Here's a question for you guys, since being nice appears to be a sticking point. You've made it deep in a tournament, and your opponent keeps forgetting about his abilities. Maybe his Firespray has Recon Specialist, but he's taking only one focus. Maybe for some absurd reason he isn't using Gunner after Han misses. Do you remind him, or do you let him try to figure it out for himself?

Two answers, depending on context.

1. I'm teaching someone new and they aren't remembering everything right away. I remind them what they can do but leave the choice to them.

2. I'm playing against someone who owns the same game or has played it enough with me to know their stuff. I do not remind them.

My goal is to play my best, win or lose, and to have fun doing it. I have no obligation to remind my opponent things that they are supposed to already know and remember themselves. Sometimes I will make an exception to this.

That is my way of playing.

Back on topic, I think next time thus comes up, the OP might mention that the other player is taking a little longer with his choices. If it persists, ultimately it is your choice for calling a TO over about the matter. If you think it is an issue that won't be resolved otherwise, maybe it is a good choice.

Something different I thought of, if you think the player was just having a difficult time is maybe get together with them to test squads out and help them learn to anticipate where their opponent will maneuver. If you have an idea of that, usually you will know what maneuver you want to make before the planning phase even starts.

My personal belief is that if a guy is playing slow, you should just prompt him.

If he's understanding, he'll speed up. Heck, if he really knows he wild even agree to a time extension. Otherwise then he's just stalling - it does happen with a fantastic alpha strike.

I don't see an issue with playing to win, I do that regularly. I even move my ships defensively to keep them alive to get a modified win. No one is out there to play to lose. However I do try to make it as casual as possible - giving tips, feedback, reminding about actions etc. If the guy is really new, I'm happy to discuss positions right before we reveal dials.

I do have a bad habit of frowning when I think, that tends to give of an overly aggressive/intimidating style when I play! Something that I'm really trying to change.

If you think your opponent is slow playing, politely ask them to pick up the pace. If they continue to take a while, call over the TO/Judge.

Stalling (deliberate slow play to manipulate the clock) is cheating and should result in a DQ.

Players entering tournaments with timed rounds should be aware that they are required to play the game at a reasonable pace. There's plenty of time to learn the game playing casual games without a clock ticking.

I thought in genuine tournaments you can't pick up your dial again to alter it, only to check it, even during planning phase to prevent this behavior.

I have never heard this rule. It wouldn't stop the behavior, it would just result in people holding all their dials until they were sure they had the right moves. Unless you also said a person could only hold one dial at a time, and that's getting silly.

I have not heard that before.

Need to look into it, thanks

The reason why no one has heard of this rule is... IT DOESN'T EXIST.

There is NOTHING in the rules that disallows picking up and altering your dials right up until the end of the planning phase, which, unless I'm mistaken, can only be reached when the players agree they are ready to move on. After that there can be no changing of the dials (except when allowed by pilot or upgrade abilities).

Sorry for not weighing in on-topic, I thought this needed to be addressed.

My vote on WAAAGH's question is this, letting the player do something ill advised (barrel roll for no benefit, target a tanked up full health ship instead of a near dead one with no more tokens, so on) is perfectly fine, it is a strategy game after all, but letting them do something wrong (ignoring a passive power that they spent points on) is unfair and, yes, kind of a jerk move, especially if you would point out if they were trying to get four focus a turn by stacking PTL and recon (an illigal move obviously). Only choosing to enforce mandatory rules when it helps you and not when it helps the other guy is cheating, plain and simple.

I also think the guys coming down on him are being, at the least, highly unfair, he's a bit abrasive and more hardcore than I would care to deal with often but nothing he says is deliberately troll-like or inflamatory.

3) Winning can also earn you access to tournaments that might not otherwise be available to you. I don't know if FFG is running qualifiers for top tier events yet, but I've heard that winning some tournaments will earn you a first round bye at others. And that's a big deal.

Okay....I'm probably going to regret stepping into this argument, but I've never enjoyed 'competitive' gaming. However, I know those that do, and as noted, it's not my place to judge - they are, after all, your toy soldiers - and it is easier to say "it's not the winning that matters" with a straight face when you haven't just been flattened by your fourth opponent in a row.

The comment quoted above is the only one that strikes me as a bit off; "earning a first round bye for regional tournaments" means you win the right to play less games. It really only strikes me as a winning for the sake of making it easier to win the next one...i.e. winning for the sake of winning. But then this is very much the view from the bottom of the results table, so what do I know?

Re: how you react to other player's mistakes - I let them correct them, within reason. If a game is fun and an opponent is enjoyable to play, I'm not going to punish them for mistakes which are accidents rather than poor tactical choices: a classic one is a reasonably new player with a pack of TIE fighters - hands up if you've ever deployed one of your TIE fighters facing the wrong way round and didn't realise it, or seen an opponent do the same?

Re: the actual question.... I wasn't there, but lacking evidence to the contrary, believe you. Doing it for the whole game seems a bit silly, but if it got to the 10 minute mark and I knew I had a ship in hand.... I can see the temptation to waste time. I've never noticed someone doing it deliberately, but if I was pretty sure they were doing - especially if there had been a noticable change in time taken, or he kept 'checking' them and not changing them, I would say something to him.

Has FFG stated anything about someone stalling the game on purpose to get the modified win? Another scenario would be someone with a-wings or interceptors destroy one of your ships then constantly fly around the board avoiding the fight until time reaches 0. What would you say or do in the 2nd scenario?

Flying out of range is a difficult proposition in a timed battle. It might save you for 2-3 rounds, or against a foe you have pretty handily beat anyway(say you have a bunch of low hull ships left to their one), but it isn't an illegal tactic. Hell, if you think of it as waiting for reinforcements it isn't even realy outside the games spirit.

In game you are free to use whatever tactic you want. Exploiting the methodology of the game(The free nature of setup with the timed nature of tournament games is where problems arise.)

I do wonder if smaller venues shouldn't uses something ike a 8-10 round limit versus a time limit...

Another scenario would be someone with a-wings or interceptors destroy one of your ships then constantly fly around the board avoiding the fight until time reaches 0.

That is a legal tactic. Nothing to do but try to predict their next move and cut them off. a 3x3 playing area is not enough space to run for too long. Mind you, if they only need 2 or 3 rounds till time is called and they are ahead on points, it's a sound tactic.

It sounds like a bit of sore loser, why delay to cause yourself a modified win? He may have stalled, hard to say on what we were given.

BUT you are never forced by your opponent to take risky decisions, you did that all on your own.

Ok. So if you were down in points, and the game turns started getting longer and longer and you knew you needed to catch up to win, you wouldnt try to optimize your attack over defense to try and score more points? Knowing that you are leaving yourself exposed, all because when you could have easily played 2 turns in the time its been taking to play 1?

What would you have done? Continue to play as normal knowing there is no way n hell you could inflict enough damage in the ti,e remaining?

In the OP's example he was the one down in points and accusing his opponent of slowing the game down. This is more of a detriment to his opponent as it would restrict him to a modified win rather than a full win. If you are simply playing to win, a modified win is near worthless and will not place you at the top of the heap. So in this case, I believe his opponent was likely just indecisive and slow rather than cheating. If the later is true, then his opponent is also stupid.

Do not let your opponent control your tactics. Do not make a decision you would not otherwise take. If you play by a reaction response, you will will always be behind and following. There is a time and place to push an attack and sacrifice defense, but make that your decision and not dictated by your opponent. Control the battle and make your opponent react to you.

Just my $0.02 and basic real world combative tactics.

I wouldn't mind seeing something like a 2 minute round timer during the planning phase, if you dont finish and set your dials then your opponent gets to choose the maneuver you do. This would stop stalling to win especially in the single elimination portion.

It sounds like a bit of sore loser, why delay to cause yourself a modified win? He may have stalled, hard to say on what we were given.

BUT you are never forced by your opponent to take risky decisions, you did that all on your own.

Ok. So if you were down in points, and the game turns started getting longer and longer and you knew you needed to catch up to win, you wouldnt try to optimize your attack over defense to try and score more points? Knowing that you are leaving yourself exposed, all because when you could have easily played 2 turns in the time its been taking to play 1?

What would you have done? Continue to play as normal knowing there is no way n hell you could inflict enough damage in the ti,e remaining?

In the OP's example he was the one down in points and accusing his opponent of slowing the game down. This is more of a detriment to his opponent as it would restrict him to a modified win rather than a full win. If you are simply playing to win, a modified win is near worthless and will not place you at the top of the heap. So in this case, I believe his opponent was likely just indecisive and slow rather than cheating. If the later is true, then his opponent is also stupid.

Do not let your opponent control your tactics. Do not make a decision you would not otherwise take. If you play by a reaction response, you will will always be behind and following. There is a time and place to push an attack and sacrifice defense, but make that your decision and not dictated by your opponent. Control the battle and make your opponent react to you.

Just my $0.02 and basic real world combative tactics.

Another scenario would be someone with a-wings or interceptors destroy one of your ships then constantly fly around the board avoiding the fight until time reaches 0.

That is a legal tactic. Nothing to do but try to predict their next move and cut them off. a 3x3 playing area is not enough space to run for too long. Mind you, if they only need 2 or 3 rounds till time is called and they are ahead on points, it's a sound tactic.

Exactly! Not everyone runs jousts list.

Introducing more time constraints would not be fun, imho. Some lists take longer to plan, some take less time. I think the FAQ is pretty reasonable in suggesting that you be a good sport and if someone is flagrantly violating the rules or the spirit of good sportsmanship then ask the TO to intervene.

On topic, I think that I would cut the guy (the alleged staller) some slack. Having said that, close games can get contentious and nobody likes to lose. I think it is natural for two people trying hard (their best even) to win, to become emotionally invested in the outcome.

I think the best way to handle this type of situation is to say something to the effect of: "We really need to keep this game moving along for both of our sakes. You need a chance to get a full win and I want to have a chance to get back in this game."

It's possible the opposing player doesn't realize he or she is slowing things down. If the problem persists you then have an opportunity to suggest that you feel it's bordering on slow play.

Honestly I think it's fairly rare to see a specific individual intentionally slow play for their aadvantage on a frequent basis but it will happen. Normally it just hurts them in the long run.

I haven't played any timed matches, so this is just on basis of a quick look at the tournament rules/FAQ.

While the rules mention suggested times and a general "not stalling/speedy", I think they are seriously lacking in explicit definition on how a timed round should run.

That reduces the problem to an issue of intent. Was it intentionally slowing or just the other's play-style. And that's a question which is difficult to answer adhoc and even more so remotely in a forum. Just because someone has an advantage if the game slows down (from the current state) and he is actually slow in moving, doesn't necessarily mean it is a violation of the rules, but it still might be. And bringing in a tournament official doesn't really speeds things up.

given that the planning stage is probably the most variable in terms of think-time depending on lists/player it might have been a good idea to account per player time for that stage instead of a total game time.

Oh where to start with this thread.

First, on topic.

Slow play/stalling will happen in games such at these for there overall reasons. It could be accidental, players not playing from behind are not inclined to play quickly. If they play at a relatively reasonable pace typically a lack of urgency could lead them to slow play/stalling. It could be incidentally, some players just can't play at a reasonable pace. And it could be purposeful, which is out and out cheating. Regardless of how/why slow play/stalling is against the rules.

Every TO should include in part of their briefing that all players are expected to play at a reasonable pace throughout the day. This heads off many issues by making players aware of their play speed. Also it makes addressing any issue in the event easier.

As a player if you are worried about your opponents play speed you must speak up. Mentioning it to your opponent will fix most issues as it will again make your opponent aware of their play speed. Provided you do so politely there is no reason for a player to get offended, unless they are stalling deliberately.

If that does work you must make use of the TO plain in simple. Just call them over and explain that you feel your opponent is not playing at a reasonable speed. If the TO has already given fair warning in the tournament briefing then this should also fix the issue. If not you have to rely on the TO keeping an eye on things.

Secondly, the concept that sportsmanship dictates you allow your opponent to reverse their play mistakes in a tournament is a bit silly. Yes, everyone wants to beat their opponent at their best, but part of playing at your best is correct execution in game. It is in no way unfair to expect your opponent to play by the rules, and the rules do make note of the fact that players may not always play optimally. Provided a player holds both themselves and their opponent to the same standard there is no reason to cast that opponent in a negative light.

The concept that sportsmanship dictate that you offer advice to your opponent in game is just downright absurd. You aren't playing your opponent at their best if you are telling them how to play their squadron. Players are adults, or at least are being held to adult standards, they can play their own squadron. The idea that you know how to play your opponents squadron better then they do is very arrogant. Offering unsolicited advice in game is very poor sportsmanship. You play your squad, they play theirs, while both adhering to the game rules, and you can offer your advice after the game if asked.

Lastly, though you may have little opinion of certain posters dismissing (and asking others to do the same) their posts because of their post history in not proper. You can disagree with a poster on just about everything, but that won't mean you won't agree with them at some points. The dismissive and trolling attitude of some posters in this thread is very troubling, regardless of their thoughts towards a certain poster. I don't agree with Warggh on just about any of his posts but none of his opinions on the subject at hand have been out of order.

It sounds like a bit of sore loser, why delay to cause yourself a modified win? He may have stalled, hard to say on what we were given.

BUT you are never forced by your opponent to take risky decisions, you did that all on your own.

Ok. So if you were down in points, and the game turns started getting longer and longer and you knew you needed to catch up to win, you wouldnt try to optimize your attack over defense to try and score more points? Knowing that you are leaving yourself exposed, all because when you could have easily played 2 turns in the time its been taking to play 1?

What would you have done? Continue to play as normal knowing there is no way n hell you could inflict enough damage in the ti,e remaining?

In the OP's example he was the one down in points and accusing his opponent of slowing the game down. This is more of a detriment to his opponent as it would restrict him to a modified win rather than a full win. If you are simply playing to win, a modified win is near worthless and will not place you at the top of the heap. So in this case, I believe his opponent was likely just indecisive and slow rather than cheating. If the later is true, then his opponent is also stupid.

Do not let your opponent control your tactics. Do not make a decision you would not otherwise take. If you play by a reaction response, you will will always be behind and following. There is a time and place to push an attack and sacrifice defense, but make that your decision and not dictated by your opponent. Control the battle and make your opponent react to you.

Just my $0.02 and basic real world combative tactics.

That's questionable logic. In smaller tournaments a modified win is just as good as a full win. Not to mention it sounds like these two are the top competitors at this place, meaning that in most cases whichever one won the game would probably take the tournament.

this is the case,

the first tournament i played this guy, i took second, our match came down to a range 1 shot from me against his ship who only had 1 hull remaining. the TO called time and dice down, so i never got the shot, i asked the TO if i could and this guy said no, time was called and i conceeded. (i lost by 2 points)

2nd match i had 4 squints and he ran XXBB, i had killed 1 x and 2 B's and only lost my 2 alphas

now at this tournament time was called on a game where he was going for total victory and needed to take a shot and convinced his oponent to let him, i called him on it and reminded him of the time he did not let me.

3rd time was the reason for this post.

I wouldn't mind seeing something like a 2 minute round timer during the planning phase, if you dont finish and set your dials then your opponent gets to choose the maneuver you do. This would stop stalling to win especially in the single elimination portion.

That goes back to another thread about what happens if a player doesn't "set" his maneuver dial. The general consensus seemed to be "repeat last turn's maneuver if possible" with the same red while stressed consequence only if it comes up.

While I certainly believe a player should have a good idea what maneuvers they are going to want to do the next turn expecting them to set things in 15 seconds a ship could be rushing.

With the OP's issue I'll agree with those who have said there isn't enough information. If it's someone you regularly play against you can probably tell when he is slow playing. I can also see where he may be a bit more stressed to try to hold on to an unexpected lead and trying not to "blow it" by doing something really dumb.

It may not solve slow play but to me part of the solution to trying to eek out a small win for modified points while the loser gets nothing is simply to allow the loser to score points as well. I believe that would encourage more people going for the full kill as the margin for a partial/modified victory goes down. An idea I saw floated that you should just forfeit instead of granting a modified win because it gives you a better SoS which I think is truly crazy; if the opponent can't, or won't, beat me decisively why should I say they're better than that and why am I punished when they aren't?