Why is the Tournament Scene getting flak, and do they deserve it?

[Denzark]

With all the fuss and general kerfuffle surrounding the release of Stronghold and Escalation, one party of our hobby is drawing considerable flak from many quarters at the moment. This is the tournament scene and its players. The question occurs, why is this?

In another thread, it was pointed out by Darklink, that tournaments are often little more than organized events. It is an excuse for like-minded chaps to get together and fight a few games on the trot. That in itself is not bad, is it? Couple that with the fact that often (most in my experience, YMMV) tourney players are highly enthusiastic, their armies are largely built and painted, they know the rules, they know the fluff, they are there for the same thing as you. It takes a level of effort to specifically head out for a tournament - as opposed to knocking around your FLGS and agreeing at whim to a 'pick-up' game. The shared experience with this mutually heightened level of investment with tournament gaming can be awesome. After all, no-one begrudges playing the beginner at the club, but at some time the novelty of a half built, half painted 750pt ork army, half of which are proxied by Imperial Guard, pales somewhat.

So where have the Tourney gamers got this reputation from? I reckon there are several reasons:

1. Tourneys are the only places where you can be 'ambushed' by killer lists. 'Hang on' you say, 'it’s a tourney, anything goes'. OK I get that. But, put it in perspective. If you play in your basement/mancave wherever, against friends, you probably know what sort of list is being thrown down - it may be a trial of a cutthroat list, but normally people would agree beforehand. Likewise, you have a choice in pickup games - If someone in the FLGS invites you to play a 3 suit list against your fluffy list, you can respectfully opt out. But in a tournament you get no choice. You are there to play and at some point the draw or the rankings system, will see you against a killer list that you have little or no chance of beating.

2. The point above seems sort of obvious. But this links to my next point. The tournament is the only habitat of the WAAC power gamer. That person who takes his enjoyment in pressing the autowin button. He gets some point of self worth from the win, he cares nothing for sportsmanship, he doesn't banter during the game, his approach is almost autistic in disregard for social graces. You would not normally play this individual by choice, if you encounter him at a pick-up game, you would only play him that once as he is not fun. He gets a bad rep in-club and finds it near impossible to get games. But in a tourney this individual is forced upon you, hence my comment that this is the only environs in which they are found.

3. Tournament players can sometimes give the impression that the tournament scene is the most important aspect of the hobby. The level of irritation this causes can be similar to that expressed for the endless legions of Ebay sellers who claim they 'pro-paint'. Just because somebody won an event that had x-level of prize support, does not make them the final authority on all matters 40K. Now I do not claim all tourney players claim such things. However, I think the small numbers that do seem to imply this, can easily give the others a bad name (this also applies to the WAAC Jobs described above). This is further magnified by the high percentage of 'internet personalities' who co-incidentally are active in the tournament scene. Like Commodus in 'Gladiator' getting tetchy with Senators whispering 'Republic Republic Republic', some people grow tired of 'tournament tournament tournament'.

4. Now if the 3 points above are correct, the final point is the killer. Tourney players quite rightly would prefer a tight, balanced and unambiguous ruleset. 40K does not fit that. Escalation and Stronghold takes us even further away from that. Non-tourney players who couldn't give a toss about a tight ruleset and are having the time of their lives with mad fluff lists, massive death toys and all these expansions (see Mr Mystery's 'Golden Age' thread), take the tournament perspective to imply a criticism of the way they enjoy warts and all 40K. A non-tourney player may say: 'Hang on GW doesn't write tournament rules. How can you criticise them when they say the single most important rule is to have FUN?'. And because of the killer lists at point 1 and the WAACs at point 2 and the 'noisy tournament players' aspect at point 3, all of which do not make a FUN experience for a lot of people, the non-tourney players quite literally cannot empathise with the problems the tourney players raise. It is, a self-licking lollipop (or is that self-fulfilling prophecy?).

So who is right? With the debate in full swing and to be maintained as we find out online which tournaments are picking and choosing which rules/supplements to limit, I can see this ongoing. For myself, I recently had to check my perspective. I regularly play at Throne of Skulls, and found myself planning a new army to be WYSIWYG, no proxies and no third party parts. When I was debating how best to achieve this, my normal partner was quite aghast I was weighing these considerations up against the rule of cool - why should I limit myself merely to meet entry requirements for a tourney?

(TLR)

And so I came to the conclusion that both views are equally valid. Cutthroat at tourney, fluffy warts and all at home. Tourney players don't deserve flak just for being tourney players, but only if they try and claim some kudos just for being a tourney player when all that really means was they had the time and the cost of entry in their pocket. But on the flip side, if the non-tourney crowd are growing a little sick of the negative debate (actually increased codex/rules output was what the internetz were demanding from GW for the last 3 years of 5th Ed), they can always vote with their feet and not respond on those blogs where the self-perceived elite are being opinionated. After all, there but for the grace of the God Emperor goes I…

[Anggul]

There's nothing wrong with 'tourney players', they're usually no different from any other player. It's the ones in 'point 2' which are the bad image that so many people base their view of tourney players on. There's a difference. There are many people who bring lists to tourneys that are both fluffy and strong at the same time. There's this bizarre idea that 'fluffy' and 'strong' are mutually exclusive, when they aren't. 'Fluffy' doesn't mean purposely taking crappy, overpriced units, it means building your army to a theme. The players mentioned in point 2 screw this entirely and clearly care far more about, as you say, pressing a win button despite the fact that it only proves that they don't have any skill and are just making the tourney less fun for players who want to actually have a good, challenging game.

Like you say, in a tourney setting that kind of person is forced upon you, you don't have a choice and it really isn't much fun. Sometimes it can be fun to see how well you can do against their boring spammy list, but it gets tedious. That's the thing that pushes people away from tournaments, and the problem is that there isn't much that can be done about it. Some people are just like that and aren't concerned about both sides having fun. You can place certain limitations like Feast of Blades has done, which I think is just fine, but there's a limit to what you can do. Really you just have to be patient and hope you don't have to face these kinds of people too often, and get to play other people who actually want to enjoy a challenging game, not someone who just wants to not have to think, roll dice and let their opponent pick their army back up without doing much.

Making the classification of a 'tourney player' I think is a mistake. The distinction people really see is 'person who wants a good fun, challenging game'/'person who just wants to win with no skill or challenge for some bizarre little ego kick (also known as WAAC). It's these kinds of people that drive people away from tournaments which are otherwise great fun and a great opportunity to play some good games against likeminded people who enjoy the game. There's 'refined' and then there's 'boring'.


As an aside, I think all players should be concerned with balance and whether units work. The point in playing is to replicate the fluff and to enjoy seeing your beloved units do what they do in backstory in an awesome fashion. Lack of balance means that doesn't happen, and you become disillusioned with the game, your suspense of disbelief broken because that unit that is so epic and/or glorious in the fluff is just getting trounced because of bad rules and points values. You want your army to perform as it should in the backstory, regardless of whether you're in a tournament or playing a narrative campaign. If anything, those of us who play narrative campaigns and such should be more concerned with it because the experience is based entirely upon faithfully representing the actions of the army. The issue, I think, is that people seem to be afraid to do what they want. They feel that they need explicit, written permission from GW to do something, when GW themselves actively promote the opposite. We can change things for the better ourselves. We can make those units that we love so much more balanced. You can't do it as easily with a random pick-up game, but at tournaments and regular gaming groups/your mate's house, you can set 'house' rule changes based upon what you think as a group and use them. Suddenly the game is a lot more fun because you can use the units you want to use without just having to pick them up off the board before they get to do their thing and you get to have fun replicating their endeavours.

Balance is important for all things, not just tourneys. It has an effect upon the game as a whole because the rules are representing the fluff. In some cases, people just don't seem to get how a unit is supposed to work, and so declare it 'underpowered'. There are genuine cases of underpowered units though, so we can fix them ourselves as long as the environment permits it and have fun using them.

[Defenestratus]

The reason why the tournament scene is getting flak is because they've totally forgotten the underlying social contract that exists between two people when playing a game of plastic dolls.

They've forgotten that each and every rule in the core rulebook requires as much permission to use as does anything else that GW puts out - and a lot of them are really having a hard time coming to grips with the fact that the world of make-believe, plastic toy soldier commanding isn't black and white.

Personally I find it pretty hilarious that this much uproar has been made over such a frivolous matter.

The idea that "anything goes" at a tournament is pretty silly to me. I have played only a handful of tournaments, but I have willingly ceded two games because I simply knew I wasn't going to have fun playing the person. One was because the person was using a broken Chaos list with the lord on disc of Tzeench, and the other was because the player was a douchenozzle who had previously made a 12 year old kid cry that same day.

Both time's I took a loss, and both times my opponent was pleased as punch at the "free" win. In my mind however that person lost. Why? Because in each case, that person didn't get to play a game of toy soldiers. Tournament players (I speak in generalities here) forget that they're in a tournament to *have fun* and not to *win*. Some people equate winning to having fun, but thats only because they actually don't really enjoy playing wargames. They just enjoy finding outlets that prove to themselves that they're better at *something* than someone else.

[Sly]

Anggul said it very well:

Most tournament players are not WAAC gamers.
Fluffy lists can be competitive, and the reverse.
Balance and solid rules are good for home players also, not just tournament players.

I'm going now to jump to a point to illustrate that a lot of players arguing from the point of view of a tournament are still arguing for the betterment of the game: D-class weapons.
A lot of tournaments are considering putting house rules for D-class, starting with making them S10/AP1 and adding some other benefits from there. Now, this is done for balance, right? However, I ask you... how many HOME gamers have some favorite unit, or a favorite HQ, or a tooled up Command Squad? Removing these from play with no save is NOT FUN for the guy looking forward to his Chapter Master having an epic battle with someone, win or lose. So this is one case of many where the balance that tournament players want to see would translate into protecting the fun of the home gamer.

[Mr Mystery]

Yet gamers talk to each other. Gamers have to arrange the game. Points are agreed. You're more likely to ask or be asked 'mind if I field my super heavy'.

For me, Tournaments are painted with the same brush because sadly the majority of whining comes from a minority of players who have tournament playing in common. As I'm not really noted for eloquence with words....this is not to say all tournament players are whiners, or even that all whiners are tournament players.

But it certainly seems a lot more common for an internet whine to be coming from a tournament player demanding the game be rebuilt from the ground up to satisfy their particular wishes. They also feel that people who don't exclusively play to win are a bit weird, or doing it wrong....

[Auticus]

I used to be a heavy hardcore tournament player. 95% of everyone I played with or met at a tournament were pretty good guys.

However the 5%...

The 5% are why tournament players get flak. We know the 5%. Everyone reading this probably can name off a couple names that fit in the 5%.

I've seen a table flipped at a tournament. I've seen dice flung at walls. I've seen models slammed to the ground and stomped on. I've been on the receiving end of a rant for fielding a "cheesy army". I've been on the receiving end of a rant blaming dice. I've seen grown men twist their faces up in RAGE. I've seen grown men curse other grown men out like they were playing in the NFL and their coaching career was on the line. I've seen grown men treat a game of warhammer like it was the NFL and that their entire self worth was based on their W/L record and winning the tournament.

I've seen grown men laughing mean-spiritedly at their opponent after defeating them, calling them "stupid" and condescending them. They are the same people that loudly boast about their grand warhammer skillz and how they are "good at the game" and you are not "good at the game".

Those 5% act the same no matter what environment you are in. However, in a gaming club you can choose to not play the 5%. At a tournament, you cannot choose this. You are hoping you don't draw the 5% but if you do draw them... your enjoyment of the event is likely going to plummet.

The 5% need policed by our community.

It only takes ONE game against one of these guys, and you will likely stereotype an entire tournament community from it, because the 5% primarily dwell in tournament halls where winning at all costs is the most important thing.

Its not fair, but that's why you get the reaction to tournament gamers most often than not.

[Mr Mystery]

Also, consider this.

My town has a gaming club. Comprised of predominantly good fellas, many of which I have gamed with in the past. But for a while the club became tournament obsessed. Every game was 'tournament practice'. Every game, because it was tournament practice, was subject to odd rulings and 'comp'. I'd be told 'you can't use that list. It's not comp' It went from a pretty decent group, to an elitist group quite quickly, and I haven't been back.

They couldn't get their heads out of Tournament mode for a single game each week. Their preference began to be foisted upon all and sundry. And that shouldn't ever happen. Nobody should be told at a paid for club they can't use a certain list, because the other person is prepping for a tournament, just as someone prepping for a tournament shouldn't be told they can't do it at a club they too have paid for. Got to compromise on all sides. But for me, it just stopped being fun.

[Eldar_Atog]

Mr Mystery's example is very similiar to what happened to my gaming group. About a third of the group became touranment obessed. You showed up for a friendly game and you ended up with 2 or 3 players wanting to test run their list (2 Cultist, 3 Hell Turkey, allied detachment with flying monstrous creature). That happened time after time. God help you if we had a friendly touranment. That's when the Necron flying circus guy would show up teamed with the flying monstrous creature guy.

Even after you would leave and get a bite to eat, they would keep talking about the latest power unit that they were going to exploit. It only took a few months of this to completely splinter the group.

There has been a lot of mention in this thread about this stereotype being caused by a small minority but my experience has been just the opposite. You'll have a small minority of touranment players that are there to have fun. The majority usually just wants to fondle themselves while talking about their leet 3 hell turkeys.

[SaveModifier]

Tournament players shouldn't be getting any flak, they should just be ignored, giving them the oxygen of publicity is confirming in their heads that the game revolves around them, its good to see the rest of the community finally hitting back at those people who complain and moan about everything.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

will say from my own experiences is when it coms to tournaments you have some good guys and you have just as many if not more bad guys that come to these events. i know i can point to a few years back watching a tyranid player pull out models sit them on the table then have to switch them out for his actual list once his opponent had deployed.

another i can remmber was a group that called themselves hell fire setting up tournaments where their members won after their own guys as well as their seating caused only their guys to be in the top. so after a year or so everyone wised up and they got tossed from the local store never to be seen or heard from again.

hell i know at the last 2 tournaments ive seen a known cheater same tyranid player get away with murder.. apparently when you role for psychic powers you can roll 2 dice then determine which dice goes for which group. funny last time i checked you picked a disciplne then rolled 1 d6 and either took that or took the primaris then roll again and again until your done....


at anoher one i saw a group give out best painted to their own guy 2x now... beating a beautifully painted dark eldar force that was hand painted then beating a tau list this time that was stunning (apparently he had the wrong flock... funny i though silfor was flock and looks nicer then static grass...) oh and the first one lost out to imperial fists who were table top only... he had a display board while the De player did no it was shameful and left a bad taste in alot of peopl mouth.

I know i've met enough dbags in my career that i honestly avoid them unless somehow i get it into my head that i will go play games with cool dudes and then have fun... (oddly enough this only happens when your at the bottom of the tier...)