Questions, Concerns, and Suggestions

The place to discuss all that was! Visit the AdeptiCon website (www.adepticon.org) for past coverage, event results and photos!

Questions, Concerns, and Suggestions

Postby Huoshini » Mon Apr 14, 2008 10:35 pm

Feel free to sticky incase anyone would like to voice any and all opinions on the event.


First of all, everything was fantastic, and I have nothing but good things to say about the con!

I would just like to say, why were ties with best sportsman broken with Battle points?

I understand that there were no other ways to do it with the scoring sheet. I just find it dosen't really make sense to me. Maybe next year find a place in the sheet for your favored opponent?
G.R.A.M.P.A
AdeptusBrewCityJoe wrote:Yeah I guess you are right.

"When you're in the garage, Bring out the damn dinosaurs!" -Phil Kelly

Lord Sportsman: Adepticon 2010
User avatar
Huoshini
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:39 am
Location: HURRICANE SLAYER!

Re: Questions, Concerns, and Suggestions

Postby Dean » Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:11 am

Huoshini wrote:
I would just like to say, why were ties with best sportsman broken with Battle points?



Most tourney's are run this way. It says something if you can beat down on your opponent and still receive hi Sports Scores.

GW uses the same in there GT's

This award will go to the players who have achieved the best score in the Sportsmanship category over the course of the Tournament. In the case of a tie, we will give the awards in order of the competitor with the highest Battle Points, then Army Appearance Points.


Dean
Dean
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 1:05 pm
Location: Gilbert, AZ

Postby Blackmoor » Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:03 am

#1. If they have the 40K Invitational next year, it should be a regular RTT like the Championship. The reason why is that we already have one Gladiator event, that everyone at the Invitational is already playing in. I know they want to find the best player in the country without the soft scores, but that is what the Gladiator already does.

#2. I know tradition is strong at Adepticon, but they might want to reduce the point limit, or add some time. With the addition of Orks it is very hard to get past turn #4. With a heavy emphasis on objectives, it is vital that everyone gets in 6 full turns.

#3. When ever you have objective markers, you should be able to claim them if you have a scoring unit within 6” instead of having to touch them (Sundays mission #3). This stops people from squatting over the objectives on turn #5 with vehicles. (I was the one who parked my Falcons on them on the bottom of turn #5 so my opponent could not touch them, and it did not seem right).
Blackmoor
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:15 pm

Postby Inquisitor_Malice » Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:01 am

Blackmoor wrote:
#2. I know tradition is strong at Adepticon, but they might want to reduce the point limit, or add some time. With the addition of Orks it is very hard to get past turn #4. With a heavy emphasis on objectives, it is vital that everyone gets in 6 full turns.


We had similar problems on Saturday. Out of three games that only went to turn five (and that's after having to push our opponents), two of them were against orks. Personally, from now on - I am going to keep an eye on the clock and if we are not at the bottom of turn three by the 1 hour mark, I will start speeding up my game and asking my opponent to do the same. Our army came into it's own on turn 5-6 and we did not get to take advantage of it. In fact, in one of our games against orks Brad and I just setup our entire force instead of alternating and it still didn't help.

Also, one suggestion to who ever is running the clock. If the clock is messed up don't drop 10 minutes off the clock when it is indicating 18 minutes left to go. In round 1, I saw almost 10 minutes knocked off within the span of 10 seconds, which brought the time down to 9 minutes from 18. That caused major problems in our game and is not fair to either opponent. If organizers make a mistake like this and catch it with limited time left to go, they should just eat the mistake and work to catch up on it by reducing the breaks between the rounds.
- Greg
User avatar
Inquisitor_Malice
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:58 pm

Postby Redbeard » Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:34 am

Blackmoor wrote:#1. If they have the 40K Invitational next year, it should be a regular RTT like the Championship. The reason why is that we already have one Gladiator event, that everyone at the Invitational is already playing in. I know they want to find the best player in the country without the soft scores, but that is what the Gladiator already does.


I agree here. I had an invite to the invitational, but given that it was a gladiator format, I prefered to play in the Championships instead. One gladiator for the weekend is enough.

#2. I know tradition is strong at Adepticon, but they might want to reduce the point limit, or add some time. With the addition of Orks it is very hard to get past turn #4. With a heavy emphasis on objectives, it is vital that everyone gets in 6 full turns.


I'd rather see time added - but where will it come from? :) As one of the ork players there, I agree - I'd much rather get more turns because the endgame is when I've actually gotten to my opponent, but I don't really see how it is feasible.

#3. When ever you have objective markers, you should be able to claim them if you have a scoring unit within 6” instead of having to touch them (Sundays mission #3). This stops people from squatting over the objectives on turn #5 with vehicles.


I actually prefer a mix here. Sometimes, having to touch is good. 5th ed will be out next year, so falcons won't be unkillable anymore, and if you can't kill a tank, maybe you don't deserve that objective.


The only real concern I have for this year was in how much dead-space there was in the cleanse-style deployment zones. The rulebook provides that you cannot deploy within 6" of the table center but the missions at Adepticon doubled this to 12". That's fairly significant, and ended up making it hard to actually deploy at times. I'm curious what the reason behind doubling the no-go zone was.
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Postby StevenSwayze » Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:01 am

I actually thought that having to be 12" from the center ws a nice idea because, in a normal mission if the guy who deploys first sticks something 6" from the center it forces the other guy to have to deploy 18" from the center, which makes deploying a huge army even tougher actually. At least this way both parties had a relatively wide frontage, equidistant from the center of the table.
StevenSwayze
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:10 pm

Postby Generalissimo_Fred » Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:41 am

How about 850pts for each team in the team event. Make everyone take an HQ choise and 1-3 troop choices and keep everything else the same. You'll have 1700pt lists (per team) that should finish on time.

I think this will work really well, especially since 5th edition will be out by then and troops will be the only scoring units available. It still prevents competitive people from skimping out on troop choices while giving them the tactical flexibilty to customize lists and play in a reasonable amount of time.
Generalissimo_Fred
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Elgin, IL

Postby Ed » Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:13 am

One thing that would be nice for the future is to have a standard for terrain to avoid the opening dialogue of "So how do you want to treat this terrain?" I had a feeling that this dialogue was the first round of fighting, just without dice. It's somewhat uncomfortable, because you're often playing against someone whom you've never met before. The team with 60 genestealers wants the hill to block LOS to infantry, while the team with 8 rhinos wants the river to not impede their movement. I know the rulebook has pretty good guidelines, but I don't see why Adepticon shouldn't standardize all the terrain that they bring.

For instance:
All hills block LOS to infantry, but not to vehicles.
All areas of water are dangerous terrain tests to both infantry and vehicles.
All buildings are area terrain offering 4+ cover saves.
Etc.

At least this way, there's no need to argue or discuss what is what. It's all layed out for the players in their packet. My apologies if 5th ed makes this moot.

Ed
Ed
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:08 am

Postby fyrblckdragon » Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:59 am

Yeah, 5th will make the issue moot.
User avatar
fyrblckdragon
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 5:08 pm
Location: Saint Charles

Postby WC_Brian » Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:17 pm

I would like to see rules for terrain placement. I think that terrain is the most important aspect of the game. Often times I noticed the terrain on the table is scattered because people push it out of the way to make room for their display boards when prejudging or loading up their armies for the next round. Since you already have to do something with the terrain we should be placing it ourselves.

If there are concerns about abuse of terrain placement it would be simple enough to create guidelines like "no terrain within 6 of a board edge or another terrain piece" or having it scatter like was done at the Necro and Owned. Though it is interesting to have it scatter I would suggest less than the 3D6 that those events used. Often the terrain would end up on the board edges. The function of that kind of terrain is to provide cover for shooting units. That won't be very useful in 5th since your own troops will provide better cover!
WC_Brian
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 3:43 pm

Postby Huoshini » Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:42 pm

My concern with the fantasy tables and their terrain placement-


I understand that this is a medival world and trees were more abundant but with trees on every damn table it got to the point that I was ready to flip a treeman over! It just got to the point I wanted to stand back and not move because all of my units would just get bogged down in trees.

I was sad that I wasn't playing a wood elf army :(

Next year, as repenting for my bitching, I would be more than happy to help with terrain placement! :) ( Not saying that you guys didn't do a good job :) )
G.R.A.M.P.A
AdeptusBrewCityJoe wrote:Yeah I guess you are right.

"When you're in the garage, Bring out the damn dinosaurs!" -Phil Kelly

Lord Sportsman: Adepticon 2010
User avatar
Huoshini
 
Posts: 539
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:39 am
Location: HURRICANE SLAYER!

Postby Carrick » Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:50 pm

1. Allocate Tables Sooner. During registration you should be handed a table number. If you have 80 tables you have 8 boxes with twenty numbers (1 - 10 for example) and everytime you hand someone the rules pack you give them a number. The random factor reduces chances of friends playing each other and if they do draw the same number and really don't want to play each other then one of them can swap their's for a number from the next box.
There should be 10 mins between posting of tables and the start of a round in the Gladiator - with a loud countdown! Half an hour in the other events to allow for the more social conversations before kick-off.
Typing those results is tough in short periods of time but having a helper sort them sort of Alphabetically as they come in (a-e,f-k,etc) saves scrolling up and down to find a surname. This mean that the data entry takes four people. One to check the results have been filled in, one to sort by surname, one to read the results to the last who types.

2. Start On Time. No matter what allow the gaming clock to start at the advertised time. If people have arrived late then they loose game time. My last bus is at eleven - thankfully a very kind fellow competitor gave me a lift home but I was almost sleeping in the lobby of the hotel.

3. Standard Definitions on Terrain. As suggested above.

4. Lower Points Costs.
The Gladiator is good. It is tough to finish in time but it is The Gladiator! so it should be tough. No breaks between games - suck it up!
The Team-tournie I can't really comment on but it seems very social and perhaps time needs to be tabled to allow for off-table fun?
The Championship could be reduced to 1500. This size isn't really played at competition in the US and forces an economy into the game. It would provide a very different challenge from the other RTTs and a sharper contrast to the Gladiator. It is easier to finish in two hours (with half an hour between posting of tables and the start of a round for deployment). With a tighter game-time and schedule you could get the event up to four games which provides a more conclusive winner.

5. A personal and unlikely (probably even stupid) suggestion. Drop the sporting scores. I stung all my opponents - I think the highest I gave was a 5 and I gave a couple of 3s. Nobody else I spoke did this even though they all had gripes - I can see why when 2 of my opponents stood up by the results sheet checker and read of what I had given them and then made me feel very intimidated. Congratulations for having big friends who can make leery comments about my partner's chest.
I will wait to see what I got for sporting but I daresay that people gave me higher scores than I gave them hoping for a tit-for-tat operation. It is a shame sticking to the rules is considered a affair worth menacing your opponent for.

6. When results are posted give a full breakdown round by round.

7. In the Combat Patrol - drop the ordnance - next time you take a whirlwind I am taking two basilisks. If an event is not following published rules then have a good reason - a deviation of this degree is upsetting. Also Judge the painting better - I know it is subjective but was that really the best that was there?
Adepticon '08 - Sixth Worst 40k Sportsman.
Adepticon '09 - Ninth Worst 40k Sportsman.
User avatar
Carrick
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 11:28 am
Location: Ravenswood, Chicago

Postby RichN » Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:53 pm

Huoshini wrote: Next year, as repenting for my bitching, I would be more than happy to help with terrain placement! :) ( Not saying that you guys didn't do a good job :) )


I'm sure Ken and Dave would be more than willing to accept your help. Get yourself signed up for a black shirt and help police the hall. Shift starts at Midnight and ends when the hall is ready for the next day. :D
Terrain, Modeling and More... Chicago Terrain Factory
User avatar
RichN
 
Posts: 675
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:41 am
Location: Darien IL

Postby old coast » Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:13 pm

Carrick wrote:5. A personal and unlikely (probably even stupid) suggestion. Drop the sporting scores. I stung all my opponents - I think the highest I gave was a 5 and I gave a couple of 3s. Nobody else I spoke did this even though they all had gripes - I can see why when 2 of my opponents stood up by the results sheet checker and read of what I had given them and then made me feel very intimidated. Congratulations for having big friends who can make leery comments about my partner's chest.
I will wait to see what I got for sporting but I daresay that people gave me higher scores than I gave them hoping for a tit-for-tat operation. It is a shame sticking to the rules is considered a affair worth menacing your opponent for.


LOL, welcome to the 40K tourney scene...actually you wouldn't want them to drop the sports scores as that is only only thing that holds some people in check.. I congratulate you for taking people deservedly to task for their behavior and not being intimidated to do so like others you mention
I was walking around the 40k tables myself on friday and between rounds on saturday and saw some bullshit going on that was pretty over the line-
old coast
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Cicero, IL

Postby Shotgun » Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:37 pm

I don't think you will see alot of time add between rounds for social chit-chat. Be it the Gladiator, TT, or Champs, people paid to play, not to stand around and talk. Time is the one commodity that you find as an event organizer, you never have enough of. My advice would be socialize and story tell -after- the tourney or before.

As to feeling intimidated, why? you scored it honestly as you read the conditions. Without Sports, you end up with a weekend of varous gladiators and only give validity to those that intimidated you in the first place.
Shotgun
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:44 am
Location: Denver, CO

Next

Return to AdeptiCon 2008

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 1 guest

cron