I don't mind it. If you need someone else to lose to make it it's out of your hands anyway. You were never truly in control of the situation and you can't complain that it didn't go your way.

If you don't want someone above you to get in because of an ID, win all your games. Once you lose games, especially more than one, things are goig to have to go your way.

There is a larger matter to consider here than that one individual who is affected. Stuff like this will make people think twice about going to tournaments and ultimately that hurts the game we all love.

Why? Play your game as well as possible and enjoy the X-wing. If you're in, you're in, if you're out, you're out. If playing out the game isn't going to help either if you, then take the ID. I find it very strange that all of the top 8 players were in a situation where ID helped them, though. It seems like there were too many rounds.

This tournament only had 43 players, just putting it into the 6 round territory. It effectively had one round of swiss too many.

I don't mind it. If you need someone else to lose to make it it's out of your hands anyway. You were never truly in control of the situation and you can't complain that it didn't go your way.

If you don't want someone above you to get in because of an ID, win all your games. Once you lose games, especially more than one, things are goig to have to go your way.

There is a larger matter to consider here than that one individual who is affected. Stuff like this will make people think twice about going to tournaments and ultimately that hurts the game we all love.

Why? Play your game as well as possible and enjoy the X-wing. If you're in, you're in, if you're out, you're out. If playing out the game isn't going to help either if you, then take the ID. I find it very strange that all of the top 8 players were in a situation where ID helped them, though. It seems like there were too many rounds.

They started with 45, 40 is the cut off for 5 rounds, so they were very close to that. They also had some people drop. I've seen 41 as the final number in some places and in others 39. It was definitely the perfect storm and this won't be a common occurrence. However, I think the rule is bad for the game and will make it less inviting for newer players. The same argument of "you had your chance" can be made for the player who loses at a higher table in the final round and missed the cut as a result. That person went into the final round controlling their own destiny. I say make them claim it.

I believe this rule is utterly stupid and needs to be fixed. Until it is addressed I do not plan on attending any larger events. What is the point of allowing draws anyway? I believe the blame lies on FFG, but that doesnt mean those top 8 and the TO weren't to blame as well. Each of those players should have been disqualified for collusion. If you go to a tournament you can play to win and that is fine, but the number one rule is don't be a ****!

To be fair to Paul, I'm pretty sure he said on one of the podcasts or twitch tuesdays that he didn't like the rule, but it's now one of the game rules and he would use it if the opportunity arose. I don't think we can blame any of the players.

It's. Not collusion. Collusion. Is done in secret. This is not the players or TO at fault. They followed the rules. Don't like the rules fine ******* don't but don't get pissy with people who followed the rules as they currently exist.

To be fair to Paul, I'm pretty sure he said on one of the podcasts or twitch tuesdays that he didn't like the rule, but it's now one of the game rules and he would use it if the opportunity arose. I don't think we can blame any of the players.

You can.

Let me ask, what problem did this new rule fix? 3 weeks ago everyone would have played it out. The dice don't lie.

It's. Not collusion. Collusion. Is done in secret. This is not the players or TO at fault. They followed the rules. Don't like the rules fine ******* don't but don't get pissy with people who followed the rules as they currently exist.

The rule does not protect the integrity of the tournament. It's up to the TO to do that, and disallow the ID.

To be fair to Paul, I'm pretty sure he said on one of the podcasts or twitch tuesdays that he didn't like the rule, but it's now one of the game rules and he would use it if the opportunity arose. I don't think we can blame any of the players.

You can.

Let me ask, what problem did this new rule fix? 3 weeks ago everyone would have played it out. The dice don't lie.

Most people are agreeing that the rule should be removed. However, it's silly to blame the players. Don't hate the players, hate the game man.

There is such a thing as the "Law of Unintended Consequences". What FFG had in mind for the ID rule we won't know until FFG explains it. And as mentioned elsewhere, as players we take advantage of rules because that's what we do. Just like putting 3 Tacticians on the YV-666 before they were reclassified as LIMITED.

Don't blame the players because they followed the rules. Don't blame the TO for following the rules. Don't blame FFG because we, as players, found a loophole. As players we outnumber the designers by a wide margin and some of us have truly imaginative and evil minds and come up with stuff that the designers would never think of.

Everyone take a deep breath, relax and be assured that this will be corrected. FFG wouldn't intentionally destroy the game we love.

There is litterally no chance FFG did not know this was going to happen. IDs work this way in MTG, the new head of FFGS OP was a MTG Judge. FFG did not invent IDs.

It's. Not collusion. Collusion. Is done in secret. This is not the players or TO at fault. They followed the rules. Don't like the rules fine ******* don't but don't get pissy with people who followed the rules as they currently exist.

The rule does not protect the integrity of the tournament. It's up to the TO to do that, and disallow the ID.

I think ID needs to be removed, but the TOs job is to enforce the rules, which currently allow ID. Its not the TOs fault

You're litterally arguing that TOs overrule what FFG has explicitly allowed. That isn't a rational stance to take on the subject.

Well, I'd argue the top two were fair enough, but as seeds 4-8 were potentially vulnerable, allowing them to auto qualify in my opinion "damages the integrity of the tournament".

Unless FFG clarify that, I think disputing those rulings is perfectly valid.

Again, as has been pointed out, FFG themselves allowed IDs in that exact type of situation. It isn't as if this is untrodden ground.

"I was just following orders" and "I did it because they did it"

Are both not good enough for me.

You are being ridiculous. FFG sets the parameters for how the tournaments are run, TOS are suppose to run events within those parameters. TOs ignoring those parameters is not acceptable behavior from a TO, and likely would put into question the venues standing with FFG.

It's. Not collusion. Collusion. Is done in secret. This is not the players or TO at fault. They followed the rules. Don't like the rules fine ******* don't but don't get pissy with people who followed the rules as they currently exist.

Collusion can be done openly. I don't think it would of been a big deal if only seeds 1-4 would of done it, due to being even if they lost they were in. But any chance that the other seats where still open, is collusion of the ones seated in those spots. As others have stated, the integrity of the tournament was destroyed. You now have players playing at lower tables that once did have a very likely chance to get into the cut, no longer able to. That can honestly break some people's spirits which takes the fun out of the game. All parties that are involved, are to blame.

It's. Not collusion. Collusion. Is done in secret. This is not the players or TO at fault. They followed the rules. Don't like the rules fine ******* don't but don't get pissy with people who followed the rules as they currently exist.

Splitting hairs I feel. It's match fixing, pure and simple. Whether you want to technically not call that collusion, up to you, but that's pretty much what it amounts to.

It is, of course, explicitly permitted by the rules, which is very odd. I presume that FFG allowed it on the principle that it is difficult to police players just flying round in circles and avoiding each other. If there is the ability to de facto agree to draw and just move plastic around the board for an hour that is allowed by the rules, then might as well make it legal to agree to draw.

You are being ridiculous. FFG sets the parameters for how the tournaments are run, TOS are suppose to run events within those parameters. TOs ignoring those parameters is not acceptable behavior from a TO, and likely would put into question the venues standing with FFG.

The TO could of ruled that the bottom seats were colluding amung themselves and not allowed it, but the TO didn't. So there is lots of ways this could of been ruled within the tournament rules to still be held to FFG standards.

Seems to me the point of the ID is, "Hey, we're both 1-X and nowhere near making the cut. Wanna just call it a draw and go get dinner?" Or, "I'm in the cut no matter what and you're out of it, mind if we draw so I can grab a break before the finals?" Not, "If none of us play, we're all Top 8."

You are being ridiculous. FFG sets the parameters for how the tournaments are run, TOS are suppose to run events within those parameters. TOs ignoring those parameters is not acceptable behavior from a TO, and likely would put into question the venues standing with FFG.

The TO could of ruled that the bottom seats were colluding amung themselves and not allowed it, but the TO didn't. So there is lots of ways this could of been ruled within the tournament rules to still be held to FFG standards.

There is really no wriggle-room in the wording in the tournament pack. Intentional draws are explicitly allowed. It's spectacularly clear. If a TO is to deviate from this, it is a outright change to the tournament pack and it should be posted ahead of time. Plus I don't know if that's appropriate for a store championship/regional at all.

Seems to me the point of the ID is, "Hey, we're both 1-X and nowhere near making the cut. Wanna just call it a draw and go get dinner?" Or, "I'm in the cut no matter what and you're out of it, mind if we draw so I can grab a break before the finals?" Not, "If none of us play, we're all Top 8."

If that was the case then they would have A) Written the rules that way and B) Not allowed this kind of action at the Hoth Open, an event officiated by FFG OP.

There is such a thing as the "Law of Unintended Consequences". What FFG had in mind for the ID rule we won't know until FFG explains it. And as mentioned elsewhere, as players we take advantage of rules because that's what we do. Just like putting 3 Tacticians on the YV-666 before they were reclassified as LIMITED.

Don't blame the players because they followed the rules. Don't blame the TO for following the rules. Don't blame FFG because we, as players, found a loophole. As players we outnumber the designers by a wide margin and some of us have truly imaginative and evil minds and come up with stuff that the designers would never think of.

Everyone take a deep breath, relax and be assured that this will be corrected. FFG wouldn't intentionally destroy the game we love.

There is litterally no chance FFG did not know this was going to happen. IDs work this way in MTG, the new head of FFGS OP was a MTG Judge. FFG did not invent IDs.

I like to give everyone the benefit of doubt. Even if it appears as an intentional f up. Also, since I wasn't privy to the deliberations before ID was instituted I'm not going to blame specific people or do any finger pointing. I prefer to have more information than provided so far before I "go off" on anyone or any group.

You're assuming this is a **** up. There is no reason to make that assumption just because some people dislike it specifically for illogical reasons.

Let’s dispel once and for all with this fiction that FFG doesn’t know what they're doing. They know exactly what they're doing.

Hmmm ... seems very distasteful if the entire top 8 did it. Each pair independently arrived at that conclusion with the TO's observation?

It would seem there's an easy fix if one wants to preserve the option of an intentional draw for the "well, we're both not making it,let's grab chow" type scenarios: simply make an ID a zero-point outcome. That way if your position is unassailable it won't change, but it doesn't put you one point out of reach of another player who is still playing who could overtake you with a win. Score an actual draw as 1 point, so if you play the game to a draw you get the reward, but if you don't play, you don't profit.

I don't mind it. If you need someone else to lose to make it it's out of your hands anyway. You were never truly in control of the situation and you can't complain that it didn't go your way.

If you don't want someone above you to get in because of an ID, win all your games. Once you lose games, especially more than one, things are goig to have to go your way.

the point is... without the ID, then someone would DEFINITELY lose. then its up to MOV

Frankly, anybody defending the inclusion of the ID is one of those WAAC types who are generally douchecanoes.

Who obviously must rely on f***ing over better players because they don't want to have to rely on their skill or dice to ensure their top 8.

Is it legal? Yes.

It's still a ****** move, and it makes you a ****** for defending it.

I did not like the Intentional Draw ruling when it was added to the tournament rules. I like it even less now that it has been exploited.

The rules are contradicting themselves, saying collusion is not possible but at the same time allowing Intentional Draws.

It has no place in a competitive tournament, which is there to determine who is the best player out of that crowd on that given day. I would never allow it to happen were I the TO.

Victory or death.