The best part is if they bank it messes up the sitting positions relative to others. I was told I was taking things to serious when at the Store Championship I played at yesterday when my opponent moved both daggers and went back to focus the first one and I said he couldn't. My understanding is you move and then action. So did the guy also move all and then claimed to give all an action. I would only allow him to take the action on the very last one he picked up ( outside of Using the template for movements).

If they're the same PS, yes, you're being too uptight. If he wants to drop tokens at the same time, that's fine. Now, if he's going to barrel roll after moving both, that's a big no no.

Yeah I don't think there is any problem with moving ships with the same pilots skill together (with templates!) and then taking their actions at the same time.

Yeah, you'd be an ass if you didn't let him take his actions (Focus, evade, TL, NOT roll/boost). Is that really how you want to win? On a technicality like that? Be a good sport and let it go, it's just easier to do it that way. In fact, I'd remind a player if he forgot to take an action.

Yeah, you'd be an ass if you didn't let him take his actions (Focus, evade, TL, NOT roll/boost).

I mean yes, taking a focus or evade action when moving two ships isn't going to change anything. TL is iffy though. Boost or Barrel roll are clearly out.

So we all agree that some actions can't be allowed, so why allow any? Because if you allow some but not others you have to decide which are allowed and which aren't. Far simpler to play by the rules as written rather then get into a discussion on how far you can bend the rules...

What I can't figure out is how we've gotten to the place where expecting people to actually play by the rules is considered a bad thing.

...So we all agree that some actions can't be allowed, so why allow any? Because if you allow some but not others you have to decide which are allowed and which aren't. Far simpler to play by the rules as written rather then get into a discussion on how far you can bend the rules...

There isn't bending of rules. They state actions and triggers can't be retroactive without opponents consent. So the players can decide what is reasonable (Focus/Evade) and what isn't (barrel roll). It isn't bending ... It's consenting and directly in tournament rules. You can choose not to allow anything ... But there will be a cost of your reputation and possibly your local X-Wing community. This isn't Magic the Gathering where both players are penalized for missing one player's trigger ... And that is a good thing IMO.

What's the consensus on TIE Swarm movement etiquette? I've faced several in recent tournaments, and without exception, the players feel like they can just set up in perfect formation, move one TIE using the template, and then just pick up the subsequent ships (sometimes just the ones with the same pilot skill, sometimes all the ones that are in the same formation) and move them to maintain the same relative position with the first ship.

I've not brought it up at the table -- I'm pretty casual even in tournament play -- but it kind of bugs me. TIE swarms are a pain in the ass enough as it is, but they require exact positioning. I feel like ignoring the minor discrepancies that creep into ship positioning during play, whether from the inadvertent jostle, the slight variations from template placement, etc., flies (as it were) in the face of what it should take to maintain formation flying, and makes running an effective swarm easier than it should be. It also makes it faster, which is an issue in tournament play.

Apologies if somebody already explicitly addressed this, but moving blocks of TIEs around "in formation", assuming they all went straight isn't really that big of a deal, but if they are touching and they all picked the same turn or bank most definitely is a big deal as it makes them collide.

http://www.themetalbikini.com/2013/02/maneuvering-as-formation-part-1.html http://www.themetalbikini.com/2013/02/tie-swarm-movement-and-maneuvering-part.html http://www.themetalbikini.com/2013/02/maneuvering-as-formation-part-3.html

Long story short, there are perfectly legal moves that can be made that don't result in collisions when flying in formation, but I can't really tell from the original post if that's what your opponent did or not.

As for the Actions, I don't know. Me personally I'd just still drop them in order as dropping them out of order or all at once is a bad habit to get into when/ if you start playing with ships that are all at a different PS, but I doubt I'd kick up too much of a fuss. It is illegal however, so mileage is going to vary, and as others have said, I can't imagine dropping tokens at once really saves any appreciable amount of time versus dropping them one by one.

Peace!

Two ships that take the exact same manuever and were touching the time before do not count as colliding. There was a ruling on this. There is no overlap at any time(when done perfectly.) Touching does not mean colliding, only creating an overlap.

Sure they do, man. They overlap. Check out the links. I took pics even!

Most Tie Swarms touch back to front. That shouldn't lead to issues. But side to side, unless the outside banks higher than the inside, yes.

Oh, so you meant they were touching back to front not side to side when you said there was a ruling about them not colliding or whatever?

What I can't figure out is how we've gotten to the place where expecting people to actually play by the rules is considered a bad thing.

The spirit of the rules is that every ship gets an action unless prevented by something, if someone moves a formation of ships on the first turn and then says, "oh, if it matters, everyone focused", they are playing by the spirit of the rules that every ship gets an action, even if the written procedure says to do it in a different order.

Both groups are playing by the rules, but what "playing by the rules" means is different to different people. Now, a problem comes up because the group that thinks the only valid interpretation is a strict legalese application of the rules frequently come across like they are accusing the spirit of the rules people of cheating and being dishonest, while the other side comes across like they are calling the first group jerks and #%^*holes, instead of everyone just recognizing that differen people prioritize things differently and we are all actually playing by the rules.

Now, there is a difference between casual play and tournament play. There are actual stakes involved and the participants are going to be more emotionally invested in the match, so additional care should be taken by both sides to understand how the other perceives this issue, and that means the one player should be willing to adhere to the letter of the rules as well as the spirit if it is an issue for the other player, and the other player should be willing to make allowances and let it slide once or twice, which is exactly what Osoroshii said he did in those circumstances.

I will say that, were I in Osorosii's place, I would probably be a bit more flexible than a strict one warning policy if it looked like the other guy was just legitimately forgetting repeatedly rather than just thinking everyone should play his way.

Since when did expecting people to play by the rules become a bad thing?

Because sometimes it's just easier to take shortcuts when it has no impact on the game. For example, if your ion cannon gets three hits against my B-wing there's no reason to roll the defense die even though I technically have to according to the rules. Same thing with moving groups of ships in open space, it's not technically legal to move my ships in sequence and then immediately drop a focus token on all of them, but everyone knows what I'm doing. And since the precise order doesn't matter at that point in the game there's no reason to obsess over whether I've followed the absolute strictest rules for announcing my actions.

And, again, even MTG tournaments with $50,000 cash prizes include an allowance for common shortcuts that aren't technically legal, so don't bother with any of this "it's competitive, rules matter" nonsense. Objecting to common shortcuts that have no impact on the game is the equivalent of the cop pulling people over for driving 1mph over the speed limit. Yes, you're right by the letter of the law/rules, but don't expect anyone to respect you or want to play against you.

Yeah, you'd be an ass if you didn't let him take his actions (Focus, evade, TL, NOT roll/boost).

Since when did expecting people to play by the rules become a bad thing?I mean yes, taking a focus or evade action when moving two ships isn't going to change anything. TL is iffy though. Boost or Barrel roll are clearly out.So we all agree that some actions can't be allowed, so why allow any? Because if you allow some but not others you have to decide which are allowed and which aren't. Far simpler to play by the rules as written rather then get into a discussion on how far you can bend the rules...What I can't figure out is how we've gotten to the place where expecting people to actually play by the rules is considered a bad thing.

VanorDM, I also got caught up in the discussion over this subject. Don't become the villain as I have, just walk away.

There isn't bending of rules. They state actions and triggers can't be retroactive without opponents consent.

So I have to agree with you and give you consent for what ever you want to do, or I'm being a poor sport? Last time I checked consent means we agree on something, not that I have to let you have it your way. I mean that is kinda the whole point behind the rules isn't it? If we can't agree on something we play by the rules as written... I'm pretty sure every TO out there would say the same thing.

I personally would have no issue with someone moving two same PS ships and doing the actions out of order. But not allowing it, telling people that they have to play by the rules as written does not make me a bad person.

I find it very interesting how many people seem to feel it's ok to resort to extortion in order to play how they feel they should. Because that's what you're saying here. If I don't let you have your way you'll blackball me from the X-Wing community. I mean if that isn't one of the most hypocritical things I've ever heard... You're going to try and drive me out of the community in the name of casual fun...

Now, there is a difference between casual play and tournament play.

I agree, and we are talking about a tournament setting here, not a friendly game at the LGS. if this were a friendly game we were talking about that would be a different thing.

But either way, what I object to is the idea that expecting people to play by the rules, makes me an ass, that no one should ever play with.

...I personally would have no issue with someone moving two same PS ships and doing the actions out of order. But not allowing it, telling people that they have to play by the rules as written does not make me a bad person....

I didn't say you were a bad person. Just trying to communicate that not consenting to retroaction/shortcuts/ect. will likely cause a reaction to you by other players ... Usually negative. I'm speaking from personal experience as I am a rules lawyer in my group ... And I now have a reputation for it. I have learned to lighten up in areas I actually don't have an issue (like the ones you just stated) for an improved atmosphere. And as for "driving you out" comment ... There will be casual/layed-back players turned off by a cut throat tournament environment, just as hard core tournament players might leave if no one likes them. I'm just trying to say how it is. I don't believe Flying Casual means play sloppy and allowing cheating. Just making X-Wing work for everyone. My .02

Yeah, you'd be an ass if you didn't let him take his actions (Focus, evade, TL, NOT roll/boost).

Since when did expecting people to play by the rules become a bad thing?I mean yes, taking a focus or evade action when moving two ships isn't going to change anything. TL is iffy though. Boost or Barrel roll are clearly out.So we all agree that some actions can't be allowed, so why allow any? Because if you allow some but not others you have to decide which are allowed and which aren't. Far simpler to play by the rules as written rather then get into a discussion on how far you can bend the rules...What I can't figure out is how we've gotten to the place where expecting people to actually play by the rules is considered a bad thing.

VanorDM, I also got caught up in the discussion over this subject. Don't become the villain as I have, just walk away.

"It is too late for me, my son."

I generally find it works best to allow people to take shortcuts that don't actually impact the game, but to point out to them frequently that it IS a shortcut, the rules technically say to do it a different way, and that there are so e people who might object. That way their enjoyment of that game doesn't get ruined, but they will be able to play it the other way should it become necessary to them.

I didn't say you were a bad person. Just trying to communicate that not consenting to retroaction/shortcuts/ect.

Well the term poor sport and ass have been used... Both of those things I associate with a bad person.

Again, because the larger point seems to be missed here.

We're talking about a Store Championship, which is a bid deal. People should expect to play a lot tighter by the rules in this situation then they would on their friendly Friday night games. And we're also talking about people calling someone a ass because they have a difference of opinion.

If I were playing in a tournament, I'd play it exactly as written, because that is IMO the polite and respectful thing to do. I shouldn't expect someone else to allow me to play sloppy, take short cuts that are against the rules as written or expect them to consent to my way without asking first.

I mean who's really being the poor sport here? The person expecting to play by the rules, or the person expecting to be allowed to take shortcuts that he/she feels don't have an impact on the game?

As a side note... I was thinking about it and realized that pretty much any action taken by ships of the same PS doesn't actually have an impact on the game. So even barrel rolls, boosts and such don't actually have an unfair impact on the game when taken out of order by ships of the same PS.

It has always been my belief that each match is centered around an agreement between the two opposing players. I have lost track of the number of times I have asked my opponents if they were okay with me moving 4 APs (from a 7 TIE Swarm) as a group during the initial stages of the match and they have said "yes." This includes the finals match of the 2013 North American Championship. If they have ever said "no" (this may have happened once or twice, or never), then I moved them individually.

If you really want to spend your match time sitting and watching your 7 TIE Swarm opponent very precisely template-measure each movement of each of their 7 ships when they are all the way on the other side of the board from you, then by all means, have at it. I have found that many players want to get to the "action rounds" as soon as possible in order to secure a more satisfactory conclusion to the match (and to avoid that oh-so-evil Partial Win).

The level of formality present in games is the consequence of constant negotiation between you and your opponent. I personally enjoy that aspect of the game. I like that I have the option to allow my opponent to put a focus token on their ship during the combat phase because they had forgot to place it during the maneuvering phase. I don't HAVE to let them, but I may. Similarly, I like that I am able to ask my opponent if they are okay with me moving 4 APs as a block in order to speed up the initial rounds of the game.

What you "believe" should be done and/or is okay is completely meaningless in the context of the game as a whole. It only takes on meaning when you sit down to play with someone. Even then, your desired level of formality will vary from match to match (maybe even during the same tournament!) over the course of your X-Wing career.

On a final note, I don't think it can be argued that the highest degree of formality desired between opponents must always be respected.

On a final note, I don't think it can be argued that the highest degree of formality desired between opponents must always be respected.

Exactly. I tend to not play or expect others to be overly formal in their game play. But calling someone a name because they wish to play more formally then I, is IMO the height of bad sportsmanship.

I find it very interesting how many people seem to feel it's ok to resort to extortion in order to play how they feel they should. Because that's what you're saying here. If I don't let you have your way you'll blackball me from the X-Wing community. I mean if that isn't one of the most hypocritical things I've ever heard... You're going to try and drive me out of the community in the name of casual fun...

Unfortunately for your position, it may be correct but it simply isn't how society "expects" things to work and that is going to cause friction, even if is technically "right". Society will see this as taking advantage of the rules even if, as you correctly say, it is just following the rules. The social group will largely expect you to seek a "fair" outcome - where "fair" is defined as "an outcome that avoids conflict and attempts the best compromise that will most closely resemble an result based upon the skill of the competitors". Not conforming to social norms is what will ostracize you - not any concerted, organized or intentional effort. It is just going to rub many people the wrong way.

You can bemoan that following the rules exactly as written should be what society expects all you want and it isn't going to change a thing even if it is logical or correct. Social groups care less about "logic" or "correctness" and more about the perceived "fairness".

In much the same manner, if your opponent does do things out of order, and you warn him you expect him to do things as written in the future, it is absolutely correct that it would be poor sportsmanship on his part to argue the point. Again, you are technically correct. And I think social norms would side with you on this. You have put out notice that you expect to play formally and the rules support your position. There are opportunities for poor sportsmanship on both sides in this case and people will be "judged" by others based upon their attempts to avoid conflict - not by who is "right". In life, most often the only person who cares how "right" you are is you. Everyone else in the room just wants you to avoid ugliness and arguments through compromise. And to this even there are exceptions - sometimes you have to take a stand regardless of outside social pressures. It is up to you to decide if allowing actions that would have been perfectly legal except for procedural issues is worth the fight and the social cost with regards to how others perceive you.

And for the record - I'm not saying any of this is fair or right or wrong... It just ... is.

Following the rules is one thing. Forcing someone to follow strict rules adherence, especially when its a rules that really doesn't matter to how the game would be play really puts off some people. Forcing someone to do something just for the principle of it really makes it a hollow gesture and can really set the social tone for the match.

There's been a few times where people at my LFGS have forgotten that any tabletop game is actually a very cooperative event. You are both playing to get enjoyment out of it. Their is rarely a third person arbitrator that can make an airtight decision (like the programming in a video game) and you have to work together to both play the game and to also work through and troubles. If you don't, or you make playing a game painful, your opponent could quit and while the other person quit and forfeited, you both lose because you didn't get to play the game.

I find it very interesting how many people seem to feel it's ok to resort to extortion in order to play how they feel they should. Because that's what you're saying here. If I don't let you have your way you'll blackball me from the X-Wing community. I mean if that isn't one of the most hypocritical things I've ever heard... You're going to try and drive me out of the community in the name of casual fun...

Nobody is going to intentionally and purposefully "blackball" you from the X-Wing community. It is just going to happen naturally because there is an accepted social standard in gaming and competition that you won't change no matter how much we talk here. People in general expect a "good" or "fair" competitor to be forgiving of his opponent's mistakes where practical and to seek a resolution where the outcome is determined by the skill of the competitors and not by misunderstandings, poor assumptions or technicalities. This is especially true when the situation involves a "norm" adopted by large groups as acceptable even if it does not technically comply with the rules - in this case because people allow it because it is accepted to make no difference.

Unfortunately for your position, it may be correct but it simply isn't how society "expects" things to work and that is going to cause friction, even if is technically "right". Society will see this as taking advantage of the rules even if, as you correctly say, it is just following the rules. The social group will largely expect you to seek a "fair" outcome - where "fair" is defined as "an outcome that avoids conflict and attempts the best compromise that will most closely resemble an result based upon the skill of the competitors". Not conforming to social norms is what will ostracize you - not any concerted, organized or intentional effort. It is just going to rub many people the wrong way.

You can bemoan that following the rules exactly as written should be what society expects all you want and it isn't going to change a thing even if it is logical or correct. Social groups care less about "logic" or "correctness" and more about the perceived "fairness".

In much the same manner, if your opponent does do things out of order, and you warn him you expect him to do things as written in the future, it is absolutely correct that it would be poor sportsmanship on his part to argue the point. Again, you are technically correct. And I think social norms would side with you on this. You have put out notice that you expect to play formally and the rules support your position. There are opportunities for poor sportsmanship on both sides in this case and people will be "judged" by others based upon their attempts to avoid conflict - not by who is "right". In life, most often the only person who cares how "right" you are is you. Everyone else in the room just wants you to avoid ugliness and arguments through compromise. And to this even there are exceptions - sometimes you have to take a stand regardless of outside social pressures. It is up to you to decide if allowing actions that would have been perfectly legal except for procedural issues is worth the fight and the social cost with regards to how others perceive you.

I do totally understand what you are saying and for the most part I agree. The difference I feel is in the environment at which we play that same game. I am no stranger to house rules and even have a few of my own for some games. Of course these house rules , even socially acceptable ones, are for casual play. When I pay money to compete for prizes as in a tournament that environment has changed. I would also agree the term Tournament is used loosely at times when dealing with a social gathering with prize support from a game night kit. A Store Championship is the first step in a path of other larger tournaments. Even winning a SC gives you advantages at a regional. I would never discourage any player from attending any event as we all love this game. Just understand the rules as they are and if you intend on wanting to use a house rule ask before performing it. By using a house rule in this environment without asking you put me in an awkward position. I now have to start to figure out is this house rule being used to your advantage. Should I use this house rule ( you guys are going to love this )to see if I can gain an advantage. I'm not looking to undermine my opponents. I do have a strong competitive spirit. I have noticed the word Competitive means "win at all cost" to this X-Wing community. I can truly say my most favorite games of X-Wing I've played are the ones I lose, or the close hard fought battles. Steam Rollin any one in any game is not enjoyable for my competitive heart. I often like to talk about a game when either I lose or win about mistakes I've made in strategy and offer help with strategy when asked. The only thing I disagree with your remarks, putting the variance rules ahead of the actual rules in a tournament environment. We all know the rules at this point and are in fact dealing with what is socially acceptable out side of those rules. I alone don't expect to sway an entire communities opinions with clever words of "I right, you wrong". I have never resorted to belittling anyone for having a different view as mine. I have seen people making similar points as me getting called the same names I was being called. We all play roles in this community. I have accepted the role of the villain, but **** it I'm going to be the best villain I can be!

What's the consensus on TIE Swarm movement etiquette?

Yeah, you'd be an ass if you didn't let him take his actions.

If I don't let you have your way you'll blackball me from the X-Wing community.

Yikes. Okay. So the thread about Tie fighters moving illegally turned into... this...

I probably wont enjoy a match with a super serious gamer. I am used to playing at friends/my house, with casual gamers who bump ships, forget to drop tokens immediately after moving, and leave their movement templates after they move. (the last one is unforgivable, btw)

At the same time, there are players who wouldn't enjoy a super chill match with me.

So what?

We all play this board game differently.

Some people play this board game pretty seriously.

Some people play this board game pretty lightheartedly.

Also, playing styles change depending on the location. (home, friends house, store tournament, whatever)

But most of all, arguing on this forum probably isn't the place.

(not that there is a suitable place for this... It's kind of obvious no one is going to change their minds, so why keep arguing?)

The only other thing I will say, is having an opinion is awesome. However, it doesn't give you an excuse to be a douchebag.

Following the rules is one thing. Forcing someone to follow strict rules adherence, especially when its a rules that really doesn't matter to how the game would be play really puts off some people.

We're not talking about some strict interpretation of the rules. We're talking about following the rules as they're quite clearly written. I mean it's not like I'm pulling out section 5, paragraph 3, line 5, and claiming that the word It doesn't actually mean what you think it means.

We're talking about moving a ship, and preforming an action with that ship before you move any others. Exactly the way the rules say you should.

I'm not even saying that you need to do that. I am saying however that if someone wants to play that way, it doesn't make them a bad person or a poor sport. Because when you start taking shortcuts based on how you feel things should work. You are opening up yourself to be accused of cheating.

Now adding a focus token to all the ships at once won't have any impact on the game. But perhaps a TL might, or a Boost or Barrel Roll, or Squad Leader...

The point is you've left the objective nature of the rules and gotten into subjective opinions on what does or doesn't effect the outcome. At that point you've opened up yourself for arguments based purely on opinion.

Their is rarely a third person arbitrator that can make an airtight decision

But in this case there is. Because we're talking about playing in a Tournament not just a normal game of X-Wing. A tourney that can in fact make the difference in where you place in the regional, which means there is a 3rd person, the TO who can make that decision. We're also talking about a game that if you quit because you can't agree... Then you have lost your standing in the tournament.

There is no may to a ship taking an action. They "have" to take an action. So if they don't take one I assume they ffocused. It's good sportsmansip. That said, if a person repeatedly abuses this by boosting or barrel rolling and then trying to explain that they focused later in combat I stop being quite so nice.

There is no may to a ship taking an action. They "have" to take an action. So if they don't take one I assume they ffocused.

No that's not true. You don't have to take an action, Actions per the rules are optional. That's not the same as some effects like Wedges -1 die.

From the rules...

Perform Action: The ship may perform one action

Plus the Tournament FAQ has this rule.

If a player forgets to use an effect during the timing specified by that effect, he cannot

retroactively use it without the consent of his opponent.

So it's really up to the other guy if wants to give consent or not.

Following the rules is one thing. Forcing someone to follow strict rules adherence, especially when its a rules that really doesn't matter to how the game would be play really puts off some people.

We're not talking about some strict interpretation of the rules. We're talking about following the rules as they're quite clearly written. I mean it's not like I'm pulling out section 5, paragraph 3, line 5, and claiming that the word It doesn't actually mean what you think it means.

We're talking about moving a ship, and preforming an action with that ship before you move any others. Exactly the way the rules say you should.

I'm not even saying that you need to do that. I am saying however that if someone wants to play that way, it doesn't make them a bad person or a poor sport. Because when you start taking shortcuts based on how you feel things should work. You are opening up yourself to be accused of cheating.

Now adding a focus token to all the ships at once won't have any impact on the game. But perhaps a TL might, or a Boost or Barrel Roll, or Squad Leader...

The point is you've left the objective nature of the rules and gotten into subjective opinions on what does or doesn't effect the outcome. At that point you've opened up yourself for arguments based purely on opinion.

Their is rarely a third person arbitrator that can make an airtight decision

But in this case there is. Because we're talking about playing in a Tournament not just a normal game of X-Wing. A tourney that can in fact make the difference in where you place in the regional, which means there is a 3rd person, the TO who can make that decision. We're also talking about a game that if you quit because you can't agree... Then you have lost your standing in the tournament.

I'm surprised you went for my comment because I was just talking generally, but I still believe the point stands. If you want to make sure someone follows the rules and plays fair that's one thing. Making someone have to follow a rule by strict adherence just for the sake of the rule itself can be very easily seen as petty. One of the easiest rules we use in our gaming group is if that the rule doesn't have any bearing on whats going on feel free to break it. If it doesn't matter don;t worry about. If theirs contention with it make sure to speak up and talk it out. To use your target lock example if a guy wants to call all his target locks as once, as long as I haven't moved yet why does it matter.

The other side to strict rules adherence is that if people are going to be sticklers for one rule people tend to push it too far. There's been a few debates about custom templates and if any additional markings on the templates would cause pre measuring and cheating. By that same logic X-Wing should be played on a black mat because someone could use the markings on the starfield to pre measure (which would actually be easier because the starfield is constant). Every time someone bumps a table and moves a ship a fraction of an inch, that breaks the rule, but generally no one cares if this happens and its generally expected to happen.

Ultimately there is a reason for the continual use of the "golden rule" in multiple games. Designers understand that the game is supposed to be fun for both parties and almost every rulebook has a caveat that disputes should be worked out between the players.

I think what people are cautioning against is forcing unnecessary strict rules adherence . Even with a TO in a tournament if he is called over to make a calling a superfluous rule that wouldn't really have an impact on the game, he'll remember that. If he keeps getting called over he'll probably get annoyed. I've played in tourney where the TO was so sick of my opponent that you could tell he started to not care at all and just started to give answers without even getting the whole story. TO's make mistakes, have limited time to devote to your dispute, and are human beings. Ultimately, after 1 hour and a pitiful amount of turns, my opponent quit, made a scene and had to be escorted out by security. I won but I didn't feel like I won. I didn't get an enjoyable game out of it and it felt like I wasted my time. Just because you play in a tourney doesn't mean you have to play any differently, and please understand what the real core of the problem I see if forcing someone else to play differently needlessly. I understand the "play to win" mentality in tournaments but you have to get past the "play" part (which I won't even get into the problem with SOS with someone forfeiting). I miss the days of "Fly Casual."

Your point about possibly being accused of cheating is a valid one but its also a double edged sword. If you start calling someone a cheater or start accusing them of not following the rules when the rule in dispute has nothing to do with the outcome of the game, you put yourself in a bad position socially for what is all intents and purposes is a social event.

If you start calling someone a cheater or start accusing them of not following the rules when the rule in dispute has nothing to do with the outcome of the game, you put yourself in a bad position socially for what is all intents and purposes is a social event.

First off you're assuming that the action doesn't effect the out come of the game. Which it may or may not, what you're getting into is a subjective argument on how much impact it has on the outcome of the game. You may not feel it does, but I might. Who's right?

If you follow the rules as written there's no room for argument or accusations. What good does saving 5 seconds do you, if you spend 15 minutes arguing over it?

Second, you either follow the rules or you don't. There's no gray area here, it's not like these rules are that vague that it's really open for interpretation.

Lastly, we're talking about a Tournament, not a social event. Tournaments have a completely different purpose then a friendly game, as such you should expect people to play it more formally then they might at their LGS with their friends.