bust out the 5 minute egg timer.. once it dings that player is done and play moves to the next person. actually 5 minutes seems a bit excessive if you ask me.. just like in real combat you cant sit around with your thumb in your nose and expect for everybody to wait on you!!

That's what I liked about playing Blood Bowl. You had 11 players on the field and 4 minutes to resolve everything for all of them. I think a time limit wouldn't be a bad idea for X-wing.

I'm not 100% sure of FFGs tournament regulations .. but I feel a solution would be to add a line regarding game speed to the effect of:

If a TO deems the game play to be moving at a pace he/she considers innapropriate then a warning will be given to the offending player(s). If the offending player(s) does/do not heed the warning to the TO's satisfaction they will be DQ.

It gives a rule in which the TO may refer to to support their decision to DQ, yet also allows the TO some 'room to move' on the issue - depending on the context and supposed motivations observed by the TO. A hard and fast 5 min rule does not do this.

There needs to be a hard and fast process for enforcing a penalty if a player needs to be penalized. Something along the lines of first offense = warning, second offense = DQ.

If a TO is too lax and just keeps warning, the players will push the boundaries of whatever they think they can get away with.

There needs to be a hard and fast process for enforcing a penalty if a player needs to be penalized. Something along the lines of first offense = warning, second offense = DQ.

If a TO is too lax and just keeps warning, the players will push the boundaries of whatever they think they can get away with.

I agree, but clear rules need to be outlined for the TO to operate within. In a previous job of mine, everything my office dealt with had (for legal reasons) to be within the confines of policy, both the institution's and various govt bodies'. You can't penalise someone for breaking a rule that doesn't exist.

Having said this, I don't think FFG should have a large document outlining every possible violation and subsequent punishment. Rather, a more basic "at the TO's" discretion .... " kind of approach.

If TO thinks you're taking more than a reasonable time to decide on your dial .. Warning. What is 'reasonable'? Well, the TO can make that decision depending on the circumstance. But the TO can confidently make these decisions without fear of repurcussion, and easily illustrate FFG's ruling in which supports their decision.

That's the problem at the moment, is it's still the TO's discretion to determine how long is too long. Most of the other rules of the game are fairly basic and easy to enforce, but the lack of any guidelines or timeframe for how long phases should take, makes it a gray area.

I'd guess escalating penalties should go warning (perhaps universal) - game/match loss - tournament DQ although there could and should be some exceptions.

The issue of timing is always hard. Let's say there is a hard and fast rule of 5 minutes. Johnny X has a vision impairment and it take him longer to read small print. It takes him 6 minutes to set his dial yet he clearly is not trying to delay the game. Should he be penalised? You break your left arm a week before tourney and take it takes you a little longer to set your move your ships (your left arm is only range 1). Should you be penalised?

In addition, who is going to time the moves?

It's always hard to cover every eventuality, but in this case I feel the TO is in the best position to make a judgement call. Are you taking too long? Is it possible you are intentionally and egregiously altering the cadence of the game? Are your actions unnecessarily impacting negatively on the overall gaming experience? BAM! You just got a warning.

Timing is a problem. Has anyone spoken to FFG, what do they use as norms in the Nationals and Worlds or other tournaments they run.? I would think they have guidelines that they use among themselves.

I'd guess escalating penalties should go warning (perhaps universal) - game/match loss - tournament DQ although there could and should be some exceptions.

It should be determined by the number of rounds being played. If there aren't many rounds left or not many to start with (due to a low number of players), the warning - loss - DQ, may be too long a process.

I'd guess escalating penalties should go warning (perhaps universal) - game/match loss - tournament DQ although there could and should be some exceptions.

It should be determined by the number of rounds being played. If there aren't many rounds left or not many to start with (due to a low number of players), the warning - loss - DQ, may be too long a process.

This is true although if they are "trying too hard to win" then throwing them an automatic loss (and a MoV 0 for good measure) may already throw a big wrench into things. A loss and no MoV should make it harder to advance to any playoffs and kills swiss standings.

Has anyone spoken to FFG, what do they use as norms in the Nationals and Worlds or other tournaments they run?

They don't seem to have a norm. I think they intentionally leave it vague so that the TO can decide for themselves. The problem is if they say "5 minutes max" and you have someone who constantly uses up the full 5 minutes, even though it's clear they don't need it... They'll be likely to try and argue that they're not stalling.

So perhaps it's better they don't give a time limit and just let the TO make a judgement call.

I like the idea of a warning, game loss with MoV 0 and then DQ from the whole tournament. Although when I think DQ I was thinking of that game not the whole tournament.

Because honestly, unless it's a truly huge tournament like Worlds, a single loss and 0 MoV is likely to knock you out of the finals either way.

The Tourney Rules say that a TO can remove a player for unsportsmanlike conduct. The TRs also state that intentionally stalling for time is prohibited. Sure, they don't give guidelines like "5 minutes for activation phase per ship" or whatever, but I think they're pretty straightforward in their intent- if the TO thinks somebody is stalling, the TO can remove them.

As to the OPs original question, "Should I have disqualified him?"

Do you think he was intentionally stalling? Then yeah, by the letter of the law you should have DQed him. If not, then no, you did the right thing letting him continue.

That may seem to go against my laid back persona, but rules are rules. It's also the reason you'll probably never see me TOing a tournament- I don't want to be that guy, man. Not over something fun like X-Wing. I have to be that guy as my job, I wouldn't want to do it for something fun. Thing is though, somebody has to be that guy at a tournament or somebody is going to get screwed. I mean yeah, as a whole X-Wing folks are fairly laid back and all, but odds are you're going to have some kind of rules argument, justified or not, and as TO you gotta step in and sort it out one way or another.

I mean look, I had to fire a guy from my maintenance team a couple weeks ago. It sucked, I felt horrible for the guy, but at the end of the day, he wasn't pulling his weight on the team and two other guys, guys who do a great job for me, were having to work harder as a result. There's no outcome where everyone ends up happy- I'd talked with this guy on multiple occasions about getting it together and it just went in one ear and out the other. Finally, I just decided it wasn't fair that the rest of the team, me included, were having to work harder/ more as a result of this guy doing less, so I peaced him out. Sucked for him, but his replacement has done a decent job and my hardworking guys are in much better moods now that they're not having to do a bunch of extra work on top of their own.

Tournaments are kinda the same way- you have a bunch of people there to play some competitive X-Wing, and probably 95% of them you'll have no issues with other than a misread card or misremembered rule, but that 5% that's there to stall and push limits on rules? Well, that's where the TO has to step up and do the not very fun thing and ruin somebody's day. Whether that's let a guy you think is stalling win your entire tournament despite the fact that several players complained of his slow play, or you bounce the slow player after ignoring your requests to play faster, somebody's day is going to be ruined. There's no right answer, but a decision still has to be made. That's your job as TO. I think it's also why FFG hasn't published a bunch of rules on player conduct- ideally, a person with the responsibility of running the show can take into account context and apply the more vague conduct type rules more effectively than a disconnected bunch of rules devs.

I was the opponent of the player in question for the final game. If I may offer my perspective, for whatever it may be worth.

I was Playing BBBBZ, versus his Fat Dash/Loaded Keyan list. I killed Keyan in round 3. So from then on, he only had the 1 dial to set. I would set my dials, and wait a vey long time for him to set his one. I didn't time it, so it is interesting to see how long it did take.

I have played against this person several times in the past in both casual and tournament play. He routinely plays very slowly, to the point that I refuse to play against him in casual games. It is just too frustrating, and has made me very angry in the past.

For this game, I refused to get upset about it, to the point of not complaining at all, when perhaps I should have. I personally believe he does this on purpose to frustrate his opponents, so I did not want to let this tactic work on me. Just my opinion.

I must give credit to the TO, for erring on the side of caution. He did give warnings, but he didn't want to risk being in the wrong with a DQ when there is no specific rule regarding slow play- particularly in the final rounds.

I know the TO was frustrated by the slow play too, as this game took almost 3 hours (more? again I didn't time it) to play out when it should have been much shorter. That seems to be why he made this post, asking for what would constitute a reasonable limit for this situation.

Again, this is just my opinion, take it or leave it.

I was the opponent of the player in question for the final game. If I may offer my perspective, for whatever it may be worth.

I was Playing BBBBZ, versus his Fat Dash/Loaded Keyan list. I killed Keyan in round 3. So from then on, he only had the 1 dial to set. I would set my dials, and wait a vey long time for him to set his one. I didn't time it, so it is interesting to see how long it did take.

I have played against this person several times in the past in both casual and tournament play. He routinely plays very slowly, to the point that I refuse to play against him in casual games. It is just too frustrating, and has made me very angry in the past.

For this game, I refused to get upset about it, to the point of not complaining at all, when perhaps I should have. I personally believe he does this on purpose to frustrate his opponents, so I did not want to let this tactic work on me. Just my opinion.

I must give credit to the TO, for erring on the side of caution. He did give warnings, but he didn't want to risk being in the wrong with a DQ when there is no specific rule regarding slow play- particularly in the final rounds.

I know he was frustrated by the slow play too, as this game took almost 3 hours (more? again I didn't time it) to play out when it should have been much shorter. That seems to be why he made this post, asking for what would constitute a reasonable limit for this situation.

Again, this is just my opinion, take it or leave it.

Always good to see another perspective on a matter from someone who was actually involved in the situation in question. With regards to slow play, if you can set 4-5 dials and still have to wait for him to set his, then there's something wrong. Why was he frustrated by the slow play? He was the one dragging the game out.

I don't mind a game that goes for a few hours, but as long as the pace of the game isn't slow. I've come from a background of historic gaming where the games in question would routinely run for 3-4 hours, but there was always plenty happening so the time flew by. When you're sitting and waiting and waiting for the other player, it becomes a real drag.

Sorry, I meant I know the TO was also frustrated by the slow play. I have edited that for clarity.

That makes more sense. Was there no time limit for the final round?

A TO has the most absolute authority in an event. There is absolutely no reason the TO should feel as if the are powerless in a situation the feel is problematic. If the TO felt the pace of play was being deliberately slow then the TO should have given a final warning and then a game loss. You can not, as a TO be afraid to follow through with rules enforcement. Especially in regards to sportsmanship issues, which this is.