comp should be really, really simple. ETC can kiss my hairy @$$.

Listen, we all know that in the day 2 Hydras were tough and 2 Stanks are tough. Double Crushers and multi Chimera coupled with a Nurgle DP is the bomb and maxed Warplighhtning gives people a rash. None of those are necessary for the relevant armies to win, which is exactly why they give fits. The player made a list that wasn't necessary to win. They will now probably just "win more".

A simple "no double rare", etc goes a long ways towards bringing things in line without neutering the respective armies.

Sportsman: This one is actually kinda tricky for me as I really appreciate the "Aussie" method of ranking your opponents 1 to 3. It's hardcore, but can hurt feelings. The fellow that got all 3's may not be a bad guy, but just wasn't as good as the guy that was handing out cookies and whiskey the whole event. I really think there should be a bigger percentage spread for sportsman. Instead of a 1 to 5, or something just as narrow, rate your opponent on a 1 to 100. It'd stop the "everyone gets 4's syndrome". Bob got 87%, Nathan got 85%, Carson got 77%, Don got 73% and Sean (as an example Wink ) got 44%. Know what I mean? I've never seen this used, but I think could work.

Battle points: Since we're getting together to "battle" it's obvious that this should be the Lions share and I feel it should be - by a significant margin. Like 75%. With Sports and comp comprising the other 25%. Sportsman is almost irrelevant to us and comp should be around, but even then we simply don't have a group of guys that bring the stink all the time. SO MUCH in fact, that I've noticed our group criticizing lists or units that wouldn't hold a candle in hardcore events. I think that's a huge pat on the back to our gaming group as it's a rarity. Further to that, I pretty much don't care what the other fellow brings. I may not like it, but it's my job to beat my opponent - not ask him to bring an "average" army.

I think I'm bringing this up as there's a different system depending on who's running the event and I've often scratched my head to why they would point the event that way - even though I don't completely understand how they even came up with the system they have presented. Very Happy

I'm rambling, and by no means feel what I have written here is the "correct" method, and I'm even ready to change my mind on some things if I can be presented a solid arguement. Just thought I would get some chatter going over the holiday season so we can have abetter perspective for the new year.

Thoughts?

Oh ya - MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!

squalie

Posts : 3503
Join date : 2008-06-05
Location : Moose Jaw

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Kal on Mon Dec 23, 2013 1:21 pm

very interesting. i know we have talked about this on many occasions. the persentage sportsman score is very interesting. and would make the spread alot different, with very few people getting identical scores. (honestly i should atleast have a 45%  Wink )

i like that 75% is based on the game score. but i might be bias due to the fact i have no armies 100% painted.

limiting people to 1 of each rare would be cool too. i mean they are RARE afterall. make more sense fluffyness

So your saying i have to rent a clown suit and start baking cookies?


Kal

Posts : 1891
Join date : 2013-04-07
Age : 27
Location : Moose Jaw

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Kuyp on Mon Dec 23, 2013 2:49 pm

Comp is the only thing that really bugs me. limiting everyone to no double rares hinders everyone, unfortunately it hinders all the wrong armies.
i only see one way of doing a well comped system and that is going balls deep with a list of rules so long you'd think you're reading the skaven faq.

I don't really think we need comp here, our group is so small and opinionated that anyone bringing the list of doom will soon be labeled and ridiculed as not a good player and only able to win cause of there army, and because of that no one really "brings the pain". no i know what you must be thinking, "no one here is that mean and would really call someone out", but i strongly feel that its insinuated even if its not said.

At the end of the day i may bitch and moan about how hard it is to kill a daemon prince, how ridiculous phoenix guard may be, just how good warp lighting cannons and skull-a-pults are, or really any number of things available EVERY army. it boils down to unit jealousy, if you want to have that supper Killy vampire lord in your army cause its tearing you to shreds, maybe start playing VC... or just live with your army choice and get over it.

I just don't think its right to tell someone they cant bring "whatever" because its to good and will make my victory very hard to achieve. imagine your favorite model and it cost you $100 to buy and you spent 30 hours painting it up and then never get to use it in a game even if the rest of your army is complete rubbish.


Don i like your idea for the % value on sportsmanship. i know that i have stopped giving good sportsman scores to a guy who i just had a good game against, cause the chances are here im gonna have two more good opponents who all had equally as good games and now i have to pick who i like better and who gets the shaft? never really been a fan.

Kuyp

Posts : 963
Join date : 2008-11-30
Age : 25
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  nathanr on Mon Dec 23, 2013 3:26 pm

I like playing warhammer. I really like playing warhammer with the group that we've got here, even Sean  Wink !

Only once have I ever stood across the table from an army that I knew I couldn't beat. That was in Edmonton and it was pretty much the WOC net-list of doom. My opponent was a pleasant enough person and the game went as well as could be expected, I even had some moments of hope before I was crushed utterly. I had fun trying to beat the "unbeatable". This is why I don't like composition rules. Everyone likes the underdog story, there are whole genres of movies devoted to the theme. I think if you want to bring the hardest stuff you can think of then bring it on. I'm going to try to beat it with Bretonnians, my brain and a healthy dose of luck. Unfortunately, people do often penalize those players through sportsmanship scores. I don't agree with people who lose badly and then penalize their opponents through sportsmanship but if there is no outlet to rate your opponent's list then that's usually where it will spill out. At the same time, vague composition rules usually also penalize innocent army lists. The "no dual rares" rule Don proposed does put a stop to dual chimeras but it also stops Wood Elf players from taking 2 eagles. It also stops High Elf players from bringing dual bolt throwers, hardly overpowered. I much prefer the option to rate my opponent's army. I'd also like those scores to be public knowledge after the tournament so if I got dinged in sportsmanship or composition I could know that and make adjustments for the next tournament.

How about this for a point breakdown:
Battle Points - 75 (max. 25 per round)
Sportsmanship - 10 (based on a rating out of 100 each game and then averaged)
Composition - 10 (based on a rating out of 100 each game and then averaged)
Painting - 5

The painting issue is another tough one. Painting a whole army is hard. I've done it 3 times over the past 15 years and I'm in the midst of it for a fourth time. I'm at an advantage because I'm a hoarder and never sell my warhammer toys so I've got multiple painted armies to choose from. I would imagine that it is discouraging to be new to the hobby and see someone who has a 10 year head start on getting their army painted doing better in tournaments just because they've had more time in the hobby. I think painting scores (if present at all) should be based on a single unit or model from your army. Everyone should have 1 model that they believe is a good representation of their best work. I don't know how it should be judged, maybe have a panel of judges give a rating out of 100 to each entry and then average the scores from each judge.


nathanr

Posts : 4384
Join date : 2008-06-10
Age : 35
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Galadros on Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:16 pm

This feels very much like a discussion topic that Carson brought up back in August on this very forum. Might be worth a reference back there... http://raveninghordes.forumakers.com/t1357-tournament-scoring
 
I'll address a few of my thoughts, based upon a dozen events I've attended over the past couple of years. Ultimately, it's up to the tournament organizer to decide on how he or she weighs the value of the various aspects of this hobby. The attendees (or lack of attendees) will let you know whether you've gotten it right.
 
You absolutely CANNOT overlook the value of incorporating painting scores into the overall score, even if it just a simple checklist of achievements. To address your point about people always painting new armies, Carson... Perhaps people are rushing armies to the table because the painting score is not weighted enough? I understand that some may be working their very first army, but most of you have a painted army already, don't you? Or just as likely, you have ALMOST finished armies that need some incentive to complete. An increase, not a decrease in painting weight will lead to this. It certainly has in Alberta where I have seen only 2 unpainted armies over 8 events this past year. Speaking for myself (and perhaps others) I hate playing unpainted models! When I go to a tournament, I EXPECT fully painted on both sides of the table.
Nathan, I don't feel that your proposal to judge only the best stuff in an army is viable. Someone could spend 30 hours on a glorious centrepeice at the expense of fielding a grey plastic army, maybe even without shields on their spearmen. It would be a travesty to reward that as a measure of tournament preparedness. If you want to do this kind of thing, have a seperate painting contest on the same tournament day.
 
Secondly, I don't believe in comp, at least not beyond what your army book tells you can and cannot do. I certainly agree that it does spill over into sportsmanship scores, though. The result of the game also skews this score as well. I'd bet my army on the premise that guys who clobber their opponents get worse scores than those who get whooped. So how do we fix this? I recommend simplifying it. Score 1 for an average game, 2 for something exceptional and memorable, and 0 for a poor experience. This could be your comp score (if you want to keep one at all).
Sportsmanship should be renamed as Behaviour score. Out of 5 points per game, use 1-3 to reflect game play, such as; did your opponent play in a timely manner, did he move and measure appropriately, did he handle any odd situations well? Points 4-5 should be reserved player personality. Consider things like; was this player engaging before, during and after the game, did he make me comfortable, was there any entertaining banter?
 
How much percentage should each of these be worth? Well back to the point above, it is up to the tournement organizer to decide how to weigh these. Whatever is decided, it is important to make that available in advance. If painting doesn't matter, or it matters hugely, that would dictate what army an individual brings to the day.

Galadros

Posts : 191
Join date : 2008-07-06
Age : 44
Location : Edmonton

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Kal on Mon Dec 23, 2013 4:37 pm

nathanr wrote:I like playing warhammer.  I really like playing warhammer with the group that we've got here, even Sean  Wink !

butt of all the jokes eh Wink thats it we'll settle it like MEN!... with small plastic painted figures and 6 sided dice....LIKE MEN I SAY Very Happy 

i like the idea on judging one painted figure but there still has to be some credit given to fully painted armies, cuz they do look badass and its what we all strive for.

guess l can see the logic behind not limiting everything to one rare. and as Dom said if we wana start getting into that we'll have rules as long as the skaven faq. I like the idea if you want it then built that army. just means ill have to buy all the armies! well most of em (no nasty elfies)


Kal

Posts : 1891
Join date : 2013-04-07
Age : 27
Location : Moose Jaw

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  nathanr on Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:01 pm

One more thing that I feel I should add, a lot of tournaments have a "best general" award for the top battle point total disregarding the soft scores (sportsmanship, comp, painting etc). I like the idea of this as it serves as a way to acknowledge the individual who did the best in the W column while also gently suggesting that they should make a little more effort in the other aspects of the hobby and maybe get the big prize next time. As my Grandmother always says, you get more flies with prizes than complicated composition rules.

nathanr

Posts : 4384
Join date : 2008-06-10
Age : 35
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Kal on Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:06 pm

Galadros wrote: I understand that some may be working their very first army .

What could we do for people who are still painting their first army? different scoring? scorring based off progress?

I agree with a best general prize idea. thats for the gaming aspect and the over all is for the hobby aspect

Kal

Posts : 1891
Join date : 2013-04-07
Age : 27
Location : Moose Jaw

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  ScottRadom on Mon Dec 23, 2013 6:02 pm

Getting rid of a paint score? Why not get rid of Sportsmanship and everything else that isn't reflected in battle points? A best overall is a representation of the player who best represents what the hobby is about. Sportsmanship, fielding representative armies, having a nicely painted army, and yes winning games from time to time.

Winning a tourney with an unpainted army is like sticking your dink in your sister. You might have had a good time but it's nothing to brag about.

If you want to win the overall championship you're going to have to win games. You're also going to have to use your best people skills. And yes you should expect to field a fully painted army. New to the game? Don't have your army painted yet? Hop to it, you'll be glad you did. You don't have to have display level rank and file troops out there but there should be paint, bases, and appropriate WYSIWYG stuff on all your mini's. If a fully painted army isn't the goal then why not just play a computer game?

Remove painting and you remove the soul of the tabletop experience.

ScottRadom

Posts : 2158
Join date : 2008-04-18
Age : 40
Location : Saskatoon, SK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Carson on Mon Dec 23, 2013 6:55 pm

I had a long winded reply but Scott and Kieran summed it up nicely.

This kind of discussion is key though for us to keep striving for the best tournaments for our group in Saskatoon. I am a big fan of comped envirnoments in tournaments, but it really has become redundant in our group......peer pressure. I've never been a power player though and can't see the thrill that one gets from crushing an opponent with "that list" instead of winning with some skill.

I've basically changed the scoring on every single tournament in the last while to find the right fit and will keep working on it.
That being said, our tournament in January is maxed out and I can't wait to throw dice.

We'll see what happens in this round and then maybe add a few things to round4.

_________________
What is best in life?
Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of thier women.

Carson
Admin

Posts : 2783
Join date : 2008-04-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Ironwoulf on Mon Dec 23, 2013 7:32 pm

I like having best general and an overall champion. Can't paint worth shit and lose more than I win so screwed both ways but at least i can say I was instrumental in making the winner.

Ironwoulf

Posts : 348
Join date : 2008-06-19
Age : 55
Location : Dalmeny SK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Pud on Mon Dec 23, 2013 8:26 pm

I can't paint, I can't play, and my Ogres are my Babies but I have to take a solid list to play. I play this game for the fun, not the glory. At Onslaught I learned a lot and had a good look at this Hobby, I suck. I will play till someone rips the dice out of my hands, but I will play at scoring system that anyone chooses. I like the idea of % for sportsmanship and 75% for battle points and best General is the glory I seek as it is the one thing I might reach on day, when I am old, grey, and I pull a horse shoe out of my arse.  santa 

Pud

Posts : 481
Join date : 2010-05-11
Age : 41
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  squalie on Mon Dec 23, 2013 10:09 pm

Seems I need to explain myself a little better and support some of my earlier points.

When I talk about double rares, everyone should know 2 Eagles is not the same as 2 Stanks. I didn't mean to implement NEVER double rares, but in some events one could say "no 2 Stanks, no double Crushers, etc". It'd actually be a very short list. This "laundry list" that's mentioned may have about 5-6 units on it. And again, I should state that it doesn't bother me that much, but I felt I should bring it up as it's often mentioned. I also care so little about this point as to let it go.

I've said what I said about sportsman and will see how this thread develops before weighing in more on that.

About painting: What I'm trying to say is that during an event after each game your opponent rates your army from 1-10 (or whatever). That is always weighted towards the "better' painted armies, which seems a little unfair to the younger fellow that can't paint well but put a ton of effort into it. I like the point Galadros made about a checklist. Of course there should be rewards for painting just looking for ideas on how to balance things.

Now, since I love the aspect of painting in the hobby and absolutely believe that one should be rewarded for his talent and efforts I'm just trying to find a way for the newbie painter to compete with a more talented/experienced painter and have them rated on their own merit. Why should the newbie bother when the same experienced guy can show up and have a nicely painted army. I can't stand playing unpainted armies and really dislike playing against armies where little effort is put into them.

Getting rid of a paint score? Why not get rid of Sportsmanship and everything else that isn't reflected in battle points? A best overall is a representation of the player who best represents what the hobby is about. Sportsmanship, fielding representative armies, having a nicely painted army, and yes winning games from time to time.

I wasn't trying to say get rid of an intregal part.

If you want to win the overall championship you're going to have to win games. You're also going to have to use your best people skills. And yes you should expect to field a fully painted army. New to the game? Don't have your army painted yet? Hop to it, you'll be glad you did. You don't have to have display level rank and file troops out there but there should be paint, bases, and appropriate WYSIWYG stuff on all your mini's. If a fully painted army isn't the goal then why not just play a computer game?

I agree 101% Armies should be painted. How do we get the guys that don't paint as well (and never will) as some to compete with the guys that do?

squalie

Posts : 3503
Join date : 2008-06-05
Location : Moose Jaw

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  GeoffKlassen on Mon Dec 23, 2013 10:23 pm

the painting score is easy 10 points out of 15 for painted with minimum 3 colours, 1 for basing, 1 for fancy or themed banners, 1 for conversions, then two extra points for special rewards like rally cool bases or guys named Geoff. Its not hard to paint 3 colour on all models.

Sportsmanship has always sucked, all ways hated the vote for your favorites 1-3 means that you have a popularity contest. I prefer the checklist method more that way there is no ambiguity. E.G.
1. Did he have tape measure and templates
2. Did he roll his dice quickly
3. Did he measure properly
4. Were they prompt during their turns
5. Did they try to go back a phase that they missed
6. Did they smell
7. Did they shake your hand at the end
8. Were they sore losers or gracious winners.
9. Did they use movement trays to speed up their playing
10. Were they named Geoff?

Or something similar to this makes sure no one but me maxes out but it gets rid of the composition in sportsmanship issue and gets rid of the popularity contest.

Having an award for best general and one for over all champion tends to be the way to go though.

Just my two bits.

GeoffKlassen

Posts : 223
Join date : 2008-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Carson on Mon Dec 23, 2013 11:17 pm

I think that best General is what has been missing from the last few tournaments.

I'm going to add it to this one.

What is the consensus on a checklist for painting and sportsmanship. Its very easy to implement for this tournament.

_________________
What is best in life?
Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of thier women.

Carson
Admin

Posts : 2783
Join date : 2008-04-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  nathanr on Tue Dec 24, 2013 9:51 am

I don't like the checklist for sportsmanship.  I can play a game with someone who meets all these requirements:

1. Has tape measure and templates
2. Rolls his dice quickly
3. Measures properly
4. Is prompt during their turns
5. Tries to go back a phase that they missed
6. Doesn't smell
7. Shakes your hand at the end
8. Is a gracious winner/loser.
9. Uses movement trays to speed up their playing
10. Is named Geoff

and still come away thinking they were a bad sport.  Do I still give them 10/10?  Good sportsmanship isn't filling all the requirements on a checklist. It is giving that player who forgot to do magic before they shot a chance to go back, or reminding your opponent to roll a ward save or stupidity check that they've missed.  It is genuinely and actively trying to make the game a positive experience for both players involved.  Some people do it well and some don't but good sportsmanship should be a goal that we all strive for.

The score out of 100 is exactly what I think sportsmanship should be.  If you had 3 good games you can score all three opponents well but you can still have a scale to work with instead of bad/average/good or "everyone gets a 4/5".  I could play Don, Carson and Sean and have great games with all 3.  They'd all start at an 80 (4/5) but Sean was extra prompt with his turns and he graciously let me go back to my magic phase when I got overly excited about shooting at his daemon prince so he gets bumped up to an 87.  Carson was a gentleman as always and our game went smoothly so his score stays at 80.  The game with Don was good but he did get emotional and pouted a bit when I killed his Hirophant, plus he fudged some charge distances (which didn't result in any major issues in the game) so he gets a 72.  The scores aren't based on anything really concrete, I don't have a list of things that give bonuses or penalties.  It's just based on how I feel after the game and I think that is what sportsmanship should be.  It is NOT based on game results, in my example above I specifically didn't mention the results of the games because it doesn't matter.

Please note that the scenario above is purely fictional.  Any similarities to real persons or events are purely coincidental.

For painting I think a checklist is a good thing and helps to even the playing field.  There should be points awarded for progress made even if the whole army isn't painted yet.


Last edited by nathanr on Tue Dec 24, 2013 12:28 pm; edited 1 time in total

nathanr

Posts : 4384
Join date : 2008-06-10
Age : 35
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Galadros on Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:25 am

Because I so desperately want you guys to hang onto a painting/hobby score in your events, I'd like to share something I've encountered at a few other events. It is a checklist of hobby achievements, something like this...

1. Army fully assembled
2. Most models base painted
3. ALL models basecoated
4. Highlight colours throughout
5. Washes and layering employed
6. Details (belts, brooches, etc.) all painted
7. Exceptional painting through blending
8. Bases done for all models
9. Movement trays for the whole army
10. Extra texture on bases
11. Basic conversions done on some models
12. Complex conversions within the army
13. Creative theme that carries throughout
14. Display board for army
15. Written background story

I've listed 15 items here which can be modified and tweaked, obviously. The idea for tournament scoring is that you are capped at 10 though. So, if you achieve 12 of 15 items, only 10 points go toward overall score. However, all 12 would measure toward best army award. I feel that this lessens the gap between the most experienced hobbyists and the fresh ones. Yet the best hobbyists still get recognition for thier exceptional efforts without removing the incentive to pursue hobby improvement for all.
How do you feel about that?

Galadros

Posts : 191
Join date : 2008-07-06
Age : 44
Location : Edmonton

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  nathanr on Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:31 am

I really like that.  It covers the whole spectrum and people who are just starting out can actually get a decent score without too much trouble (at the moment my unfinished Dark Elves would score a 5), even if they don't have their whole army painted yet.  It makes the painting thing a non-issue while still giving people something to strive for.

Edit: It also lets people know what is expected when they come to a tournament. It might be unrealistic to require everyone to have a painted army but we aren't too far off from having everyone score an 8-10 on this list. If someone wants to bring something new and unfinished they can fully assemble their army with a few conversions, basecoat it, do the bases up nice and put together movement trays. That'll get them 6 right there, maybe even 7 or 8 depending on the quality of their conversions and basing. If it is a themed army they'll be at 9, if it's themed it shouldn't be too hard to write some background fluff for it so that's 10. Full tournament points for painting and you haven't even painted a single model! The difference is, you've spent a good amount of time and effort in the building portion of the hobby and that is worth it, plus you'll have the basis for an award-winning army in the future.


Last edited by nathanr on Tue Dec 24, 2013 12:37 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : more thoughts)

nathanr

Posts : 4384
Join date : 2008-06-10
Age : 35
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  squalie on Tue Dec 24, 2013 12:25 pm

That's actually the point I'm trying to make. Painting is an absolute intregal part of Warhammer. It HAS to be rewarded - hell, even insisted upon. The ONLY single thing I'm trying to accomplish is to even the field between the talent levels of painters.


squalie

Posts : 3503
Join date : 2008-06-05
Location : Moose Jaw

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Kal on Tue Dec 24, 2013 1:08 pm

I like the best general

i like the sportsman score out of 100

painting needs to be important still. the whole background story is fun but idk if it would ever pan out like expected

Kal

Posts : 1891
Join date : 2013-04-07
Age : 27
Location : Moose Jaw

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Ironwoulf on Tue Dec 24, 2013 2:29 pm

I do think painting should be included. I like the 15 pt system. I appreciate playing against painted armies which in turn prods me into painting my own, even if "table top" quality.

Ironwoulf

Posts : 348
Join date : 2008-06-19
Age : 55
Location : Dalmeny SK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Carson on Tue Dec 24, 2013 5:40 pm

I think we might have hit on something here. I'm gonna add these ideas to the tournament on the 4th and we'll see how they work out.

Merry Christmas everyone.

_________________
What is best in life?
Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of thier women.

Carson
Admin

Posts : 2783
Join date : 2008-04-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Kuyp on Tue Dec 24, 2013 7:22 pm

Sean just ask Andre about back story for armies. Plenty of dedication there

Kuyp

Posts : 963
Join date : 2008-11-30
Age : 25
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  nathanr on Tue Dec 24, 2013 9:52 pm

I always enjoy playing Andre's dwarfs for exactly that reason. Every character and unit has a name and backstory which I can appreciate because I've named all my dwarf characters too.

nathanr

Posts : 4384
Join date : 2008-06-10
Age : 35
Location : Saskatoon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Carson on Wed Dec 25, 2013 10:43 am

doesn't everyone (maybe secretly) name their characters.

_________________
What is best in life?
Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of thier women.

Carson
Admin

Posts : 2783
Join date : 2008-04-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Tournament Comp vs. Sportsman? Yes, there is a difference.

Post  Sponsored content Today at 10:12 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum