Invitation rules and players

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

Invitation rules and players

Postby stormboy97 » Sun Jan 18, 2009 1:15 pm

please sign up marc parker

also why did you change the format from last year?
you had to be painted but it was all battle points.
you are the top ten battle point winners of tournaments and the ard boys and now your bringing in the fluff points.

It is not easier to do it that way, because that means you have to input more data and paint score more armies.

the big draw off the invitational was that it was just battle points and no pretty princess or bought painted army, just the best of the best.

just my two cents worth.

how many of you 84 players want 40% of your points to be non-battle fluff, and if that's the case why even have this ,it's just splitting up the RTT.

with only 3 games the top paint score guy has a huge advantage whether he painted or bought it(who cares) I thought this was to decide the toughest player but I could be wrong.
stormboy97
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:56 am

Postby Redbeard » Sun Jan 18, 2009 6:29 pm

As another of the 84 invitees, I prefer having soft scores in tournaments, and I like the change.

There's already one gladiator at Adepticon, and I don't enjoy gladiators as much as standard RTTs. I'm not going to play two gladiator tournaments over the weekend. If the invitational is also a gladiator, I'll play the RTT instead. I want to enjoy my games, not prove that I'm good at playing toy soldiers.
"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

Re: Invitation rules and players

Postby Rhysk » Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:02 pm

stormboy97 wrote:please sign up marc parker

also why did you change the format from last year?
you had to be painted but it was all battle points.
you are the top ten battle point winners of tournaments and the ard boys and now your bringing in the fluff points.

It is not easier to do it that way, because that means you have to input more data and paint score more armies.

the big draw off the invitational was that it was just battle points and no pretty princess or bought painted army, just the best of the best.

just my two cents worth.

how many of you 84 players want 40% of your points to be non-battle fluff, and if that's the case why even have this ,it's just splitting up the RTT.

with only 3 games the top paint score guy has a huge advantage whether he painted or bought it(who cares) I thought this was to decide the toughest player but I could be wrong.


Marc,

One of the major complaint/concerns last year was that it was basically a 2nd Gladiator Tournament. Regardless of the format for the event, the winner of the event will have to play against 3 guaranteed top notch players, who have proven their caliber in previous events.
Last year the event was a pilot event that was free, this year it is a pay event. Last year prize support was minimal, this year it will reflect the entrance fee.

We are scoring paint and sportsmanship to ask more of the field. Bring a top notch army, play in a reasonable manner, make sure it is reasonably painted and get through a field guaranteed to contain only successful players.

We set the weighting of the scores identically to keep scoring easier between the two events.

If you think the weighting of the scores needs to be adjusted send me an e-mail and I'll be happy to entertain adjusting it.
Rhysk
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 12:27 am
Location: Mil-Town Baby!

soft scores = good

Postby Spacecurves » Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:14 am

I for one really like the change to include soft scores. I think the gladiator should be the tourney for only battlepoints, and the 40k invitational should crown an overall champion, one who not only knows how to play, but is a good painter, sportsman etc. The promise of larger prizes is also exciting. I say well done adepticon staff, I'm looking forward to it.
Spacecurves
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:02 am

Postby Generalissimo_Fred » Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:11 am

This seems extremely elitist and a waste of time. The invitational is not a Gladiator. It is 1750pts, not 2250. There is no FW allowed and thus no crazy units. Only things that can be played in GT's and at an appropriate points level for a GT.

All this is is a 2nd RTT on Sunday. Same rules, same points, same tournament, only this time they can keep certain people out. There is no point to it and no different than the excact same tournament run at the excact same time in the excact same building.

Everyone who wants to play 1750 with fluff scores can play in the RTT that is why it is there. If you only want to play 'tough' competition then stop being a whiny spoiled jerk and play with everyone else. If we follow that logic then there should be a 2nd gladiator that only allows top BP scorers and past champions. It can run concurrent to the Friday Gladiator, have the same rules, but reduce the field to only 'good' players. That way we don't have to bother to play those 'lesser' players. Puh-lease.
Generalissimo_Fred
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Elgin, IL

Postby stormboy97 » Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:50 pm

3 for the pretty princes points
2 for having to win on the field of battle

:evil:
stormboy97
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:56 am

Postby Redbeard » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:08 am

You know, it isn't like they're not keeping track of battle points. What's the difference, in terms of bragging rights, between claiming that you won a tournament that had no soft scores, and claiming that you won Best General at a tournament that did?

Seems to me that if you want to know who won on the field of battle, just look for the Best General award.
"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 Generalissimo_Fred » Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:08 am

Then why not win best general in the RTT instead. There seems to be no difference between the RTT and the Invitational ecxcept a huge number of people are excluded from the Invitational. It's the same tournament run at the same time. I think it is taking away from the RTT. Let's say you win the RTT. You can't claim you were the best at Adepticon because there is another tournament run at the same time with the same criteria and that winner will say they were the best. Why? Because it was a select field. Only certain people were allowed in.

Let's say you won the invitational. What's the point? You won an event with people who have played in GT's etc.. but you didn't win the field at Adepticon. There was another tournament run at the same time with the same criteria, but you didn't get to play against those people. The purpose of the invitational was supposed to be who is the 'best of the best', but now you've made it an identical tournament to the RTT and run it concurrently. You played agianst people who had good armies LAST year, not this year and not at this tournament.

There are lots of people who make new armies just for this tournament, armies no one has seen before. You can't say you are the best because you didn't play them, they were excluded. Meanwhile you can't say those people can play the same army next year because rules change in a year and that army might not work as well anymore.

All in all the Invitational is not showing who is the best. It segregates the players at Adepticon. It appears to be a tournament set up for a few people who know each other and travel to play a tournament with their friends and exclude everyone else.
Generalissimo_Fred
 
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:31 am
Location: Elgin, IL

Postby Redbeard » Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:52 am

I understand your point Fred.

But, on the other hand, "Invitationals" are pretty standard fare in competitive fields. There are invitationals for the individual sports of golf and bowling, and even bass fishing. There are invitationals for poker players and bridge players, and scrabble players. The Olympics and the World Cup are technically invitationals - you have to have placed well enough in your local events to be allowed to compete.

I'm not saying you're wrong, and I agree that it does dilute the concept of the Adepticon Championship* (*except "good" players). But, I think having an invitational is a cool thing, and I don't know of any other con that might actually see the invited participants show up. So, it might be a case of 'if Adepticon doesn't do it, no one will'.

In either case, I'm not involved in the decision making process, I just replied to Marc's original post.
"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 Inquisitor_Malice » Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:50 am

I like a quote from last year's Championship winner, John Willingham.

"Remove the best players in the world from a tournament and John Willingham will win it."

Alas, he won't be defending his title in the Championships because he graduated to the Invitational.

I have mixed feelings. I didn't mind the gladiator style, but I also don't mind a RTT Style. Too bad we can't make this where both awards carry equal weight. With the Overall title, the perception seems to detract from the Generalship award, which is kind of what this is about.
- Greg
User avatar
Inquisitor_Malice
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:58 pm

Postby Marius Xerxes » Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:09 pm

I like it. I mean, the list of people is drawn from the previous years Tops. So it changes year to year. Who knows who else might come along in that time. New and good players always come along to rank amonst the top.

And lets face it.. sometimes when you are proven through consistancy of placement to be that good.. you want the challenge of playing people in your "class" as it were. I know in any kind of competitive sport or game i get involved in, i want to play better and better people. I use the following as pure example, and in no way to demean other payers, but I know I could dominate the field of play in a kids t-ball or soccer game. So in someways I need to move up to allow competitive play to continue for those in that field, and also to challenge my own skills and gain more improvement.

Is it an "Elitest" group. Yes. The same as the NFL, NBA, NHL, Pro Golf, NASCAR etc. Those people preform at a level that is deserving of their playing amongst themselves to promote even better play and something for others to aspire to. Play as good as they do, and you to can join that group. Thats the only thing holding you back.
Marius Xerxes
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:41 pm
Location: Springfield, Illinois

Postby muwhe » Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:38 pm

Hey, it’s on my shoulders, as ultimately the buck stops here and thankfully they are broad. During the very first council meetings we re-evaluate events from year to year. I heard a considerable number of people complain the year before that the Invitational was nothing but a second Gladiator event. I heard it from a number of people at the event.. and we heard from a number of people on the forum and feedback.

Additionally this year we adopted a sort of shared staffing model for the 40k events… Bill Kim and Greg Sparks teamed up and are going to run the Gladiator. Rhysk and Joe Adams are both heading up the Invitational and the Championship. The idea being that with 2 qualifed people running each event .. that one person was not constantly tied down .. and hopefully would result in less burnout of our staff and volunteers.

With that in mind, last year the Championship allowed Forgeworld models and the Invitational did not. During discussions about the rules for the Championship / Invitational events along with the context of adapting to 5th edition and considering it was going to involve the same people running both tournaments, sharing the same judging staff .. the decision was made to make them both share the same rule set. We already faced significant issues with making the transition to 5th edition and adopting 5th edition to the AdeptiCon format. So given the feedback, and some of the hurdles we thought we had to overcome the focus was adopted to make things as easy as possible for our judging staff. We wanted to make sure we put as many qualified people on the floor to judge all of our events and we have to make sure that our judges are familiar with the FAQ.. it’s a limited pool of people that are willing to forgo a day of play .. so that others can have a good time. Course if we had the luxury of having excess people lined up to staff these events we might have done something different but it’s the economics of man-power at work.

The fact remains that the Invitational has a qualification to it in order for you to be able to participate in that field. Regardless of the rules, the event is designed to pit the best possible players, that have proven it in at least one event during the calendar year against one another in the same field under the same rules. Regardless of what is scored … those individuals that choose to play in the Invitational are “hard-core” tourney players and there will be no easy draws. Does that mean they are the best players at the event or that they are some how “better” players than those in the Championship? I don’t think so.. I don’t think Fred Fortman, Jeff Chua, Chris Hill, Papa Nurgle, myself or a host of other players .. qualified this year yet I would lay pretty good odds against the best of this past year on anyone of them. Hmm .. maybe we need to add some sort of life time invitation to winners of certain AdeptiCon events for the Invitiational.

The rules are posted. We can take some things under consideration this year .. and we can talk about the format for next year. I’m tempted to think about scoring the Invitational as stated and as pure battle…. Maybe we weight the Best General Award equally… with the title of Adepticon Warmaster. Who wants to lay odds they are the same individual?

The best thing about having those 2 event options and speaking very generally … the Invitational draws the “hard-core” tourney guys who are the kind of players that enjoy that sort of play style .. and let’s them face off against that sort of competition. With those players battling it out, beating one’s chest and clubbing one another… It leaves the Championship open for those individuals that enjoy playing in a more laid back environment. Both events cater to a different taste even if the same rules are being used .. and I don’t think that’s a bad idea.

As always we appreciate the feedback.... and welcome anyone's involvement.
muwhe
AdeptiCon Oracle
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:15 pm

Postby Inquisitor_Malice » Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:04 pm

muwhe wrote: I don’t think so.. I don’t think Fred Fortman, Jeff Chua, Chris Hill, Papa Nurgle, myself or a host of other players .. qualified this year yet I would lay pretty good odds against the best of this past year on anyone of them.


Please - you guys couldn't even handle the Battle of the Titans invitational. You have a long way to go before you would play in this invitational. :P

muwhe wrote: Maybe we weight the Best General Award equally… with the title of Adepticon Warmaster. Who wants to lay odds they are the same individual?


I like the idea of Warmaster for the Best General in the Invitational event.
- Greg
User avatar
Inquisitor_Malice
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:58 pm

Postby muwhe » Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:32 am

Please - you guys couldn't even handle the Battle of the Titans invitational. You have a long way to go before you would play in this invitational.




I seem to recall that our personal match records are .. split? Additionally I have heard how you coughed it up to a near deathbed state C99 a few weeks ago .. please .. :D

I will admit we came up short at the Battle of the Titans Invititional .. but I don't thnk it was Chris and I that came up that short .. *cough*

Keep in mind the only reason the Toledo "boys" are enjoying some time in the top ten on the tourney circuit. .. is that the Chua, Weeks and I have retired from circuit play. But I still got enough mojo to handle you any day of the week .. Sparky .. and without your old school Chaos codex lord .. your easy pickings! :lol:
muwhe
AdeptiCon Oracle
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:15 pm

Postby Marius Xerxes » Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:00 am

I like the Warmaster idea as well.
Standing in the light, I see only darkness.

"The ambition of Caesar and of Napoleon pales before that which could not rest until it had seized the minds of men and controlled even their unborn thoughts." - The King in Yellow.
Marius Xerxes
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:41 pm
Location: Springfield, Illinois

Next

Return to AdeptiCon 2009

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron