So, a very interesting subthread going on here.
You should probably read through the comments before continuing...
My Reply:
Most sports handicappers are known as scam artists.
So let's look at Handicapping, and why doing it in 40k is pointless the way the Necro is doing it.
Data. What data? Why is data important?
Well the heart of any handicapper is being professional about it.
They look at much more than a teams makeup--the team would be the players list.
1) Scores in other events. Obviously, the final score rarely tells the story of the game. Did the player get an early lead and then blow it late? Did they defend their lead? Did they come from behind?
2) Match ups. Ostensibly this is the GOAL of handicapping, but in reality this is just data for determining the handicap. How does one list fare against another in similar situations? Is there a consistent pattern that sets one list above the others that has nothing to do with the win-loss-tie record or the final tournament scores?
3) Coaches. That would be you, the player. Do the 'players' on your 'team' play as well as the competition? Are the correct for the game being played tactics used? Is the coach experienced?
4) Trending. Is the list underperforming or overperforming? Hot streak? Cold streak? How well does the 'coach' perform after 2 days of solid gaming?
5) Strength of the list and it's coach. How does the 'team' perform at home (their local store) vs an away environment, and against certain matchups? What is the lists strength in the game that makes them different from other teams?
Honestly, what the Necro is doing is meddling in a very amateurish and non-scientific way.
If you mostly play Fantasy, you certainly are no expert on 40k and if money was riding on the game there's no way I'd use your rather unscientific and unprofessional 'methodology' to wager my cash.
Most of the 'analysis' can't even be done in the first place, because ALL of the data listed above simply does not exist.
There isn't a nationwide ranking system, which is the BASIS for handicapping ANY event.
Shit, you couldn't get a Vegas oddsmaker to lay down bets based on this, because you have no idea what you are doing and it shows.
This isn't a putdown on your tournament. It might be the most sold out wonderful piece of fried chicken goodness I'll ever eat--but I wouldn't want to play if I was preassigned to my competitor by your prejudiced opinion. If you prestack by list, don't pretend like you are doing anyone a favor, k? Prestacking lists is lame, and is not any kind of handicapping system.
I'd look on the Necro forums for more info on this 'handicap' system since it's not advertised anywhere, but the fucking board has been down for the past two days and I've given up.
Running events this way is indeed WAAC gaming at it's worst, at it's most hypocritical. GW used to try to do this, and people called bullshit on it until they stopped.
There is a reason people stopped going to the GW GT's, because GW tried to tell us what to bring and what was 'acceptable'. Well, people said fuck you and left. The Indy's aren't any better than GW, and putting in artificial limits is indeed a shitty thing to do to any sport.
The best way to make any kind of handicapping work is to:
A) Actually run tournaments properly. That means an elimination system, not that BOLScon stuff either. Man that gives me a headache. lol
B) Have a national ranking system that is required for all players. Not the crap GW uses, which is hopeless and helpless.
Here's the rating system you should use.
Here's several ways to run a tournament properly. Swiss, and elimination.
Personally I think Accelerated Pairings should be used at events with over 40 players in a 5 game format.
7 game formats over 2 days are fail, BOLS. You'll see.
People will not enjoy playing each other twice, which is something that can be forbidden without upsetting the game system (just as making players from certain groups not have to play each other can also be handled easily).
So to recap:
You don't handicap.
Using a proper tournament format should really not be that difficult.
GW needs a real rating system not that stupid shit they currently use (which has no basis in reality).
Home Tournaments » Handicapping
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Handicapping
By
Stelek
Labels: Tournaments
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
I personally think the handicapping served a particular function, that of 'hobby growth' by encouraging more players to come, be exposed to all play styles and list styles and grow themselves as the event grows.
Instead of 'you guys suck' how bout a bit more, 'hey guys, go here and play for these reasons but be prepared for this'...or better yet interact with TO's to improve things.
Huh? How does pretend handicapping serve this function?
The more I read about it, the less I want to go.
I've already got a disposition against indy's because of the stupid shit they pull.
If you are going to pull bullshit, don't be so obvious about it.
Nobody is fooled by a double standard that influences the outcome of the event and punishes players, as any kind of 'handicapping'.
K? Nobody.
I totally agree with the Elo system as an amateur chess player myself. That is as accurate a ranking system you can get. I am always paired with people in my general range. The only problem that really happens is when you are playing against someone who is on the rise and he is at the cusp of moving to the next level.
Even then it's still fair and you have more than enough chance to win. Your game is elevated playing people who are better than you. Same for 40K. You play people with garbage lists, you win all time, you think you are the king. You play a guy you never met before he smokes you and you think he is the best 40K player in existence.
Chess is the same way. You keep playing lower rated players in the 1200's and you are 1700's and your skills diminished as you are not pushed. That is why I like that rating system to keep like rated players together.
I do not think I would enjoy playing in a handicapped tourney where if I had say Thunder shield termies in LRs and my opponent had nob bikers. I'm going to own those bikers. But based on that Necronomicon set up we might very well have to play each in the first round due to us having so called "cheesy" armies.
well, if you call it 'bullshit',
at least by being obvious about it they prevent players from being blindsided.
I agree that some will not like it, but it is out there for all to see. NO ONE comes unprepared or unaware. (or if they do, it is their own fault).
I have heard of various types of BS at differing events, and internally railed at some while wanted to investigate others. Ultimately though, I didn't tell people not to go to any of them...if I had input it was to illuminate them as to what to expect.
Among other things, there really isn't just ONE way to play this hobby, and yes I used the dirty word 'hobby'...
This event TRIES to cater to the various types of participation while still offering competition.
That falls under the 'jack of all trades master of none' category.
Is it the best TOURNAMENT in the SE region, no.
Is it the best PAINTING COMPETITION in the region, no.
Is it the best INDY in the country, ???probably not..
Is it one of the best examples of the HOBBY in the country, maybe...and that maybe is a direct result of attempting to make everyone involved a real PARTICIPANT...not just a footnote.
Part of this methodology involves handicapping. This allows people of all TYPES of involvement participate TOGETHER thus perpetuating the social aspect of the hobby.
We're not talking about kid noobs, we're talking about players that want to show off their kick-arse paint scheme/converted army over a beer while seeing everybody's material as well...right next to the guys who are going in balls to the wall murder in their eyes kinda WAAC players....this system allows BOTH player types to interact with far less rancor/imbalance than normally found.
This is not the best TOURNAMENT in the circuit due to handicapping, no way.....it is one of the best HOBBY EVENTS in the circuit because of that methodology....
TMW
Probably out of place - but I am interested to hear opinions on the Throne of Skulls system used in Lenton.
Stop calling it handicapping.
It fucking isn't.
Okay, ranking then...or pooling.
point remains the same if you replace the words.
point is it is a system trying to further the hobby and bring more people into the larger 'community' group.
talking to people/playing in person is, IMHO, better than on the internet. nuances, immediate exchanges etc.
TMW
Handicapping 40K tourneys is such a stupid idea. It's GW's role to create reasonably balanced lists, their business depends on it. Yeah, some lists are stronger than others, so you expect them, and build lists to counter them. It's a known metagame component for every single competitive gaming tournament. If people want to bring a known fluff list to a tourney, that's their decision to handicap themselves, the TOs shouldn't arbitrarily try to undo that. And you know some powercheese combo will accidently get a handicap bonus too.
Heck, people complaining about fluff lists not getting a fair shot should look at say pro tennis. All the low ranked get pitted against the good seeds right off the bat in order to have competitive finals.
The point is to remove WAAC players from contention and give fluff pussies a chance.
What, you think I can't see it for what it is?
You cannot run a tournament and further the hobby by penalizing those who chose to play it as the game was designed.
It's meddling plain and simple.
Like pretty much everything else the "Indy" scene does, it does nothing for the hobby but split it along lines the Necro organizers find more palatable.
Well, fuck that. Learn to use a real ranking system OR a real pooling system.
Both were included, but you keep ignoring the facts and just spouting Nurglibberish at me.
Please stop.
Karrik: When I have a chance I'll take a look and post my thoughts on that.
I have a great ranking system.
Ask all the entrants to list how good at the game they think they are from 1 (crap) to 10 (awesome).
Then in the first round pitch all the 1s against the 1s...
All the 2s against 2s...
and so on.
That makes about as much sense.
I completely agree, especially on the point that in order to create a worthwhile matching system you first need a huge body of GOOD data, and, as you point out, that data doesn't exist. And without some kind of standardized system and for tracking that data, it never will.
ELO is a wonderful way to match players. I liked it when they tried to apply it to arena play in WoW (and other games). It's just impossible to implement with 40k.
In a perfect world, you could potentially create a system that tracks every game and correlates personal performance to general performance for every possible match-up and then implement an ELO system. But, as anyone who has taken a high school or college statistics course knows, as you increase the number of variables (degrees of freedom) you need exponentially more data in order to detect statistically significant effects. There are simply too many variables in 40k to account for practically even with good data capture, so any system that attempts to without devoting a superhuman amount of time, money, and effort will fail hard.
And besides, who the fuck wants to go to a tournament where bringing a shitty army gives you an advantage? List-building is part of the meta-game, despite the prevalence of so-called internet lists. I don't want to play in a tournament where I get penalized for not being a retard.
The problem with Necronomicon's handicapping is that it's a lazy way of addressing a different problem.
The problem isn't "hard" lists vs "fluff" lists. The problem is "WAAC" and the stereotypical gamer attitude that "WAAC" implies.
I've been tabled by a couple of the nicest guys I know, and had a great time while it was happening to me.
Conversely, I've crushed total bastards who blustered they were hot shit before the game began and were completely intolerable dickheads by the time I had finished with them.
I'll take the former situation over the latter any day of the week, thank you very much.
If Necronomicon -- any tournament -- wants to deal with dickhead players the "WAAC" moniker has come to represent, then the TOs have to get off their asses and get involved. They have to walk the floor, they have to watch the games, they have to interact with the players.
They must be vigilant, perceptive, and unflaggingly persistent in their activities. They have to DO something about the assholes when they're acting up. Right away. No delays.
Pretending that segregating "WAAC" lists -- which has been said is a ridiculously subjective rating with little basis in reality -- from "fluff" lists solves this problem IS ITSELF a major indication of TOTAL FAIL.
I think GW and other tournaments should cater towards competitive play rather than fluffy lists, painting/converting ect.
When you enter you should be placed in 3 categories:
Competing
Painting
Army composition
The player should win the tournament by winning the most games. The difference with GW and other tournaments are the above three are entwined together when winning the tournament and this handicaps players who are good generals but bad painters while elevating shit players but good painters.
I know GW pussies around trying to cater to players who are not that good and trying to give them a chance to win but this really soils the competitive nature of what a tournament is about and I along with other players don't enter with all three in mind.
Let the best players win the tournament by their playing ability.
Let the best painters win the painting side by their painting ability.
Let the best fluff nuts win the army composition side by their army selection.
Fuck the sportsmanship award, I'm not there to make friends but to win and learn.
Damon: Very good point. I removed sportsmanship from my tournaments, and I walk the tables endlessly to compensate.
Danny: I don't think it's impossible to do, given the ease with which you can create a table based system for collecting such data now--and for free.
As far as being penalized for being a retard, I sympathize with your plight. ;)
Just kidding! I think if you bring a shitty list and get ranked up (because of your rank, not your list) against someone with a good list--the person with the good list should generally win out.
Forcing players to bring competitive lists to a tournament cannot possibly be 'bad', else why call it a tournament? Just call it "Friendly Play Day". Oh right, call it a "Games Day" and you too can say you "won" a grand tournament. I mean...glorified rogue trader. lol
Anon: My tournament system strives to do that very thing. I really need to codify it and put up a site primer. Man, sooo much to do. lol
Yeah but you think these retarded TO would do this or players who know how to do a decent tournament run one and show the rest how it's done :p
"When you enter you should be placed in 3 categories:
Competing
Painting
Army composition
The player should win the tournament by winning the most games. The difference with GW and other tournaments are the above three are entwined together when winning the tournament and this handicaps players who are good generals but bad painters while elevating shit players but good painters."
The Throne of Skulls system (the actual GW tournament system - not the crappy one that the US events team insisted was prefered by the US players) separates painting and generalship into two entirely different fields.
Generalship is based on winning games - pure game performance.
Painting is judged for a painting award - this is frequently by peer nomination.
Sportsmanship (and Composition) is a ridiculous concept and was dropped from the UK GW tournie scene years (half a decade?) ago. It is impossible to judge in a manner that results in a fair score under any system.
Instead there is a minimum standard by which competitors must acquit themselves. This is upheld by the events team constantly patrolling the gaming space and by common consent.
When will the US Tournament "Circuit" learn that the systems they are trying to implement have been tested during 50 years of competitive wargaming events (in the UK) and haven't worked ever?
Why re-invent the wheel?
Oh god. Not the COMPLETE BULLSHIT of screwing the players that bring competitive lists at a tournament and cuddling the players that dont. AGAIN.
Seriously, you shouldnt win with a shitty list. Search YTTH, Google, even Warseer dammit. Just cuddling people its wrong, how they expect to be better? Seriously it isnt that hard.
BTW, GW ass-raped your favorite codex/unit whatever so hard that their eyes are bleeding and it sucks now in 5th edition. GET USED TO IT. Oh and try to make petitions for new codexes.
I heve been busy for commenting in this dumb shit/joke of a tournament system.
Karrik: They were going that way with Dave Taylor at the helm. Then they fucked that up by releasing him. =(
Dave Taylor: A great sport. A smart guy. A talented modeler and painter. Able to connect with the Warhammer "hobbyists". A real passion for the game.
Somebody please tell me why the axed him? He was one of the best things going.
When I spoke to Mr. Taylor here in Chicago (in 2007) he was very resistant to adopting the UK GT standard.
Rather than copy (learn the lessons of?) the UK events team and to some extent the GCN he was pretty insistent that the Independents here were doing it right (Adepticon was the example we both used as how to do it/how not do it!).
I'm not sure if an ELO type rating system would really work for 40K. It would be interesting to see, but would require consistent standards across the US. Given that most people don't go to large tournaments and GW has seemingly sworn off running them, there'd be no central organization to ensure appropriate standards both for the tournaments and for the directors.
I'm an official USCF club director, so I know about the type of stuff you have to go through. It helps that there's a definitive rulebook that deals not only with the rules of the game but the various rules for tournaments, for pairings, etc. There's an overarching organization that sets standards and ordains organizers and directors. GW could do that, but doesn't want to, and I understand as it'd be a big addition that brings in little money.
Lastly, I'm not sure if there's a good rubric for ranking people, because the goals of a particular game are nebulous. In theory, there's massacre, win, draw, lose, get massacred, but judging how we get those results varies from tournament to tournament. You yourself have claimed that the players who win GW GTs and Indy GTs are effectively "over-rated," but that's the closest we could come so far in the US to establishing a basis for rankings. Win/loss/draw and always the same rules/pieces make the system much easier.
This is somewhat of an aside, but something thats kind of bugged me about 40K tournies has been that they determine by how much you win, not just whether you won or lost. No other sport does this that I know of. It would seem to unbalance things, as you're less likely to table a good opponent. So someone who faces off versus a couple of shitty lists, or crap players, is more likely to score higher in the tournament than someone who was stuck facing off against last years champions, and win against them.
I am a local Orlando player and I agree with you Stelek. I have argued against it for a long time now. We are just too fractured in our area to have a consistent player base that can help guide this event. So it falls to the Fantasy player base to run a tournament for us. (A little history, the Necro was a fantasy only GT style event for years, it's only recently they opened up the 40k side due to demand).
In the issue of fairness I have posted a link to your site on the Adeptus Orlandicus Forum, a local gaming club in the Orlando area, in which I am a co-founder.
http://orlando40k.3.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=2578
I fully support the efforts of the Necro though, and with the exception of a few issues, they do put on a really great event. I have not met one person in all the years I have visited there that wasn't thoroughly enjoying themselves, maybe that is enough for most.
Let's address the fact that a new player's chance of enjoying himself when matched up against a tourney veteran is actually increased in comparison to a new player facing up against another new player.
Whenever I play against a battleforce player, I dial back the aggression, retract my claws and walk him through his game. I make sure I get my massacre (if I can) but I also make sure that my opponent is getting what he wants out of the game as well.
Look at it this way. If a new player is playing a 5 game tourney, and gets matched up against a tuned list, then gets massacred, guess where he is going. The bottom tables right?
So the new guy gets to play the next 4 games while being matched up with players with similar skill levels.
And as an added bonus, you haven't tampered with the results of your tournament by knowingly influencing matchups with your own bias for and against certain armies and units.
Or another option you could take, is to split all of the "power gamers" off and put them all in a smaller room, air conditioning optional, let them play on unpainted terrain while the people who have no ability to create army lists compete to find out who is the Anthony Michael Hall of 40k.
That would be the best way to protect the meek from being "infected" by people who can make a decent army list.
Mahu: That is kind of sad, but it's common throughout the world really. One side gets dominant and the other side suffers. I am aware the Necro was fantasy only, probably why I never attended. lol
Maybe they can listen to Shep, who has excellent points. I did that at Vegas (and many other times before then). Karrik makes a good point as well, that's entirely how I've taken my tournaments. Without input from GW UK events, I don't generally read GW's UK rules they tend to make me wonder what game they are playing. lol
Looking at them now, they do seem to be doing considerably better.
I will think some more about a primer and a tournament 'how to'.
Query, and this is not sarcastic...
are people really THAT opposed to handicapping?
I guess I never really saw it the way it has been presented here (and I am still unconvinced that this is the only view of it, but am seeing that mine is not pre-dominant either).
I seriously saw it as an excuse to go to an event, build the list I wanted to play without hyper-tuning, just the models/paint scheme/list that I liked, and have fun both days. The whole event, both when handicaps ceased and before, I had quite a good time.
I never saw it as a WAAC punishment, I saw it as a leavened field with people getting together to socialize AND compete, not compete and MAYBE socialize.
I also feel, truly, that the organizer had this aim in mind...not crippling the competitors, but making for a vibrant and flowing weekend.
They did that with scenarios, making them almost like mini campaigns, the first year I went...and only dropped that ball last year (it seems).
I don't know that the only method of running events is to be pure WAAC.
I also don't think it's to be punished by any stretch, and I have suffered (recently) the flippant 'you're a dick' kind of treatment because I brought the pain at an event.
I think the event coordinators took that into account too, and by putting like minded lists together decreased the chance of 'hard' players being 'chastised' for playing that way (the looks you get, the snide comments, as you are whaling on someone) as well as newer players playing opponents that have similar tastes, making for smoother first rounds.
I don't know what's worse, as someone said in reverse sentiment earlier, being beaten or beating someone that makes you feel bad for doing it...and yes, people can do that sometimes.
Handicapping sucks. There is no ranking system for gw games. Even the 'swiss' format for tournaments sucks as most of them are 3 rounds regardless of the number of players. Soft scores are one of the dumbest things I have ever seen. TO's don't give a shit. They care more about the 'hobby' aspect of the 'game' than rules and tournaments.
There is nothing that is going to happen to fix this.
I play in one tournament and that's 'ard boyz. It still sucks but so far it's been the only way to avoid soft scores in my neck of the woods.
Some random musings...
A HUGE problem with trying to corral all 'hard' players together like that, is that a lot of those people are dicks, and are the ones most likely to moan about being tabled, simply because they're awful sports, and expected to own face with their good list and mediocre ability. Arrogant fucks.
Anonymous said, "I think the event coordinators took that into account too, and by putting like minded lists together decreased the chance of 'hard' players being 'chastised' for playing that way (the looks you get, the snide comments, as you are whaling on someone) as well as newer players playing opponents that have similar tastes, making for smoother first rounds."
At a *tournament*, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for complaining about the "hard" list deployed across the table from you.
You are attending a TOURNAMENT. You should be playing TO WIN.
What I was angling at earlier is that you can play a WAAC list and still be a perfect gentleman while beating face on the table.
The_King_Elessar *is* correct when he broadbrushes many "hard players" with the "arrogant fuck" label. THAT'S the problem that tournaments need to address, and handicapping is NOT the answer. The answer is to be directly involved on the game floor.
You cannot correct bad social behavior with legislation or gimmicks. Only the power of the peer base and/or a higher authority can curb bad behavior. TOs ARE a tournament's higher authority, and they need to take that responsibility seriously. They must not be allowed to shirk it.
Similarly, I think it's incumbent upon us players to report bad behavior to TO's. Even if heavily involed, many events are large enough that they can't reasonably be expected to be everywhere and see everything. When you're getting "the treatment" from some arrogant fuck, keep your own temper, but take time out to report it in calm, deliberate manner. Insist that a TO come with you to see what you're talking about so the guy doesn't get off the hook.
Assholes aren't going to magically turn into nice people just because you hope to bunch them all up together at the beginning of a tournament. They may never become nice people, in fact. But you can at least take their dickishness away for the duration of an event by holding them accountable. And everyone must be involved in holding them accountable.
But it starts at the top with the TO's not making boneheaded decisions while sitting on their asses twiddling their thumbs.
I completely agree with Damon on this, the problem is that so many people have this notion that if you make a good (or "cheesy" or "beardy", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean) list, then you are some asshole who doesn't care about sportsmanship and just wants to kick people around. While that often-times is the case, it's also not always true.
By doing stuff like this, they completely screw over people like us, who are committed to both having competitive strong lists AND being good sports / having fun.
As an aside: I really hate the term WAAC, especially when referring to lists. "Win At All Costs" What costs? People who say that are basically implying that if you play to win then you have to give up any chance at having fun by being a dick. I hate to break it to these people, but if someone is a dick, that has nothing to do with their list or their skill or anything, that just means they are a dick. Even if they were playing the fluffy Necron army with no chance to win, they would still be a dick, so WAAC doesn't mean anything in my eyes.
I don't understand how handicapping is supposed to even help new players. You're a newbie/softie so you play softies until day 2 when you suddenly get hammered by powergamer after powergamer across from you? Whee...There's a crushingly fun day2.
If they did it seeded (ok, not really possible) or random, you probably get hammered your first game. But now you're already mixed down with the other softies for the entire rest of the tournament for some more evenly matched games.
I'd trade one bad game upfront for a better following series rather than getting some army comp freebie pass and getting autodemolished in the second half.
Apparently I fail at abbreviations.
What is WAAC?
I probably qualify, becuase
1) Handicapping is for morons who play golf and for some reason dont think its fair that someone knows how to play better.
2) Cheese is good, going to a tourney that they keep a score for winning? then bring a friggin list that can win.
Win At All Costs
Stelek, could you add tournaments label to this?
This is a very helpfull resource but hard to locate w/o a label.
Thank you, good sir.
Post a Comment