Monday, 29 October 2012

Tournament scoring, Generalship vs Paint/Sports?

We are having a good discussion about tournament scoring currently up here in the Auckland wargaming community.There is definitely one camp more in favour of the Painting side of the hobby and the Sports component in tournaments. It's been argued that there should be a definitive winner of the Painting and Sports at the event and these points should count significantly 50/50 in comparison to the generalship in tournaments.
It would be great to get everyone's constructive critic on the subject and at the same time give me a chance to be educated with another point of view. My ideas and opinion is below. Comp is also mentioned if you care to resuscitate its carcase, your ideas would also be appreciated.

*Comp has had its day and has proven itself unreliable and inconsistent regardless of peer or panel systems. Even if comp is 10% it's going to have a significant bearing on the results which imo is just plain unacceptable. In this day and age of tournaments comp is just an antique cassette tape in an age of igadgets.

Currently I think people go to tournaments to test their metal against every other general and also to see how the game is understood and how armies are manoeuvred by your peers and if you've got a better understanding of the nuances and tactics. I totally agree with the generalship deciding tournaments and soft scores having less focus as it's a tournament where you are exploring the tactical play of the game. If it was a painting workshop and I was gathering to learn techniques and sit down and paint with like minded individuals then it should definitely be decided if my painting was the most advanced at the end. In saying this I also agree with painting being a major focus in the tournaments as well and a separate painting prize should be on offer. An appropriate much smaller overall percentage that should be easily reachable by all should be applied to encourage a good standard of painting too as it's a hobby after all.  If you look at most of the tournaments recently you will see that the players packs reflect this quite clearly.

One of the main things that I think is forgotten about this hobby is that tournaments should be a gathering to encourage new and vets alike to come and play and encourage a community to build. Without new players systems slowly stagnate. The 3 minimum colours at present are to discourage unpainted forces but also give everyone a chance to try their hand at tournaments. Sports is a definite requirement to encourage good behaviour and perfect behaviour scores for all which is expected should be the norm. Having a mister popular contest would only encourage buddy boosting, which has been discussed at length in many other threads and forums and shouldn't have a place in tournaments.


  1. Hey Phil. Here's my 2 cents.
    If you go to a tournament it should never be decided on painting. If you want to win prizes or whatever then enter a painting competition or try for the painting prize, but to suggest that painting/sports should contribute 50% or more of a score, well lets just say you wont get many travelling for this. I won't be.
    Simply put, its far to subjective. The tournament scene in this country has just been through a phase of re-developing itself and removing subject scoring from events. It would be a shame to revert back to peer comp or additional subjective components.
    Painting is an important aspect of wargaming, but dosn't have a place deciding a tournament cemented in fixed rules. I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars going to a tournament to loose out on 3rd place because some guy didn't like my colour scheme.
    The current system we have going at the moment is great. Almost zero comp is not breaking the game and a lot of people regularly attend to pit their skills against others of like mind, I certainly do.
    The one complaint I have heard most about is comp/players pack being to restrictive, and this IMO is the no.1 reason why more people don't turn up (example the 'extra' LOS rules added in for spells).
    How do I think tournaments should be judged? 70-80% battle, 10-15% sports, 10-15% paint.

  2. Hey Tim, I agree and am entirely of the mind that generalship should be predominant in determining the results of a tournament. I do still see that this is a hobby as well so very much appreciate a lesser, but in no doubt a very important painting component too. For Guardcon we had a introductory Painting showcase alongside and for Equinox we are planning on a full on Painting competition to run with the Convention.

    I know that a lot of people have already had comp discussions in the past and are way over it but for prosperiety and also for the big group of beginner wargamers that we see in Auckland currently it would be a very informative on what you guys think.

    1. I forgot to add, I also like to see 1st, 2nd, and 3rd get trophies, whilst you get a prize for best sport and best paint.

  3. There's more discussion on this topic on the ACG forums mainly I think to establish if a more hobby focussed tournament would be viable again for GuardCon. I for one will be staying with the 70% battle and 30% Soft scores format For Equinox (includes best sport & Paint) which is tried and proven. We'll also be having A separate painting competition running alongside the tournament as well. Glad that everyone is over discussing comp and IT warriors should stay on forums :) Which is mainly why I've stayed clear of forums for quite a while now.