If you're opponent jumps and starts cheering and dancing then who cares. You're the one who gets to make the choice if it bothers you or not. Friday I played the world champ and we both needed a big win. When he took out my Han he jumped up and yelled yes! Honestly it didn't bother me at all I was able to laugh at it.

Well its good to know you are so emotionally uninterested that winning or losing at Worlds means nothing to you and should mean nothing to anyone else. But if that is true why are you still posting in this thread so vehemently? Your kind of attitude is the exact reason I stopped play 40k competitively.

Why do you choose to let others behaviors bother you so much?

*German champ not world champ sry phone ducks to type on*

If you're opponent jumps and starts cheering and dancing then who cares. You're the one who gets to make the choice if it bothers you or not. Friday I played the world champ and we both needed a big win. When he took out my Han he jumped up and yelled yes! Honestly it didn't bother me at all I was able to laugh at it.

Well its good to know you are so emotionally uninterested that winning or losing at Worlds means nothing to you and should mean nothing to anyone else. But if that is true why are you still posting in this thread so vehemently? Your kind of attitude is the exact reason I stopped play 40k competitively.

Winning and losing means a whole lot, I was definitely disappointed that I lost. I'm not gonna try and make my opponent feel bad. I drove 12 hours to get there so I was definitely emotionally interested. My last 2 games didn't go my way and unfortunately I didn't make the cut.

Why do you choose to let others behaviors bother you so much?

Well clearly then every rule regarding sportsmanship and how players conduct themselves on and off their field of play in EVERY sport is stupid since they should just not let it bother them.

If you're opponent jumps and starts cheering and dancing then who cares. You're the one who gets to make the choice if it bothers you or not. Friday I played the world champ and we both needed a big win. When he took out my Han he jumped up and yelled yes! Honestly it didn't bother me at all I was able to laugh at it.

Well its good to know you are so emotionally uninterested that winning or losing at Worlds means nothing to you and should mean nothing to anyone else. But if that is true why are you still posting in this thread so vehemently? Your kind of attitude is the exact reason I stopped play 40k competitively.

Winning and losing means a whole lot, I was definitely disappointed that I lost. I'm not gonna try and make my opponent feel bad. I drove 12 hours to get there so I was definitely emotionally interested. My last 2 games didn't go my way and unfortunately I didn't make the cut.

Why do you choose to let others behaviors bother you so much?

Well clearly then every rule regarding sportsmanship and how players conduct themselves on and off their field of play in EVERY sport is stupid since they should just not let it bother them.

Show me in the rules where you can't celebrate at a good or bad dice roll? Were you at worlds?

This wasn't about a good or bad dice roll. This was about the players attitude all throughout the match and especially at the end. You claim sportsmanship doesn't matter as its up to you whether you let it affect you. Then why do countless professional organizations have pretty strict rules and penalties associated with bad sportsmanship, and why this shouldn't be any different?

And why does whether i was at Worlds or not matter? Please don't turn this into some sort of Epeen contest, where "You weren't there so you don't even know." That's the lamest kind of counterpoint.

This wasn't about a good or bad dice roll. This was about the players attitude all throughout the match and especially at the end. You claim sportsmanship doesn't matter as its up to you whether you let it affect you. Then why do countless professional organizations have pretty strict rules and penalties associated with bad sportsmanship, and why this shouldn't be any different?

Are you serious? For starters:

If you're opponent jumps and starts cheering and dancing then who cares. You're the one who gets to make the choice if it bothers you or not. Friday I played the german champ and we both needed a big win. When he took out my Han he jumped up and yelled yes! Honestly it didn't bother me at all I was able to laugh at it.

That's poor sportsmanship right there. And in the same sentence you say it doesn't matter. That the receiving player is the one who has a problem since he lets it affect him.

Then why do countless professional organizations have pretty strict rules and penalties associated with bad sportsmanship ...

If there are rules and penalties it is no longer about sportsmanship but about following rules. Even if the penalty is called unsportsmanlike conduct.

Legal or not, it isn't hard to take that apart with the right approach and a list with decent firepower. It's just a tactic people weren't prepared for. It looks well thought out, but it isn't likely to turn out well.

Are you serious? For starters:

If you're opponent jumps and starts cheering and dancing then who cares. You're the one who gets to make the choice if it bothers you or not. Friday I played the german champ and we both needed a big win. When he took out my Han he jumped up and yelled yes! Honestly it didn't bother me at all I was able to laugh at it.

That's poor sportsmanship right there. And in the same sentence you say it doesn't matter. That the receiving player is the one who has a problem since he lets it affect him.

Then why do countless professional organizations have pretty strict rules and penalties associated with bad sportsmanship ...

If there are rules and penalties it is no longer about sportsmanship but about following rules. Even if the penalty is called unsportsmanlike conduct.

You're not answering the question, which was why they have those rules.

Really, there's no point debating this. It's about feelings - either you feel it or you don't. It's like trying to argue someone in or out of a fear of spiders!

The burden on winning was on Richard. The onus was for him to be aggressive.

And you can't have a draw in the single elimination rounds.

Exactly. The thing which astounds me most is that the vilified player's opponent lost the game (as described) due to a massive error. He did not have to engage at all. He had initiative. He would have won on time. He could have set himself up for the inevitable last minute dash and dictated the terms of that final engagement. Baffling...

Could someone please point out to me where, in which FFG document, is there reference to playing within the "spirit" of the game? Could someone also please point out the FFG definition of "sportsmanship"? I find it hard to believe that all those FFG officials there, standing by the table, could be so incompetent or cowardly as to ignore their own, rigidly defined rules...

This was linked earlier and was obviously not read by many (or, if it was, had absolutely no effect) so I will link it again:

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win

One problem with scrubs is that they cannot recognise themselves as scrubs (as per the definition is the above linked article).

I started reading this thread last night and thought it was long (around 8 pages last I looked) but now it's gigantic… Sorry but I don't have time to read it all (I have to go vote now!) but I wanted to ask something… am I the only one thinking about how to abuse the strategy even more? I mean, I get that it's an unexpected and boring move, and *maybe* even abusive of the rules but I wouldn't call it unsportsmanlike. People play to win and the letter of the rules defines what's allowed, not the spirit. That said, if it turns out to be be statistically correlated to victories then I hope that FF finds a way to put a stop to it (but they'd need to factor in the fact that the people that play this way are probably tactically better than average). If it turns out it's strategically unsound and susceptible to some tactic then I would say that they shouldn't bother as people would probably win with it more for the surprise factor than anything else.

Anyway, my version of this list would include: Jan Ors with a blaster turret and Kyle Katarn on board, two blues with FCS and Cracken with VI. Everyone but Cracken gets a free TL/focus, and one ship gets an action after he fires his shot. By adding that extra die every turn I think it would be difficult to approach and once everything breaks up you'd even have to deal with a turret floating around behind you after you turn around.

I probably wouldn't play this list (I'm too fond of predicting phantom maneuvers and tearing them apart with a PS11 Wedge) but doing such a thing does sound pretty interesting, and it's always fun to toy around with new build/maneuvering ideas and think of new strategies and their counters =).

Then why do countless professional organizations have pretty strict rules and penalties associated with bad sportsmanship ...

If there are rules and penalties it is no longer about sportsmanship but about following rules. Even if the penalty is called unsportsmanlike conduct.

You're not answering the question, which was why they have those rules.

True. And that was intentional.

I was pointing out that rules about sportsmanship are an oxymoron.

The "legality" of things like this is why other Miniature games that shan't be named have such poor reputations.

Its especially galling to me when the Rebel player was sporting a "Fly Casual" shirt and then most definitely did not fly that way.

Don't blame the player for finding a flaw in the system.

Just inform FFG and let see them doing the fixing.

I really hate the pitchforking bandwagons.

Also, props to Richard.

"He made a fair move. Screaming about it won't help you."

You know what I would like to see come out of this? Not rules about how much you can bump or how many times you can bump in a row. Not subjective calls from TOs determining someone is playing in a sportsmanlike manner. I'd like to see FFG break away from this arena/death match version of tournament play.

Want to see the current meta reshuffled? Every core set comes with a senator's shuttle with limited movement. Each player gets that shuttle. You may start your shuttle in any valid location on your side of the board. If you destroy your opponent's shuttle, you get 12 points. If your shuttle makes it off the opponent's side board you get 12 points.

You now have an item that is both worth escorting and hunting at the exact same time with a potential 24 point swing tied to it. Your opponent wants to run a fat Falcon? No big deal. Put your shuttle way down on one edge. Make the opponent choose, is he going to have 60+ points running escort or hunting?

A phantom will have to make the same choice. But if he turns hunter, he's still tough, but ultimately more predictable.

Howlrunner can't be with the escort and attacking the opposing shuttle. Time to split those swarms.

Vader able to unleash proton rockets on a slow moving objective? Yes, please!

Major Rhymer with advanced proton torpedoes? Hells yeah!

Something that simple will shake up the way everyone is playing this match. You would certainly guarantee yourself no more fortresses. You'd see more flexible ships like the Interceptor and Defender get more play. Just my thoughts.

I was pointing out that rules about sportsmanship are an oxymoron.

How so? They reflect only the definition of sportmanship held by the rule maker, making them effectively arbitrary, but all game rules are arbitrary. I don't see how it's oxymoronic.

I was pointing out that rules about sportsmanship are an oxymoron.

How so? ...

Making rules and enforcing penalties is about following rules. Sportsmanship is about behavior outside the codified rules.

If you break a rule you are not behaving unsportsmanlike. You are merely committing a foul. Nothing more and nothing less. Therefore, once there is a rule, the question of sportsmanship no longer applies.

Edit:

Even if the league commissioner/rules development board/whoever decides to call that particular foul unsportsmanlike conduct it is nothing but a foul. Such rules describe the way someone thinks the game should be played. Still, those are nothing but rules and fouls.

I was pointing out that rules about sportsmanship are an oxymoron.

How so? ...

Making rules and enforcing penalties is about following rules. Sportsmanship is about behavior outside the codified rules.

If you break a rule you are not behaving unsportsmanlike. You are merely committing a foul. Nothing more and nothing less. Therefore, once there is a rule, the question of sportsmanship no longer applies.

Edit:

Even if the league commissioner/rules development board/whatever decides to call that particular foul unsportsmanlike conduct it is nothing but a foul.

They're not mutually exclusive as you seem to believe. Sportsmanship covers things outside of the rules, that doesn't mean it doesn't cover things inside the rules as well.

Buhallin, in post #222 you stated that fortressing 'has always been an issue'.

How has fortressing always been an issue in tournaments?

He didn't really say fortressing was affecting tournaments, he said people have been complaining about it and insisting it be banned somehow since the falcon came out. For evidence, search the forum for "falcon fortress".

How do you determine whether it was deliberate or not? People bump into their own ships even if they are not using the fortress.

Declare it a form of stalling, and leave it up to the TO. We leave it to them to make a number of other, similar calls, I don't see any reason to think they couldn't handle this one.

Making a rule that defines fortressing would be hard... but as the judge once said, he knows it when he sees it.

A simple rule I think can make everyone happy and end the debate, but that for ffg to decide.

I had one suggestion, but another person made a good suggestion.

New rule

"Ships must leave the deployment area or they are considered destroyed."

"If all ships remain in the deployment zone after the first round, they are considered destroyed"

"If all friendly ships overlap one another without the interference from opponent for 3 consecutive turns they are considered destroyed"

Just a couple of ways of trying to word it properly.

I believe we will see something changed in the next faq/tournament rules

I think up until now ffg didn't bother wit the fortress build as its not seen often, but seeing it in the world's, the effect and debate it has over the community, and now since it's well known, will see more try it out.

It really take away from the spirit of the game.

I don't think it's the kind if coverage ffg would want to have.

Imo Richard has no pride.

If I win a tournament, especially something big like the world's. I'd want to be remembered by the way I flew and how well I did.

Not i sat back in a corner and coward to squeeze out a win

Legit tactic? Ya

Any dignity left? None

The simplest fix is just to have all ships move into the play area from the board edge instead of having deployment zones. Place the chosen maneuver template with one end touching the edge of the board and continue moving as normal. This would also fix the minor problems with large and huge ship deployment where they are not necessarily completely in the deployment zone at the start of the game.

Self Bumping is critical to blocking and lambda play.

Spirit of the game is subjective.

http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/attachments/transformers-3rd-party-discussion/27418159d1392048258-fans-toys-ft-04-scoria-not-slag-move-along-troupers.jpg

Self Bumping is critical to blocking and lambda play.

It is. But you don't see self-bumping Lambdas huddled together in the far corner of their deployment zone and not moving or attacking for 40 minutes of a 60 minute game.

Wasn't that one of the last big "theories" with the Fortress, though?