Started listening this morning, will probably finish it tonight.

I think I have to disagree with Brad on the issue of draws. He mentioned that that one time at Worlds was the only okay time to do a negotiated draw because it didn't affect who made the cut. I think any tournament where all 1-loss players make the cut makes a negotiated draw a reasonable and not unfair course of action if both players involved are undefeated. You're not keeping anyone out of the cut. At worst, you're keeping one player a higher seed than they perhaps deserve, but I'm not sure how significant that is. There's no real advantage to a particular seed ranking after a cut. You do get some extra time to rest and perhaps eat, but I don't feel too bad about giving someone with a perfect score going into the final Swiss round some small reward is out of line. Reasonable people can disagree on that point, of course.

I really like the show opening, and thanks for the timestamps.

I think I have to disagree with Brad on the issue of draws. He mentioned that that one time at Worlds was the only okay time to do a negotiated draw because it didn't affect who made the cut. I think any tournament where all 1-loss players make the cut makes a negotiated draw a reasonable and not unfair course of action if both players involved are undefeated. You're not keeping anyone out of the cut. At worst, you're keeping one player a higher seed than they perhaps deserve, but I'm not sure how significant that is. There's no real advantage to a particular seed ranking after a cut. You do get some extra time to rest and perhaps eat, but I don't feel too bad about giving someone with a perfect score going into the final Swiss round some small reward is out of line. Reasonable people can disagree on that point, of course.

I also find it rough when the two top players who had to face undefeated players all day then face off and one knocks the other out of the cut. Meanwhile, someone else at X-1 or even undefeated themselves might be paired down faces a lower ranked opponent and then shoots up to second or third place.(I've actually been the beneficiary of such pairings in a couple of tourneys when I had an early loss and never had to face an undefeated player, making the cut ahead of someone that played in the top table at the final round. I've never felt great about that.)

You mentioned getting a partial win for a game that came down to a pair of Mirandas and ended with one player conceding. A game that ends in a concession should award a full win and counts as the loser having had all of their ships destroyed for the purposes of MoV.

You mentioned getting a partial win for a game that came down to a pair of Mirandas and ended with one player conceding. A game that ends in a concession should award a full win and counts as the loser having had all of their ships destroyed for the purposes of MoV.

Hrm. Well, my opponent was still fighting to make the cut, and I'm sure he wouldn't have sacrificed the MoV from his Miranda. That would've forced him to meaninglessly play out the rest of the game. Were we untoward in our game stoppage and reporting the inevitable score?

Hey Dee, I'm not sure Brad got the new Tactician/Autothrusters FAQ update correct. The way he seemed to explain it, he said that if you're in range 1, and part of your base extends into range 2, Tactician would trigger (and same with Autothrusters at range 2/3). Actually, the FAQ specifically talks about turreted ships where closest to closest point for the turret is range 1 outside of arc but when the enemy ship's base clips their firing arc at range 2, then Tactician triggers. That's why they specifically used a K-Wing to demonstrate the new rule. I definitely thought what Brad thought initially as well, but guys much smarter than me explained it to me

The key is the range of the closest point within arc. I'd need to listen to Brad's example again. I think we all get it, yes? It's clarified to work the way I always thought it should...

You mentioned getting a partial win for a game that came down to a pair of Mirandas and ended with one player conceding. A game that ends in a concession should award a full win and counts as the loser having had all of their ships destroyed for the purposes of MoV.

Hrm. Well, my opponent was still fighting to make the cut, and I'm sure he wouldn't have sacrificed the MoV from his Miranda. That would've forced him to meaninglessly play out the rest of the game. Were we untoward in our game stoppage and reporting the inevitable score?

It sounds like an honest mistake and I don't think I'd expect most people to know how scoring concessions works off the top of their heads. There's nothing on the scoring slip at any of the tournaments that I've attended instructing people how to score them or even a check box that notifies the TO that this was a concession so that he can verify that it was scored correctly.

I'm not a huge fan of the new draw rule but I think this is a perfect example of why FFG instituted it. You were both looking at 30+ minutes of pushing a ship around in circles for a match that would be decided entirely by the dice. Even then, as long as no one landed on an asteroid or flew off the board, the game may very well have gone to time.

I'm only partway through listening (and now I'm behind), but I wanted to comment on the practice of conceding out of the cut, so that the person who gets the bye won't have (perhaps) just lost a match to someone who already had one.

First, just some context for where I am skill-wise, this store championship season, I:

- Attended 6 store championships, ranging from 20 to 50 people
- Generally placed in the second quartile, roughly
- Made top 4 cut once, on a day where there was a second championship elsewhere (where most of our typical contenders were)

I don't think for a second I'd have my coin if I'd driven the extra hour to go to the other store's tournament, instead of stayed at the one close to home. I flew well that day, played clean, and tried to make sure my opponents were having a good time, so I'm happy with it. But it's not the same as winning one over the majority of the local heavy hitters.

Now, if someone's tired, or realized they hate their list, or just got invited to go see a movie, and they want to drop out of the cut, that's cool. No issue there. But to drop "so that someone else can win" is kinda condescending (and I realize that it comes from a good place, but it still is).

I'd much rather that a previous winner stay in the cut and play it out. Who knows, maybe next year I'll be the guy that comes out of nowhere and knocks the champ on his tailfeathers - but dropping from the cut denies me the chance to even try.

You mentioned getting a partial win for a game that came down to a pair of Mirandas and ended with one player conceding. A game that ends in a concession should award a full win and counts as the loser having had all of their ships destroyed for the purposes of MoV.

Hrm. Well, my opponent was still fighting to make the cut, and I'm sure he wouldn't have sacrificed the MoV from his Miranda. That would've forced him to meaninglessly play out the rest of the game. Were we untoward in our game stoppage and reporting the inevitable score?

Going by the wording of saying your opponent conceded, technically he would (should) have given up the MoV for miranda due to the rules for concession. On the other hand, given the matchup that was left and the likely result, I don't know that there's a huge problem with just calling it how it was oging to end and going with the modified win, though in the future I'd probably call a judge over clear it with them (as an occasional judge myself, I'd be rather confused if a player brought me a score sheet with a modified win before time had been called, since the only way that should theoretically happen is the Nashtah Pup being the only ship left on table).