|
Post by wstevens on Sept 24, 2008 23:56:11 GMT
There are already some superb markers but sadly still some people without them. You have until next week to have these on the table ready for judging. As a partial prize I think it would be of interest to the club to recognise our good painters and possibly award morale bonus VPs towards their total for this. I propose for 1st place an extra 200vps 2nd place an extra 100 vps 3rd place an extra 50 vps Anyone against this? For judging have your markers - erm unmarked without any names on them as I will be asking for votes from the roleplayers and younger club members.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1shakeandmake on Sept 25, 2008 0:59:27 GMT
Hello Warren
Can I have a marker please, that will stop Stephen shouting at me when I record the map for the following week.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Mawson on Sept 25, 2008 10:25:16 GMT
Actually I am. What has the marker, nicely modeled and painted or otherwise, got to do with league play? The only thing that should determine the league winner should be skill on the table top (plus luck of the dice of course).
If you want to have a small separate prize for the best marker that's fine, or indeed best painted army, but don't award VP's for that please.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Sept 25, 2008 11:30:13 GMT
Warren
I'm with Steve on this one
The league should be all about tactical skill, so awarding bonus points on how well a marker is painted isn't really appropriate
I have no problem with a seperate competition for the markers though
Mike
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Sept 25, 2008 14:14:18 GMT
Ok I see the point that vps shouldn't be used but 200pts could really come in handy as the table stands now - it would put some people on -1600pts rather than -1800pts. So a massive difference and a real sweat on for people that are running away with it. I see that at most non-UK tournaments they still award marks and vps for painting skill and wsywig are you saying that they are wrong to do this in Australia, USA and Europe? To be honest in Australia most competitions are composition marked and you are marked down if you army is too cheesy. You are given good composition marks if it is a more balanced army. Is this to do with tactical skill on the battle board - er I think not. Yet battle and victory points are awarded nonetheless. Its a pity I didn't advocate this earlier - this may have seen a few more people whinging at that. So for want of a few words you could ask any foreigner to suggest why other tournaments offer such points for WSYWIG, composition and army painting. They did it two or three years ago in tournaments in Nottingham. I don't think 200pts is going to hurt anybody to be honest. However, as some people have voiced their disapproval that such a huge some of vps is unfair for just the marker so I will not use this. However, I would ask those who think it is not "appropriate" to perhaps tell those other tournament event organisers www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020523/w1.jpg the same thing
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Mawson on Sept 25, 2008 15:57:49 GMT
Honestly I have few problems with army composition marking, provide it is clear that that is the intention with the tournament in question.
Building an effective but balanced army is a skill, heck building a horribly unbalanced army of death is also a skill.
More over your army selection will have a direct relationship to it's performance on the table, unless you are totally cursed by the dice gods, so it has a bearing on tournament scoring, so I'd be happy enough with such a points system, providing the rules for how such an area was to be scored were sufficiently clear and unambiguous.
How well or poorly an army is painted or modeled however has no influence on the games you play with it, so I fail to see why points should be awarded for this.
For me painting an army is a separate, if connected, area of the hobby to playing the games. If I can't win a painting competition because I with my moderately well painted models can massacre the armies of those with a great deal more artistic talent. Then why should a stunning paint job gain you an advantage over me on the table if you can't beat me in a game.
WYSIWYG is more a matter of clarity than anything else, being able to look at a model, or unit and being able to tell what it is is pretty important in a competitive game, it's even more important that peoples units are not confusing to an opponent. Playing a game should not be a memory test, being able to remember that the empire cavalry unit on the left that looks identical to the empire cavalry unit on the right is actually the inner circle knights, should not be a major requirement for victory. Which is why my Skaven Slaves are not only made up of different models to my clan rats, but painted up very differently so they are distinct. I'm not sure why you'd award points for WYSIWYG, as far as I'm concerned there is more of a minimum requirement that your army must meet before it can enter a given tournament.
Incidentally I'm sure there are a number of club members who can tell you my opinion on the GT and painting awards. Which effectively boils down to the fact that the best painted army nominations shouldn't receive a automatic ticket to the finals. And I have mentioned them to one or two of the GW tournament staff, although I haven't had the nerve as yet to tell Brian.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Sept 25, 2008 18:20:27 GMT
Well they used to for WYSIWYG but now its a case of model removal if it does not add up and as you say for well painted models people get through to a GW final, this final point is truly not on (in which I totally agree with you). However the comparison between this towards a mere 200pts pails into signifance. But its a mooted notion now so it doesn't matter.
Going through to the final on a paint job rather than skill on the battle board tends to point fingers at whether the "artist" has a particular connection to judges (I've heard this said a number of times). Not what you know (and paint) but who. I bear witness to one incident in last year's GT where I asked about the most sporting general section and when should I fill it in as I believed that two people were fantastic. The answer was oh no you don't have to do this anymore WE will go around and see who is playing fairly and award thus. Huh? How could you possibly do this and account for all players running on a skeleton crew of a few staff and volunteers? This didn't add up either. What didn't either was the surprise of one well known character getting the nod. I did not have one of the guys come round my table to witness me stopping the game, with 15 -20 mins to go as I believed the my opponent would not get his go in after mine. Nor did anybody witness the fact I forced someone to measure a fleeing level 4 wizard distance, which he had moved off the table initially as lost, but found that it was still half an inch still on the board (an subsequently rallied). Neither the fact that someone had started a shooting round and I said to them if they wanted to take that again but ensuring it was the magic round! No I never saw anybody around my table. This is not the case of blowing my own trumpet but just highlighting three of many things I did which had not the sniff of a volunteer or staff to witness the sportsmanship presented (not that I was looking for it!) At the time I found that being a sport etc consigned you to the bottom tables so I decided in my last two games to play rough and massacred the last two people to gain some self respect back.
Remarks about the paint vps in other competitions is just an observation and not an opinion. However, it has been done and this cannot be denied.
I also agree with your stance about skill on the paint job should not have an advantage over skill on the board however it is a whole hobby and the thought of a one off 200pt vp prize should not really effect vps terribly especially if the main battle points are what we are looking at. But again I will retract that notion in favour of my original simple prize for the winner - which will be announced at the AGM.
|
|
|
Post by carl on Sept 25, 2008 18:38:44 GMT
personally, i dont think awarding extra VP's for markers, painting or anything else is a goer.
why not take 3 t-shirts out of the raffle, and give those away with perhaps the 1st prize winner getting 3 free strips of raffle tickets as well.
that way it doesn't cost the club anything and people get a little something as prizes.
i think we have enough prizes that we could spare 3 shirts but what do others think, or maybe the polo and tickets for first and t-shirts for 2nd and 3rd.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Sept 25, 2008 18:52:48 GMT
Plans a goodun' Carl do I have to get a three way approval on this from the other CMs?
|
|
|
Post by Liam Thompson on Sept 25, 2008 20:40:13 GMT
Truthfully, telling us that Markers give an in-tournament bonus AFTER all army lists have been handed in and almost all (if not all) of the players have played their first game, sounds a little to me like moving the goal posts.
As others have mentioned, this tournament was never stated to have a modelling/painting portion; all that has ever been mentioned is that a "prize" would be given to the best modelled marker, with no mention of what said prize was. The term 'prize' seems to have emotive connotations that implies a physical reward, as opposed to an in-tournament bonus.
I'm glad to hear that you've changed your mind on the matter, though, but I wanted to just get my opinion across.
One more question: in your earlier posts you indicated that you would be judging the markers alone, yet now you seem to be asking the other members of the club to aid you. Which is it?
|
|
|
Post by carl on Sept 25, 2008 20:50:43 GMT
i think it should not include any people actually in the tournament. perhaps warren could ask a couple of other members who are not in the leagues to help him out. perhaps he could set a date to have them done by and everyone has to bring them along that night to stand a chance of winning anything then Warren and the two other 'judges' could decide on the prizes. just a suggestion
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Sept 26, 2008 16:34:13 GMT
As I keep endlessly repeating myself the Vps idea was just a suggestion and as we live in a democracy we won't have that as people are against this. Enough said already!!!!!
As for the marker side competition I don't think it would be fair just to have myself judging as what I may perceive to be a work of art would be purely subjective to my tastes. Conversely, some people may be unfairly marked down due to my personal taste, so I think it is necessary to have other non-league club members to add a little more subjective input to what is artistically the better marker. I can't see why people are objecting to this as well?
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Sept 26, 2008 16:40:41 GMT
Truthfully, telling us that Markers give an in-tournament bonus AFTER all army lists have been handed in and almost all (if not all) of the players have played their first game, sounds a little to me like moving the goal posts. Never said it was implemented! Please check the original post it was a proposal which was open to how much abuse you want to throw at it - its a democracy so I had to gauge what reaction it would get. Not a favourable one it seems - but please don't say that I am telling everyone this is the case as it wasn't - it was just a proposal. Anyway it doesn't matter now as it is a defunct - this parrot is dead - it has ceased to be etc... funny walks all round. ;D
|
|