The only new thing they'd have to do, is come up with test questions, a way to have people take the test, and a way to track who's passed and who's failed.

And then we progress to the "Such and such obviously just had Google up while he was taking the test because he obviously didn't know what he was doing" stage.

It's really not that easy. This is not an issue of actual problems with the way X-wing events run. The VAST majority of X-wing events go off without a hitch. I can only think of 3-4 cases in the last year of reported problem events, and given the tendency of aggrieved people to run to the internet to complain, that's actually pretty remarkable.

This is far more an perceived problem than a real one, and if you're seriously going to fix an image problem you need a strenuous effort to do so. A couple of questions slapped into an online form isn't going to do it.

But if you require certification of TOs and disallow them from participating in their events, you're effectively creating a class of professional TOs.

I never said TO I made a point of saying Judge. I also never said they couldn't take part of the event. I also never said they needed any sort of reward or other payment.

You're basically saying that the game is so serious, you can't trust people to administer it fairly if they're even the slightest bit involved in the event

I never said any such thing.

What I said, is that there could be such a thing as a certified judge. Someone who has proven that he or she knows enough about the rules to pass a fairly simple test. That means if I'm going to an event that has one, I know that the judge will have at least a basic understanding of the rules.

A certified judge wouldn't even be required to host a sanctioned event.

This is not an issue of actual problems with the way X-wing events run. The VAST majority of X-wing events go off without a hitch.

Then why are you so dead set against it? I mean it sounds like you find the very idea to be personally offensive.

I really don't understand why the concept of having certified judges gives some people aneurysms. How can I participate in a competitive event if I have no faith that it will be adjudicated properly?

And how a person can say with a straight face that it's inappropriate to argue a ruling during a match is truly well and beyond me. If a ruling is wrong, it is always wrong. I will not suffer the ineptitude of a judge, especially an uncertified one, if I know the rules better than he does. It is well within a player's rights to fly casual, but if there is something on the line I will not hesitate to assert my own competitive outlook.

But if you require certification of TOs and disallow them from participating in their events, you're effectively creating a class of professional TOs.

I never said TO I made a point of saying Judge. I also never said they couldn't take part of the event. I also never said they needed any sort of reward or other payment.

Sorry, I'm conflating arguments here - a number of the people calling for certified judges are saying exactly that.

I'm honestly not sure what could be gained by the system you're suggesting. If the only requirement is that someone answer "What does it mean to be 'hit'"? and a few other trivial questions, it's not going to actually stop any problems. I honestly can't think of any problem reports that this would solve - there was the "not using asteroids" issue last year, which was obviously a corrupt judge. There's the recent case of running the wrong number of rounds, but you say it's not about the TO side, just the judge. Have we had even a single actual problem report that this would solve?

This is not an issue of actual problems with the way X-wing events run. The VAST majority of X-wing events go off without a hitch.

Then why are you so dead set against it? I mean it sounds like you find the very idea to be personally offensive.

Because it's a waste of time an effort - it's aimed at fixing a nonexistent problem, and wouldn't fix it even if the problem exists. A few people seem determined to create some crisis in the X-wing community, but there really isn't one.

Show me a real problem, and propose a real solution, and I wouldn't have nearly so big an issue with it. Show me a few overly obsessive players who just aren't happy with the nature of X-wing as a game, and I'll just say pfft.

Have we had even a single actual problem report that this would solve?

Well there was the deck that had all the Direct Hit! removed. The was also the one where it was ruled that the one player got to pick a side after the asteroids were placed.

Honestly the thing this would do is provide a base line to X-Wing tournaments, and could actually make them a bit more appealing. I know if I have two events to chose from and one has a certified judge and the other doesn't, I'd pick the former. Because then I know the person making the calls has at least a basic understanding of the rules.

So maybe it wouldn't help a lot, but as the game expands it wouldn't hurt. Also just because there's not a lot of issues right now doesn't mean that being proactive is a bad thing.

The system I have in mind would honestly have very little overhead, and so it would take very little improvement to make it worthwhile.

I'm just curious how a certification system will eliminate human error. Judges makes mistakes. And no matter what, their mistakes are the law.

I'm sorry, but there is nothing that FFG provides that is "on the line" that requires them to certify people to judge tournaments. I like the far more casual environment it can encourage.

And the thing you have to remember, that Wizkids, who makes the very similar Attack Wing, encourages house rules. So that may be an issue on the local level.

I really don't understand why the concept of having certified judges gives some people aneurysms. How can I participate in a competitive event if I have no faith that it will be adjudicated properly?

And how a person can say with a straight face that it's inappropriate to argue a ruling during a match is truly well and beyond me. If a ruling is wrong, it is always wrong. I will not suffer the ineptitude of a judge, especially an uncertified one, if I know the rules better than he does. It is well within a player's rights to fly casual, but if there is something on the line I will not hesitate to assert my own competitive outlook.

The difference here is that most players are willing to trust that the event can be adjudicated properly without the massive overhead of a certification system. Your personal paranoia is not enough justification for that effort on the part of FFG.

For the second, we'll go again to the tournament rules, which I'm starting to think you just haven't read:

I really don't understand why the concept of having certified judges gives some people aneurysms. How can I participate in a competitive event if I have no faith that it will be adjudicated properly?

And how a person can say with a straight face that it's inappropriate to argue a ruling during a match is truly well and beyond me. If a ruling is wrong, it is always wrong. I will not suffer the ineptitude of a judge, especially an uncertified one, if I know the rules better than he does. It is well within a player's rights to fly casual, but if there is something on the line I will not hesitate to assert my own competitive outlook.

Then don't be surprised when you get asked not to come back.

If you're involving a judge, it's already because you can't agree with one person (your opponent). If, after clearly stating your case to a neutral third party, you still can't acquiesce, the problem is you. You're not going to get anywhere by arguing, all you're doing is is pissing people off. Accept that bad calls are part of any competition and move on.

Well there was the deck that had all the Direct Hit! removed. The was also the one where it was ruled that the one player got to pick a side after the asteroids were placed.

Honestly the thing this would do is provide a base line to X-Wing tournaments, and could actually make them a bit more appealing. I know if I have two events to chose from and one has a certified judge and the other doesn't, I'd pick the former. Because then I know the person making the calls has at least a basic understanding of the rules.

Would your certification system have fixed those? I missed the Direct Hit deck issue, did the TO actually rule that that was legal once it was discovered? Would proving that someone had a basic understanding of the rule caught a judge who used the base game setup rules rather than the tournament rules?

Is there really any reason, now, to expect the person making the calls doesn't have a basic understanding of the rules? Or even if they had a certification system with your 10 questions, what does it prove?

Maybe it's just because I work in software, but certifications are useless. Your 10 questions prove nothing beyond that person being able to answer those 10 questions. You're talking about the equivalent of security theater - a meaningless check that provides a warm fuzzy to people who tend to be naturally distrusting. I think it's a waste of time, and I think it's insulting to everyone who currently runs events.

I'm just curious how a certification system will eliminate human error.

Nothing, but then again nothing can eliminate human error so I don't see how that matters. Just because we can't make something perfect doesn't mean we shouldn't try and make it better.

Would your certification system have fixed those?

Depends on why they happened. In the case of the one player getting to pick sides, I think it would, because in this case the TO/Judge didn't even understand the rules in the first place.

did the TO actually rule that that was legal once it was discovered?

Yes they did. Supposedly someone contacted FFG about it and that store is no longer able to host events. The post was here, but I don't remember what thread.

Would proving that someone had a basic understanding of the rule caught a judge who used the base game setup rules rather than the tournament rules?

I'd hope so. I'd consider knowledge of the tournament rules to be a basic requirement of anyone running a tournament.

Is there really any reason, now, to expect the person making the calls doesn't have a basic understanding of the rules?

Apparently there is, because I've heard more then one story about a TO making a call that showed they clearly didn't understand even the basic rules.

I think it's a waste of time, and I think it's insulting to everyone who currently runs events.

Feel free, but I think you're taking this way to serious if you find the idea insulting.

Is there really any reason, now, to expect the person making the calls doesn't have a basic understanding of the rules?

Apparently there is, because I've heard more then one story about a TO making a call that showed they clearly didn't understand even the basic rules.

I think it's a waste of time, and I think it's insulting to everyone who currently runs events.

Feel free, but I think you're taking this way to serious if you find the idea insulting.

"More than one". Out of how many events, over the last year and a half of X-wing?

The problem with a certification system, and why I find it somewhat insulting, is that you flip the default assumption from one of competence to one of incompetence. You aren't starting with the assumption that they're capable, and looking at problems to say "How many problems are there really, and do we need this?" You're looking at a few VERY rare events, and saying "Because of these events, we can't trust anyone to run events unless we have FFG vet them first." But how many problem events are there? From all the X-wing tournaments run all around the world every weekend, how many are truly problematic? Neither of us knows for sure... but while we lack solid data, I tend to believe that unhappy people magnify the perceived problems. It only takes a few people to make a LOT of negative noise. Yet we still have only a tiny handful of reported problems. IMHO, that means that the vast majority of events are run perfectly well, and your distrust seems unwarranted.

The other problem with the way you're proposing to fix it is that you're taking specific missed examples, and expanding those specific mistakes into broad incompetence. A TO confusing the setup rules does not mean they're completely ignorant of the tournament rules, it means they missed that specific thing. So your test wouldn't necessarily do anything to stop that sort of thing - it MIGHT stop the specific issues you choose to test, but with only 10 questions that's going to be a very small coverage.

is that you flip the default assumption from one of competence to one of incompetence.

If that's how you view it, then that's up to you.

I view it as establishing a baseline so you can walk in and assume that judge will at least have a basic understanding of the rules.

That doesn't assume incompetence, at least not IMO it doesn't.

I view it as establishing a baseline so you can walk in and assume that judge will at least have a basic understanding of the rules.

That doesn't assume incompetence, at least not IMO it doesn't.

If you assume competence, you don't need a certification to tell you that.

Or, put another way, if you assume competence on the part of the TO then the certification or lack thereof doesn't mean anything - even if the cert proves you know what you're doing, my assumption is that you know what you're doing, and there's no difference. The cert only matters if you question the ability of someone who doesn't have it.

If you assume competence, you don't need a certification to tell you that.

I'd prefer not having to make an assumption in the first place.

If you assume competence, you don't need a certification to tell you that.

I'd prefer not having to make an assumption in the first place.

Oh, you're still assuming, even in the presence of a cert. You're simply doing it with slightly more information.

Again, maybe it's just from being in the software industry where we LOOOOVE our useless certifications... but the cert proves nothing that it doesn't test explicitly. It won't guarantee the holder knows anything that wasn't explicitly on the test, it won't guarantee the holder has kept up with new releases and FAQ entries, or isn't remembering the last version of something. The only thing it proves is that they were able to answer those N questions at the time they took the test. Honestly, it doesn't even guarantee they actually know those - barring a pretty strict testing regimen, someone could easily Google for the answers, or have the FAQ open next to them while they answer. If you trust the cert, you're assuming that all those things didn't happen, that the questions answered reflect a broad competence, etc.

So we come back to my core objection here. I'm not the least bit convinced there's a problem here that needs to be solved, but even if there were, what you're proposing wouldn't even come close to actually solving it.

I'm not the least bit convinced there's a problem here that needs to be solved, but even if there were, what you're proposing wouldn't even come close to actually solving it.

Fine you win.

Unless we can come up with a system that is 100% fool proof, then we just shouldn't do anything at all. Because clearly nothing is better then something.

ITT: expecting a uniform basis for competent rule adjudication is paranoia.

I don't know how someone can get so worked up about the idea of FFG ensuring the TO/Judge for one of the 16 Regional venues the selected actually have a basic understanding of the game rules.

FFG wants to expand their OP. They want to design these large exclusively awarded Regional events. They want players to drive 4-5 hours to attend them. They rewrite their tournament document to included a Tiers of Tournament clause that specifically talks about consistency. But they don't want take the effort to ask for contact info for a TO to send him some documents then get him to take a 10 minute test on tournament basics. That's all it requires.

If FFG wants to move their OP up a notch as they seem to be trying to do, they need to lay a foundation for it.

That you feel there is nothing on the line to validate that basic level of vetting is really confusing. The time/money you are expecting players to spend to attend these Regional events deserves that basic level of respect regardless of prizing.

The issue is that you are worrying about problems that don't seem to be an issue with this game. Hell, I don't see much clamoring for it by the Netrunner guys, and that game is bigger than ours, tournament wise.

The issue is that you are worrying about problems that don't seem to be an issue with this game.

Just because there's not a huge issue right now doesn't mean there won't be.

Far better IMO to get something established now, then wait until things have gone sideways and then try to fix everything. But apparently suggesting such a thing is an insult to the X-Wing community at a whole...

personally, I'm not certain certifications for judges would be necessary, feels like shooting the issue with a Death Star and we know how that story ends.

That said, rulings-wise it probably wouldn't hurt either even if it gives such tournaments more formality than such a game needs (<-personal taste).

But if FFG want's to apply pro-sports mechanics they also should provide the infrastructure including paying those judges and other organisational staff - and not just with a random ship or something.

PS: don't forget the random doping tests

What issues? FFG is completely happy keeping the tournament scene casual/competitive. FFG is not going to have tournaments with big money prizes. And the ones that will have okay sell value, will be the ones they run themselves (ie Worlds and Nationals). None of these games are going to be Magic.

While the rulings and FAQ probably could be a little tighter and a bit more on time, I just do not see the problem. FFG is not WOTC. They cannot throw the weight they need to support such a system. They already prevent stores from getting the kits. But FFG, while big, does not have the clout to threaten to deny a store their product. These games are not nearly big enough to force such things on stores and enforce. DCI works, because stores would have serious problems without being able to sell Magic.