We just finished up with the fall 09' tournament here in White Plains, NY and we had a surprising repeat! Jawaballs returned to take the top spot of OVERALL BADASS. Greg from Brothers Grimm took 2nd place Badass and our own Danny Internets took 3rd. Robert Roda took Best Sportsman and Ben Bangley wowed with his Eldar for Best Painted. Special mention has to go to Rob Baur for his great work on his awesome ork/guard army. I was back and forth all day on who was the winner! Jawaballs was also in the running until I caught him with some mold lines on a couple of guys.It was the closest tournament that I have ever seen. We had a three way tie for third and a tie for first. I dont know what people will say, but the way we had to choose a tie breaker was the only way I see possible. The scoring of our tournament considered battle points and sportsmanship. These were the only two categories given a numerical value. Sportsman was used as a tie breaker for battle points, but as usual, sportmanship scores were all perfect. Go figure, I really hate sportsmanship scores, and with a tie in battle points and a tie in sporty points, how do you pick a winner. We choose to look at the toughness of opponents. Jawaballs won because his opponents had scored more battle points than Gregs. That is how we then decided who won third and who lost out. To be honest, I wish that our club members would have lost out in both situations because of the possible whispers saying there was homecourt advantage pressed here. I want to guarantee to everyone that is not the case!!!!!!! It just worked out that way! So what do you guys think. Given the situation should we have chosen a winner a different way?
***edit*** In the future we will keep track of either kill points or victory points in order not be put in this situation again!
12 comments:
I think it fine how you guys chose a winner its ok not everyone from the club won.....i got 31st!!!!!!!!! yaaaaaaaaaa
Ralph
That's the same way Brs Grim broke our tie in the past when we used overall KillPoints as the tie breaker. I'm totally cool with it, plus, I know I would have won if we used "Good Looks" as the tie breaker. :)
hahahaha
Don't make fun of the fat man in an orange shirt.
And don't you worry about those mold lines Matt, I am going to put the winnings of this tournament into all new Blood Angels stuff for the new dex when it drops. Every thing I have learned about painting Blood Angels and 40k in general over the last 2 years will go into every model in my army. My BA in 2010 will be a sight. (I will have plenty of downtime since I will not be leaving the house with a new baby coming.)
I do agree though, my army did not deserve best painted up against Robs and Bens.
The win overall was a shock to me. I was optimistic, but only hoping for a top 10 at best. There were some good players. Hell, one of the dudes took 7th in the UK GT the week before! I place a lot of the win on luck, having dodged Danny Internets yet again. I just cant beat him! :)
As one of the guys tied for 3rd, I'll say I found it fair. the only thing to blame for not placing from my camp is bad luck and tactics, nothing to do with judging.
I'm flattered to recieve best painted though. There were some fantastic armies there.
Thanks to Matt and Bob for putting it on and congrats to Jawaballs. Next year I got yo numba!
Hey Perils, do you mind if I throw some pics of your army up over the course of the next week?
Do it! I was going to ask if you were going to post any. I'd like to see how they came out.
I thought the way the ties were handled was very appropriate, no complaints at all.
However, and I mean this constructively and not critically, I wonder why you'd chosen to not score painting/appearance so it could be included in the Overall. Using just the battle points seemed from early on like it was very likely to result in a very close field...having Appearance Score thrown in the mix would have widened things out considerably, I think!
Again, that's not meant as criticism, just something I'd had in my head even before the tourney.
I had a wonderful time, and hope to make my way over to White Plains on some open-gaming days to get some games in against more of you folks! Matt, congratulations again to you and Bob for a wonderfully successful event!
Shameless Plug: The Danbury community website: http://ordo-ineptus.com/default.aspx
YEAH! thanks for all the voices of support and I am glad that almost everyone is happy with the event.
Bob,
Let me first start by saying that both Bobby and I wanted a close tournament. It makes for a more dramatic conclusion and just because you dont win all your games, you are not out of the total picture! We just didnt even imagine that it would be that close. Hahaha it was a nail bitter.
The decision to not include the soft scores as part of the overall came from personal experiences over the past few years. With sporty scores, I have been screwed and I have made the mistake of screwing someone else in the past. No matter how much you regret rash decisions, you cant change them. Bob and I knew immediately that sporty scores were out, at least for the big picture!
As far as painting, that was hard for me since I have a biased opinion on that, and only through deduction did I recognize that. One that involved Danny Internets and his decisions to not attend Grand Tournaments. Anyway, I used to always be in favor of the soft scores inclusion, but I have changed my mind. Our main goal was to include as many people as possible. Not everyone enjoys painting, but it is definetly a celebrated part of the hobby. So to make everyone happy, including us by making the tourney close, we made a seperate prize and kept the it to battle points.
I like the KP/VP idea, too...good thinking!
I thought the way you did it was fine (and voiced that opinion at the event). Privateer Press has used strength of schedule as a tie breaker for many years and it works just fine.
If you want to go to a VP system, I suggest doing something similar to what Mechanicon did. Standard VP scoring really hurts High attrition armies like Orks and Tyranids and would not give an accurate picture of the game results when those armies are designed to lose models to allow them to get to grips with the enemy. Maybe it is just my personal opinion but that is where I stand on VPs.
Post a Comment