Hi everyone,

I just got back from the Spanish National organized by Edge (FFG's distributor in Spain) that finished up today and wanted to share my experience and get some feedback from other people's experiences.

Before I get started on my complaints I wanted to say that my opponents were all fun to play against, and I hope to get a rematch from several of them (I'm looking at you Mr. RAC/Soontir pilot whose name unfortunately escapes me). All of my negativity is directed solely at the organization and having nice opponents was the only part I enjoyed.

So without further ado, a list of my complaints/observations:

1. The tournament structure. FFG claims in their tournament rules that all "premier" events follow a certain round structure depending on the number of participants. They announced that the tournament would be for up to 150 participants, with 5 rounds of swiss pairings with a top 16 on the second day. The number of swiss rounds should actually be 6 for such a number of people, but what they didn't announce until the morning of the tournament was that it was actually two parallel tournaments of 75 people, each with their respective top 8, that were combined for day two. It just seems pointless to me to separate the group like that, but whatever, maybe it made it easier for them though I doubt that any software that can handle the scoring for 75 participants can't handle 150. Apparently the lack of swiss rounds was due to restrictions at the locale, but why a tournament was organized in a place unwilling or unable to host the participants for that many hours is beyond me.

2. Chairs. When the tournament rules were announced last week (this reminds me that the tournament itself was announced just one month before the event) the fine text said that it's "possible that there won't be enough chairs for all of the participants, so players are free to bring their own." Apart from the ridiculousness of bringing your own (do I check it in? do I take it with me to dinner afterwards?), people's legs get tired after standing around for 7+ hours of game time and like to rest between rounds, during setup, etc. Of course, I figured that if they say that there might not be enough, I could probably take a seat every now and then, just not between every round. FALSE. I saw ZERO chairs offered to the participants.

3. Playmats. I counted a grand total of 3 mats at the venue (there may have been 3 more at the parallel tournament), so apart from the lucky 6-12 people that played on the official FFG mat everyone else had to play on a piece of black cloth that was wrinkled, had frayed edges and an inconsistent size. How do I know that the sizes weren't consistent? Because the official mats were hanging off the tables (by about half a ship base on either side) and some of the pieces of cloth were smaller than the table and others were longer.

4. Space. As (some of) the cloths were hanging hanging off of the table edges, you'd think that there would be space for cards, tokens, templates, etc. on the sides. NOPE. There was about a pilot card's width worth of space between each piece of cloth, so all dice, tokens and range rulers had to be kept in the play area and constantly moved around when ships would approach them. To save space everyone actually shared a single set of maneuver templates and dice*, which personally didn't bother me nearly as much as having a cluttered play area.

*When everyone was complaining about this before the first round, one of the organizers said that we should just share dice and maneuver templates and it will be just like playing at home. Don't patronize me, I don't pay you money to play at home, and even then I have twice as much table space than what was offered to me.

5. PA System. It was nonexistent, the organizers had no microphone, megaphone or anything else to be able to communicate with the participants. How did they not have mics in a theater? Of course, when people would say to speak up because they couldn't hear anything, the organizer would get angry and keep talking at the same volume. This happened during every announcement and during the prize draw.

6. Pairing Visibility. After each round two sheets of paper were printed out and posted on two walls, each with the pairings and table number for the 75 people in each parallel tournament. There was no projector and they printed out only a single copy of each for everyone to gather around. This was a relatively minor annoyance compared to everything else.

7. Temperature & Lighting. The locale, a theater in Madrid, was hot (though not unbearable, it easily could have been had it been warmer outside) and the AC wasn't nearly enough. It was also dark. A theater with insufficient lighting... I guess that all the lights were pointed at where the stage would normally be set up instead of straight down.

8. Prizes. My experience with large tournaments up until now is that there's a drawing for prizes, or even a pick-up in which everyone walks away with something. In the Barcelona Regional (80 people) they gave out a dozen playmats, acrylic maneuver templates, ships, a copy of Armada, etc. In the French National everyone present walked away with a number of things apart from the Luke card and top prizes. The higher your ranking, the sooner you could choose your prize, so I got the backpack (the backpacks were added to the pool), someone got a ship storage case, another guy got a Rebel Transport, a friend of mine got a summer kit medal and some regional shield tokens, another got the winter kit cloak tokens and a Ten Nunb card. This is on top of the participation package that was given to everyone. In this tournament the prizes (apart from the top 16/4/2 stuff) consisted of sets of 3 alt art cards (Boba, RS and PtL) given to a grand total of 16 randomly chosen participants out of 150. The entry fee for the Spanish National was also nearly double what I paid to participate in the French National, and the latter even included a light lunch.

9. Mistakes. I expect mistakes to happen when hundreds of numbers are entered into the system (we're only human), but I saw that one guy that was kept out of the top had a MOV of 883 (after 5 rounds of swiss), which was actually the second highest in our group. According to my back-of-the-napkin numbers it's impossible for him to have less than 20 victory points with that MOV, and as 2 people in our parallel tournament went 5-0 and I saw no ties, there's no way he should have been out with that number. I heard the Edge representative say that the ranking is right and that the numbers on the sheet weren't the tie-breaking values. I don't know how or if the issue was resolved, but at that point I was generally disgusted with the organization and left the room as I knew that I was out anyway.

10. Implementation of the rules. This I heard from people watching the top games today, so I apologize for any inaccuracies. Apparently one player didn't write down the obstacles on his list printout, and no one noticed, even though it was given an OK by a referee during the first day. In the rules it's stated that "each player must check both his list and his opponents' before starting any match to avoid errors/discrepancies with the squadron on the table and the one listed. In the hypothetical case of finding any such discrepancy, the players are expected to let their opponent know so that they can solve it before beginning the round." This was noticed in the middle of one of the matches in the top (I believe it was in the quarterfinal) and it was decided that he'd be penalized by 50 points. He won the match, destroying all 4 TLT Y-Wings and losing 3 Bs from his 4BZ list, giving him a MOV of 134-66, and his opponent went on to the next round. I get that it was his mistake to not state his obstacles, but as the referees gave him the OK on day 1 and the rules state that it's your responsibility to make sure your opponent is playing what he should be before the match, I was under the impression that a referee would not get involved in this. Furthermore, I don't understand how they penalized him when he won with a difference larger than 50 MOV. Edit: I've been informed that the sanction was agreed on in private while the players finished the game and they subtracted 50 points from the offender and added 50 to his opponent, so at least that's one MOV mystery solved.

So, is it just me or have I convinced you that this was an organizational disaster?

Edit: grammar.

That is a complete and total disaster from every angle... What a joke... How embarrassing to FFG to have their name on something like that...

That sounds like a terribly run tournament, yep.

i have literally never written down which obstacles i'm using. i hardly ever even bring a list printed out.

i've also never particpated in a tournament with a PA, or a tournament that came with chairs. and you clearly didnt come to the atlanta regional. we nicknamed that event "the sweat for fett"

i have literally never written down which obstacles i'm using. i hardly ever even bring a list printed out.

You got nothing on the Canadian Nationals. These are normal hiccups that occur (except for the chairs, that's just odd) but:

- the playmats would be an issue. Didn't players bring their own?

- I have never been to a tournament that had a PA. It is usually just the organizer having to yell loudly.

- Pairing could be orally stated first and then posted for those who missed it. Gen Con had postings of players and rankings in the earlier days of X-wing so a posted list is not unheard of.

- MOV doesn't count unless it is a tie breaker. Match points is what sets your ranking. If players had the same match points and one has a higher MOV, then you'd have something to argue about (although the person who's MOV it is is the one with the horse in the race)

- Not writing down your obstacles is such a small fix. If they made an erroneous ruling or ejected someone for not breaking a rule then it would be a poor decision on the T.O.'s and helpers part.

This sounds like normal big event issues to me.

i have literally never written down which obstacles i'm using. i hardly ever even bring a list printed out.

It's expected now that obstacle choice is part of list building- The Regionals I went to printed out sheets with pictures of the obstacles for people to circle, which is probably the most practical method.

Having a printed was part of the tournament rules and identifying the obstacles was specifically mentioned, so there was no doubt that the 4BZ player was in the wrong.

- MOV doesn't count unless it is a tie breaker. Match points is what sets your ranking. If players had the same match points and one has a higher MOV, then you'd have something to argue about (although the person who's MOV it is is the one with the horse in the race)

The MOV was an observation because the match points weren't listed on the sheet. My point was that with a MOV of 884 after 5 rounds it's impossible that his match points were less than 20.

- MOV doesn't count unless it is a tie breaker. Match points is what sets your ranking. If players had the same match points and one has a higher MOV, then you'd have something to argue about (although the person who's MOV it is is the one with the horse in the race)

The MOV was an observation because the match points weren't listed on the sheet. My point was that with a MOV of 884 after 5 rounds it's impossible that his match points were less than 20.

Did you ask your friend how many games he won that were match wins and did he lose or get modified wins in any?

i have literally never written down which obstacles i'm using. i hardly ever even bring a list printed out.

It's expected now that obstacle choice is part of list building- The Regionals I went to printed out sheets with pictures of the obstacles for people to circle, which is probably the most practical method.

It's never even been brought up that I was doing something wrong. I wasn't under the impression people cared. It's not like you can gain a massive advantage during the course of a tourney by switching up the obstacles.

- MOV doesn't count unless it is a tie breaker. Match points is what sets your ranking. If players had the same match points and one has a higher MOV, then you'd have something to argue about (although the person who's MOV it is is the one with the horse in the race)

The MOV was an observation because the match points weren't listed on the sheet. My point was that with a MOV of 884 after 5 rounds it's impossible that his match points were less than 20.

Did you ask your friend how many games he won that were match wins and did he lose or get modified wins in any?

Just to clarify, I was bothered when the organizer refused to admit the possibility of a mistake. As for the guy, he wasn't anyone I knew but just a name on the sheet to me.

What I'm trying to say is that it's impossible to have a MOV of 884 points in 5 rounds with a loss and a modified win, a modified win and a tie, or two modified wins. The maximum MOV possible with 3 wins, a loss and a modified win is 200*3 + 99 + 112 = 811. If he had 0 losses and 2 modified wins then the maximum is 200*3+112*2 = 824. If he had a tie and a modified win (for 19 match points), the maximum MOV possible is 200*3 + 100 + 112 = 812.

Therefore if the MOV is correct and he had a loss then he must have 20 match points. With a top 8 for 75 people it means that 2 or 3 players went 5-0 and the rest were either 4-1 or 4-0 and a tie. As his MOV was the second highest in the tournament, there's no way that the MOV was correct and he was out of the top.... Unless there's a mistake in the way I calculated everything* (feel free to correct me). I honestly suspect that they a) made a mistake putting in the numbers, or b) were still using SOS for tie breakers.

*Edit: It's possible that all of the players above him went 5-0-0 or 4-0-1, but to get 5 or 6 players into the top with a tie is suspicious to say the least and I didn't see or hear about any ties happening at the top tables.

That's on part with how bad us nationals was this year.

This sounds like normal big event issues to me.

That's on part with how bad us nationals was this year.

Your comments sadden me. I went to my first national tournaments this year (in France and Spain) after playing for a year and literally none of the issues in the latter were present in the former... and now you're telling me that my first experience was the exception to the rule =(

i have literally never written down which obstacles i'm using. i hardly ever even bring a list printed out.

It's expected now that obstacle choice is part of list building- The Regionals I went to printed out sheets with pictures of the obstacles for people to circle, which is probably the most practical method.

It's never even been brought up that I was doing something wrong. I wasn't under the impression people cared. It's not like you can gain a massive advantage during the course of a tourney by switching up the obstacles.

Maybe not a huge advantage but I think certain rocks helps and hinder different squads. If you were normally running 3 debris then came up against Dash who completely ignores debris and can sit on them and still shoot then you could have switched them for rocks to force a barrell roll. Not saying you would do that just playing devils advocate.

This sounds like normal big event issues to me.

That's on part with how bad us nationals was this year.

Your comments sadden me. I went to my first national tournaments this year (in France and Spain) after playing for a year and literally none of the issues in the latter were present in the former... and now you're telling me that my first experience was the exception to the rule =(

Gencon wasn't that bad this year imo. Biggest hiccup was the software crashing after the 1st round. Other than that it was ran really well imo.

This seems to be a growing trend, a lot of these businesses who were chosen to host regional/national events have a partnership with FFG and are all but guaranteed the venue every year as long as the partnership remains so they can jerk around the participants as much as they want and potential entrants have no choice but to deal with it or not go. You would think it would behoove FFG to set the standards a bit higher but as I said I think there are some business dealings behind the scenes that play into who gets to host these events.

For a premier event this sounds terrible. I was lucky enough to go to one of the smoothest run events I've ever been to this last summer. It was the X-Wing regional in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. We had 120 pre-registered players with 116 in attendance. Every match was played on a specially printed vinyl map. Everyone got a Boba Fett. If you pre-registered by a certain date you got a commerative acrylic range ruler. Food truck on site making fresh hamburgers. PA system. And pairings were available via wifi before any printed sheets were posted. The only bad part was no chairs allowed at the gaming tables.

My regionals experience was pretty abysmal, so I appreciate a complaint like this. I would make sure to email FFG this directly so they understand the issues they need to look into to assure their tournament scene is what it needs to be.

My regional in Boise was pretty terrible as well, but at least we had chairs...even if we did have to carry them in ourselves from the game store to the tourney location. Another disappointment was a $20 entry free, with no prizes beyond the regional tournament kit.

I will say though, that in every tournament I've been to, the other players have always been pretty friendly. The X-wing community rocks.

That's on part with how bad us nationals was this year.

I disagree. US Nationals had some timing issues (and those sucked), but the errors that happened were fixed (like when victory points were awarded wrongly for first-round byes) -- that's WHY there were delays! -- instead of FFG doubling down on them.

The scheduling was a dumpster fire. Yeah. The fact it went, what was it, about five hours late? That was effin' terrible. But we all had mats to play on, the tournament wasn't arbitrarily cut into half at random, the venue was well lit, we had plenty of chairs, the air conditioning was fine (or, at least, as fine as GenCon ever is), there was plenty of table space between mats, etc, etc. Of the OP's list of ten greivances, I see, like, two that applied to the US Nationals.

That's on part with how bad us nationals was this year.

I disagree. US Nationals had some timing issues (and those sucked), but the errors that happened were fixed (like when victory points were awarded wrongly for first-round byes) -- that's WHY there were delays! -- instead of FFG doubling down on them.

The scheduling was a dumpster fire. Yeah. The fact it went, what was it, about five hours late? That was effin' terrible. But we all had mats to play on, the tournament wasn't arbitrarily cut into half at random, the venue was well lit, we had plenty of chairs, the air conditioning was fine (or, at least, as fine as GenCon ever is), there was plenty of table space between mats, etc, etc. Of the OP's list of ten greivances, I see, like, two that applied to the US Nationals.

Hmm, I'm not so sure Gencon gets away scott free. The fact that there was no incentive to tell them that you dropped resulting in half a dozen players with no opponents each round. Of the 192 starters only about 60 completed all 7 rounds. Partially to blame is the poor tournament structure with shallow cuts meaning less than 10% make it though instead of the a more appropriate 20-25% (personal opinion). There was plenty of time and room to accomodate a larger cut on the Friday and make the event way more inclusive rather than being stupidly exclusive. The fact that the only thing most players got out of the event was a promo card, two if you stayed till round 6. It was hardly a glamorous event as you might expect and the software screw ups were actually not even the worse part of the event. Let's face it the Nationals event kit is pretty lame this year, and FFG didn't even give out any product as prizes. They would hardly lose any money by giving out tokens to the top 64 etc.

As an aside, well actually going back to the original posters complaints, some of them are definitely legitimate but the one that is not is the splitting of the tournament into two pods. This is in fact exactly what they should be doing in large events. It reduces the number of rounds allowing you to have an extra round in the cut without increasing total time. In fact, cutting into more pods improves it even further (say pods of 32-50 taking the top 8, normally this would require 7 rounds but can be done in 5 or 6 depending on total numbers). Large tournaments like Worlds, Gencon and the larger Nationals events benefit greatly by running parallel events, though I will admit this is probably better to be communicated earlier rather than springing it on players at the event.

The other issue raised by the original post is the person with supposedly high MoV not making the cut. Now based on Gencon experience the numbers on the results sheets did not actually reflect the actual MoV and might not be what you think it was. Depending on the software they used you may be arguing a point that is not true based on your interpretation of the number. You really need more information (I.e. talk to guy involved) before you jump to conclusions.

But to be positive for a monent, I can tell you Australian Nationals was run about as perfect as it can be and was a pleasure to play in.

Don't feel like adding to the quote train, but not being able to ever get a judge call because the judges were signing autographs was a problem also unique to us nationals.

I'm not saying one sacked worse than the other, I'm expressing empathy that I too have been to a poorly run national.

This sounds like normal big event issues to me.

That's on part with how bad us nationals was this year.

Your comments sadden me. I went to my first national tournaments this year (in France and Spain) after playing for a year and literally none of the issues in the latter were present in the former... and now you're telling me that my first experience was the exception to the rule =(

Gencon wasn't that bad this year imo. Biggest hiccup was the software crashing after the 1st round. Other than that it was ran really well imo.

You just liked it cuz it was a turret fest

Gencon wasn't that bad this year imo. Biggest hiccup was the software crashing after the 1st round. Other than that it was ran really well imo.

You just liked it cuz it was a turret fest

Wow.

And supposedly the turret players are the ones not flying casual.

I feel your pain OP.

This makes me appreciate even more all the work Vince Kingston and Kristoffer Arvidsson put in to make sure the Nordics (Nationals for the Nordic countries) went as smooth as a baby's behind.

Or this says something of how good people are at organizing things in different parts of the world....... #runs and hides#

This sounds like normal big event issues to me.

That's on part with how bad us nationals was this year.

Your comments sadden me. I went to my first national tournaments this year (in France and Spain) after playing for a year and literally none of the issues in the latter were present in the former... and now you're telling me that my first experience was the exception to the rule =(

Gencon wasn't that bad this year imo. Biggest hiccup was the software crashing after the 1st round. Other than that it was ran really well imo.

You just liked it cuz it was a turret fest