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.

I would not call the Regional system they put in place at all casual. That's my point. They want to up their game in regards to those events, but they are doing it backwards and not laying the foundation for it.

And going back to my original point in this thread, if they aren't going to vet TOs then they shouldn't mandate dedicated TOs, which largely disqualifies your most qualified TOs from TOing these events. It just hurts the quality of TOs.

but they are doing it backwards and not laying the foundation for it.

That's my point too. I'm not saying anything is wrong with how it works now. But that's not the same thing as saying there's no room for improvement.

FFG is going to have issues if they keep trying to expand the tournament system, it will likely never get near MtG levels, and I hope it doesn't. But that doesn't mean a little proactive prevention now can't save them a lot of headaches down the road.

I get FFG doesn't have a ton of resources, but they don't need to do anything like the DCI does, but surely a simple and optional system can't hurt anyone.

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.

Oh come on, you're better than that.

If we're going to talk about doing something, there are two things to consider:

1. Need. What percentage of events have problems?

2. Effectiveness of solution. What percentage of problems will be fixed?

As near as I can tell right now, neither of these gives a big number. Nobody has presented any real evidence of a widespread problem, and like it or not, 5-6 reported problems in almost two years is not a widespread problem. I've pointed out that your proposed solution won't really fix the problem if it does exist. There are ways to correct that - make the certification more intense, require regular renewal, etc.

You can't just handwave past these things, because in the end you're not really asking anything of us as random forumgoers having a discussion - you're making a business case to FFG that they need to invest more money to defend the integrity of the tournament system. That's not likely to happen without a serious demonstrable problem that needs to be solved. A couple of random incidents isn't enough of a problem, and any problem big enough to need fixing isn't going to be solved by a few hours a month and a spreadsheet.

If we're going to talk about doing something, there are two things to consider:

There's a 3rd thing. What the future might bring, and what you can do to be prepared for it.

you're making a business case to FFG that they need to invest more money to defend the integrity of the tournament system.

I made a suggestion and nothing else. If FFG sees it and does something with it great, if not then no big deal. But I'm pretty sure they won't get offended at the suggestion.

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.

Or they take this as a first year, see if there are any problems, and respond accordingly.

I do agree that the regionals should be tighter and more reliable than general, but creating some universal certification system to handle 10 events a year is horrible overkill. Honestly, for those concerned about the regionals FFG could probably fly one of their people to judge at each one more easily than they could institute some certification system.

If we're going to talk about doing something, there are two things to consider:

There's a 3rd thing. What the future might bring, and what you can do to be prepared for it.

You're right. Do we have any hint of what that future is? Is there any indication that the number of problem events is rising? Any suggestion that it might rise in the future? Or that even if it does, a TO certification system will be the way to fix it?

Do you have anything to support the idea that this is trending towards a problem given current data, or anything to support some doomsday scenario where events start collapsing under the weight of a mass of incompetent TOs?

Random preparation for fringe "just in case" is wasted effort. And it's important to remember that you're not just talking about X-wing - FFG has what, 5 competitive games at the moment? Almost certainly going back to 6 once Conquest hits. Should they just do it for X-wing, and listen to the cries from the Netrunner folks?

As for the offense... <shrug> They're not the ones you're saying can't be trusted to run an event.

Do you have anything to support the idea that this is trending towards a problem given current data, or anything to support some doomsday scenario where events start collapsing under the weight of a mass of incompetent TOs?

Like I said, clear you think that doing nothing is better then doing something. I don't agree. Having something in place now even if it's just a plan that isn't even implemented yet.

Do you have anything to support the idea that this is trending towards a problem given current data, or anything to support some doomsday scenario where events start collapsing under the weight of a mass of incompetent TOs?

Like I said, clear you think that doing nothing is better then doing something. I don't agree. Having something in place now even if it's just a plan that isn't even implemented yet.

This baffles me. We don't have a problem. We don't know what form a problem might take if it materializes. How can you possibly propose a meaningful fix to a problem when you don't know what that problem is?? Even if it's just a plan?

I'm sorry, but even if there were indications of a problem, you cannot try and fix it if you don't know what it is.

Edit: Just to be clear, I really do understand where you're coming from. But approaching an issue like that is anathema. In my career, and especially where I work now, you don't try to fix a problem unless you understand it, and you don't even decide if there is a problem, much less what it is, without real data. I happen to think that's the right way to approach it, but that at least might illustrate where I'm coming from.

ITT: we should just trust in the system, even if the rules are horribly unclear and the officials under-educated, because problems don't yet exist in a rapidly expanding competitive environment.

I'll take being paranoid over blind and hateful any day.

ITT: we should just trust in the system, even if the rules are horribly unclear and the officials under-educated, because problems don't yet exist in a rapidly expanding competitive environment.

I'll take being paranoid over blind and hateful any day.

No, we shouldn't just trust in the system.

But we should base our decisions on actual data, and only react to real issues. Is the environment actually rapidly expanding? How rapid is "rapid"? How big is it now? How many have problems? What's the change in problem rate per event?

It's a very strange discussion when the guy saying "We should have actual data" is being called the blind one.

I refer you to the rage and lack of poise with which you've handled the whole Wizards issue. If an anecdote about local people paying for CCG product with checks counts as data then please, tell me more. Just let me get some popcorn first, and perhaps a sneeze guard for the inevitable rage-fueled slavering. Meanwhile...

ITT: it's bad to be proactive instead of reactive, even when successful models exist in other games.

ITT: it's bad to be proactive instead of reactive, even when successful models exist in other games.

Being proactive is good - when you have identified a risk. Being blindly proactive, doing something just for the sake of doing something, isn't. Please, spend at least a little time looking into risk management strategies, K? Because it's not just in this thread - avoiding expensive solutions to fictional issues is something most serious people try to avoid.

And what "whole Wizards issue"? I despise the company, for a lot more than just their clinging to a model that preys on addictive personalities. It seems rather off topic to delve into all the myriad things over the last 20 years that have contributed to that opinion, but regardless of how well-founded it may or may not be, it's my opinion. What I think X-wing should do isn't really based in my opinion of the company - it's based in what I believe the X-wing competitive community is and should be. Certified judges is hardly a technique that was created by or is exclusive to WotC. While you seem to think "Magic does it!" is all the endorsement the idea needs, "Magic does it!" is not a counter from my side, because at that point, "Yu-gi-oh does it!" is next up.

Sadly, "Magic does it!" seems to be about all you really have to work with, at least judging by the ad hominems and weakly satirical rewrite attempts that have been your only contribution for far too long.

I really like how you continually oversimplify my position, while failing to provide anything substantive about your own. Do you even play Magic? Because all you've done is rail and wail like a child who thinks that his shiny new toy is going to be taken away from him if even the slightest thing is changed. Wizards isn't the devil, and the sky is most certainly not falling. Meanwhile, I've made it a point not to glorify a game that I both hold in high esteem and have my own criticisms of, and you've somehow perverted that into a sycophantic obsession with merging the two games into one abhorrent, parasitic nightmare. I won't even bother addressing your slippery slope fallacy.

And, if you haven't noticed, we've addressed several risks. The fact that you've done everything in your power to trivialize them, up to and including the most absurd use of hyperbole, does not mean that they simply don't - or won't - exist. I realize that's an inconvenience for you, but it's something you're going to have to learn to live with.

By the way, thanks for noticing my 'weakly satirical rewrite attempts' (whatever that last part is supposed to mean). I clearly don't have the lofty rhetorical ability of a software engineer, so you'll have to forgive me if I can't quite match your fire and brimstone rendition of "how Wizards ruined the whole world forever."

For those interested, check this out:

https://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/arcana/1489

Those are some amazing judge rewards. A normal, mint condition Force of Will is presently going for $120.

Can the two of you take your wizard bitching and start a new thread dedicated to it??

It's an interesting read but I prefer to specifically find my entertainment, not it randomly appear in another thread

For those interested, check this out:

https://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/arcana/1489

Those are some amazing judge rewards. A normal, mint condition Force of Will is presently going for $120.

"In April of this year, we crossed an important milestone for Magic. This milestone is something that many players wouldn't realize, at least not directly, and yet it is vitally important. As of April 2014, we have more than 5,000 active judges helping make and keep the Magic community awesome!"

Sounds like a good program. While I agree, with others, that I do not believe X-wing needs a 200+ page tournament guide, a support and rewards program for TOs would be amazing.