An open discussion on the perfect tourney experience

[Dark Alliance]

@the Forum Mods: Please leave this topic here (it is duplicated in the army list discussion forum as well).

I am doing some general research into the nature of what makes a good tournament experience.

Note I used the word 'experience' rather than just simply asking what makes a good tournament. I am really keen to hear what people would like to see from 'the perfect tournament'. What makes a good event for you? Is it a clear, concise rulespack? Do you like army comp, if so what kind of army comp do you think works best and why?

Do you like the overall experience of a tournament, where all aspects of the hobby are considered - gaming, painting, sportsmanship and a quiz? How do you think sportsmanship is best considered within a scoring system?

What do you think of scenarios, and do you think they should decide a game or simply add bonuses to the end vp count?

How important is the social side of an event? Mixing with other gamers, Friday & Saturday night entertainment/things to do and so on.

Finally, what puts you off a particular kind of tournament?

In other words, given a blank sheet of paper how would YOU run the perfect event?

[The buoyancy of water]

Hi,

From my limited tournament experience, I have found that tournaments that consider all aspects of the hobby are best. I found that when armies are judged on painting standard and army background the overall experience is best. Couldn't really say why though, I just had a far better time spending the day playing against fully painted armies instead of people who have just thrown together the most powerful list they could. Also like it when players get to judge who they think has the best army. Each player is given a token and places it next to their favourite army between games one and two. I thought that was a good little extra.

I also think either scenarios or wildcards add a little something to the experience too. For example, I played a tournament where each player got two wildcards they could play over the three games. They both gave minor penalties to your own army, but if you won the game you got more tournament points. Added a bit of an extra bitty to the whole thing.

I also played a tournament where we had an evening meal on the Saturday. Was really good and presented a nice chance to chat to people outside the gaming enviroment.

Lastly, the only tournament I didn't like was a 2250pt one. I now don't like 2250pt games because I think it's too easy for armies to fit in big monsters and such. So I am now strictly a 2000 or 1999pt tournament guy!!

Hope some of that helps.

Cheers,
Dave

[Zakath the slaughterer]

What do you think of scenarios, and do you think they should decide a game or simply add bonuses to the end vp count?

Just add bonuses to the VP count. Making the games depend upon claiming 3 objectives on the table, for example, just leads to certain unit armybuilds or tricks. A bit like the Eldar Jetbikes were used before random game lenght came into picture.

Lastly, the only tournament I didn't like was a 2250pt one. I now don't like 2250pt games because I think it's too easy for armies to fit in big monsters and such

Agreed.

Do you like the overall experience of a tournament, where all aspects of the hobby are considered - gaming, painting, sportsmanship and a quiz?

I have always preferred tournaments where some level of painting or modelling are required. Losing with beautifully converted and painted Chaos Warriors against VC that comprise of just the opposing player's old models with Devlan Mud on them is frustrating.

Also, half of the whole game is chatting and interacting with the other gamer, so how one behaves shouldn't go unnoted. Again, this should not be overdone because I have seen tournament wins decided because some people always gave 0 points for sportsmanship to get an advantage.

Minor comp is always a plus, tournaments where everything is allowed are probably fun too - but not for everyone! I do enjoy playing dead serious for the win but I enjoy more relaxed, friendly games more

How important is the social side of an event? Mixing with other gamers, Friday & Saturday night entertainment/things to do and so on.

I might even go as far as to say it is the most important thing in a tournament. The Gathering of Geeks.

[Edwinsmith]

I like a tournament which is based on pitched battle.

I also think limiting armys by a blanket rule eg no double rare, no more than 3 war machines etc is better than a composition score since what is balanced or characterful is subjective. If I ever were to go to a tournament with a composition score I would simply not take it into account and just take the army I want to take.

[Gastronauticon]

My local miniature dealer throws an annual Fancy Fanatic tourney which is just great.

It is usually at some really nice setting, like a conference center or a rented restaurant by the river. There is a dress code (suit and tie preferably) and a nice buffet. The tourney, with stardard sceanarios mostly, ends in a, well, pub evening on site.
The entry fee is naturally quite steep and there is only a limited number of participants but it is the best gaming event of the year. Winning is, for various reasons, not as prestigeous as other tournaments but that is actually all the better.

Anyhow, geeks in suits are ever so much fun. Try it if you get the opportunity.

[Malekithau]

Having not played in a WB fantasy tourney for 5 years but having been a total tourney whore for years as DA knows I will giv emy opinion. I will preface this by saying I have played other tourneys for other games (told u I was whore

I like total scores based on games results, sportsmanship, painting/modelling, composition/theming - not so keen on quizzes unless they are delivered at 12 midnight after 5 hours of everyone on the P!$$. Then they are funny :]

I like the social aspect of playing a tourney as you can tell but I do believe that players should be rewarded for skill in each of the individual areas well so the best in those areas are rewarded. The top prize should be for the best overall.

I do not like scenarios except for fun as they usually favour some armies over others. Pitched battle is the way to go. Pre-set terrain to save time. No named characters.

Lastly - location, location, location. My old WB club used to run an annual inter club tourney involving about 8 clubs with 4 team members from each and ranked 1-4. $ games ina day with 1500 points. It was held in a licenced club so we could have lunch in the same location as well as have a drink if we wished. Also it was airconditrioned and weather proofed which is more then can be said for many I have played in including the Sydney GT - sweating gamers are really on the nose.

Thats it[]

[Arquinsiel]

The one time I have seen sportsmanship scores not abused was when the inter-round scores were kept secret and each player had to assign a one-time bonus of X points to the player they thought was the *most* sporting.

[Malekithau]

The one time I have seen sportsmanship scores not abused was when the inter-round scores were kept secret and each player had to assign a one-time bonus of X points to the player they thought was the *most* sporting.

I have seen it abused as well but then i would never play in a tourney without some form of sportsmanship.

On the other hand I am opposed to enforced comp rules. One persons cheese is another persons fromage.

[Noble korhedron]

I would agree that "all-aspect" torunaments are best! However, I was in a GW 1000 pts mini-Tournament approx. a month ago - it was done solely on gaming and was nonetheless pretty good fun!! Perhaps the small list sizes helped - people knew they couldn't just make one-trick ponies and still hope to win....?

[Maaksel]

What comp lists do you all like to see?

I've seen quite a few out there, but just wondering what the overall is for people.

[Noble korhedron]

Hmmm, depends on how powerful the crap in different lists is. Depending on the power levels of individual lists, I would say all special choices should be 0-2 for comp purposes, and all rare choices 0-1, if not already decreed so by their army lists. What do the rest of think of these sorts of limits?

[Kefka]

When it comes to scoring your opponent, I have been to a few tournaments where checklists come into play.
For example, for painting you would see:
_ Are all the models painted at least three colours
_ Are their highlights
_ Are there conversions
_ Do the bases have any flock/scenery
And at the end, give room for bonus points, just for WOW factor (as we call it here). That way,people with excellent painting get those bonus points.

Also, it is important for the people running the events to actually check on the scores. Whether you use the checklist system or basic points handed out, always check when a zero or one is given. Go to the player who gave the low score and ask them why, or watch a game the other player is playing and see if the low scores were proper. This usually deters anyone from zero bombing if they know they can get called out on it.

As for overall scoring, Gaming, or generalship, is usually about a third the score here, leaving painting, sportsman, and army comp for the other two thirds (in that descending order of importance). As well, a "Best Sportsman" is always voted on at the end, pick your favourite person you played and they get some extra points.

Scenarios are hit and miss. They need to be play tested a lot before the tournament to make sure they are fair. I have been to a few tournaments and seen some armies get clear advantages or horrendous disadvantages because of the scenarios. The one tournament I did where the scenarios were great, they had been brought into our local GW and gaming clubs and play tested by everyone who came into play. This worked out all the kinks.
Alternatively, you could just use Battle Missions (for 40k).

Socializing is why I go to tournaments. I enjoy meeting new players and playing new games, win or lose.So It's always nice if there is a lunch buffet or gathering afterwards. I don't suggest going to a bar or pub though,as there are always younger players who would get excluded.

And finally,what puts me off at tournaments. Ones where winning the game is the only important thing. I've only been to one tournament like that and it almost made me quit warhammer (doesn't help that it was my first tournament).
Also, tournaments where "teams" of players gang up and vote themselves what ever trophies they want. This is more the other players ruining the game, but it does have to do with the scoring system as well as the tournament organizers lack of vigilance.

[The virgin forest]

I've never been to a WFB tourney, and really isn't up to it. Tourneys are about winning, and warhammer is for having fun playing the game and showing off your latest models.

Lately, when I moved cities, I joined a 'league' just to get out and meet new players, and this has been nice experience, but I really dislike mixing the competitive part into my warhammer.

Also if I have to take a good chunk of my time (like a weekend) and spend it on warhammer, I like it to be something memorable and a shared experience with friends, like organizing a huge battle and making up some special rules. So I have pondered to organize a tourney myself, but it would have to be something story based. A good vs. evil setup with scenarios building up to a huuuge climactic battle, with opening battles unlocking little extras for the main event

[Mutator]

Tourneys are about winning, and warhammer is for having fun playing the game and showing off your latest models.

I've been to tournaments, and they were about having fun playing the game and showing off your latest models.

Realistically, most of us are not going to get a podium finish in any large event. Therefore we change the goalposts to more accurately represent what we want:
Having fun playing the game
Playing new people/armies/playstyles
Checking out new army builds/modelling/paintjobs
Hainging out with fellow geeks
That whole tournament vibe where 20-300 people have gathered solely to breathe warhammer.

To some extent this renders the players pack second to the vibe. Sure, a poorly considered pack which totally removes the illusion that one might, all going exceedingly well, get a podium finish with an army of ones' choice might be offputting (especially where substantial investments in time and money are concerned for travel etc). But primarily, the pack is merely there to set the tone of the event ("bring yer Monty Pythonesque army for laffs or bring your toughest for hardcore"), while we gather to revel in collected geekdom

[Marauder mitch2]

My perfect tournament experience was the WM ETC last year in Maelstrom. Well run great atmosphere tough games.

[Rabidnid]

Rules for attending a tournament

Going to the event
Make sure you have everything sorted out the night before so you can check it against the entry form before you go (yes this does mean you have to have finished painting your army at least the night before the tournament)

Have everything packed into the minimum number of bags and make sure that you can unpack and pack your army efficiently and easily. It will make life easier as you will be doing it a lot over the next few days.

Bring water and painkillers of your choice, as you will have a headache by day two no matter what else happens.

Bring copies of your list, army book, rule book and applicable errata. I usually bring errata for anything related to the most recent books as well, because the users of such books might be a bit vague regarding changes if they are negative.


At the event
Make sure you are there early on the first day so you can be on top of any last minute changes work out where everything is.

Work out who the judges and referees are, then ignore them for the first 4 hours. They will be too busy to think properly and don't need the distraction.

Get to your designated tables early so you can nab any chairs and the best spot to put stuff. (Yes some times the organisers will stick in an extra 30 tables in a room at the last minute and you will not have room to turn around at your table)

When it comes to playing try to be casual but clear on how you will treat terrain and building before you start. Also try to be consistent with rules and measurements.

Other than that decide if you are trying to win the tournament. If not take it easy in the first round and you should avoid any excitable players in subsequent rounds.

Do all of this and any tournament should be enjoyable.

I've never been to a WFB tourney, and really isn't up to it. Tourneys are about winning, and warhammer is for having fun playing the game and showing off your latest models.

For me its to play different armies and people and have fun over a couple days. I have a few trophies, but getting them was never the objective.

[Rabidnid]

double post

[Noble korhedron]

@Rabidnid: Good advice.