Terrible decision and does absolutely nothing to answer the question of why in the heck we needed this option. Seriously rethinking my desire to even go to a regional.

Terrible decision and does absolutely nothing to answer the question of why in the heck we needed this option. Seriously rethinking my desire to even go to a regional.

Ask the Netrunner players. That was where I saw some saying that it was needed.

Terrible decision and does absolutely nothing to answer the question of why in the heck we needed this option. Seriously rethinking my desire to even go to a regional.

Ask the Netrunner players. That was where I saw some saying that it was needed.

A game where you draw 33% of the time, IME.

Winning is more important than competing, these are regionals for the top miniatures game.

Glad to see you've stuck true to form there PGS....

All that matters is winning, being polite to your opponent, and following the rules.

What's funny about fly casuals is how much more angry they get during a game than I do.

While I don't normally agree with PGS on much I feel he has a point here.

You want to have a serious competitive community for a game? That's largely driven by people who think winning matters more than competing, people who take note how much and why they lost, they analyze it and it drives them to do better.

He'll, if winning is less important than participating, then IDs are a non-isdue, right? You still get to play your X Swiss games regardless of the top tables drawing. In the end it's their loss because between IDs and byes they participate less, right?

I am not a competitive player, I play for fun. I care about the competitive scene because interesting ideas come from the drive to win the big events. X Wing is an exciting game about the notion of gallant individuals putting themselves on the line to defeat the enemy.

Nothing about the top 8 taking draws was exciting, let alone gallant. I admit that I admired the top players in the game, but this kind of behaviour just shows them to be... Disappointing. That's all I can muster for this. I want to use stronger language, but I respect the overall goodness of this community too much.

So good for you guys in Roanoke. You achieved your goal through the path of least resistance. I for one will no longer hold you in a place of respect or interest, and I will certainly no longer be listening to the podcasts from the ones invovled. It won't matter to you, but how I spend my time as far as this game is concerned matters to me.

Per. Spec. Tive.

Slow your roll folks. Good gracious. Draws are one point. Full wins are five points. I don't like intentional drawsmuch either but they are hardly the sithspawn that we all seem to think they are.

Besides, it's supposed to all be about fun anyway right?... Right?

Per. Spec. Tive.

Slow your roll folks. Good gracious. Draws are one point. Full wins are five points. I don't like intentional drawsmuch either but they are hardly the sithspawn that we all seem to think they are.

Besides, it's supposed to all be about fun anyway right?... Right?

Yes, it's all supposed to be about fun. The ID situation is the antithesis of that which is why so many people are furious.

ID'e might be a good thing for some games but that clearly doesn't seem to be the case for X-Wing.

*Oh noes! FFG doesn't have an answer to an old ruling that the thought was acceptable but now clearly isn't meaning they have to some soul searching, and they told us "please stand by while we look into the problem, we don't have a simple solution here", and all of a sudden X wing sucks and its teh wurst gaem ever!* /end sarcasm

Cmon guys, lighten up a bit.

Sigh. Not what I was hoping to see.

"We made a bad decision, and this is why it is correct".

Basically doubling down and compounding the error. If this is truly their stance, I think things will only get worse.

It just means you will see less players who play for fun vs those who play to win at x-wing tournements.

Not supporting the ID at all. Or as many others have said, treat it as a double loss.

Also, I play Armada, and in my opinion it has a really good points system for tourney gameplay. It's point system reflects far more how a game really was played. Why not implement that system to X-Wing? It would give the game a lot more color in tourney plays imo.

I suspected this response...if it was anyone other than the top players from NOVA FFG may have responded differently.

FFG contradicts themselves about fair play and sportsmanship.

Although this may be legal, at a minimum it is bad sportsmanship and bad for the game.

*Oh noes! FFG doesn't have an answer to an old ruling that the thought was acceptable but now clearly isn't meaning they have to some soul searching, and they told us "please stand by while we look into the problem, we don't have a simple solution here", and all of a sudden X wing sucks and its teh wurst gaem ever!* /end sarcasm

Cmon guys, lighten up a bit.

Uhh, I agree some folks could lighten up a little, but you know that the situation you sarcastically described isn't at all what's going on, right?

It's not an old ruling, they're not soul searching, they're insisting it's not a problem (we just don't understand how great the rule is), and their simple solution is to explain to use why the rule is so great.

I mean, the hyperbole was basically the only thing you said that was accurate.

*Oh noes! FFG doesn't have an answer to an old ruling that the thought was acceptable but now clearly isn't meaning they have to some soul searching, and they told us "please stand by while we look into the problem, we don't have a simple solution here", and all of a sudden X wing sucks and its teh wurst gaem ever!* /end sarcasm

Cmon guys, lighten up a bit.

Actually, they said "please stand by while we draft a document telling you that you should like this". The announcement in no way indicated that they thought there was even a problem or that a solution was needed. It did the opposite and said "we hear you, but we're doing this anyway".

If no one wins, then there are 2 losers. That's the way things should be done!

Why would they listen to us? We are just the people who buy their products. Did GW listen to the players?

So let me understand this..

I get 5 points if I play a full game and win by 12 or more.

I get 0 points if I lose playing a full game.

I get 3 points if I play a full game and win by less than 12.

I get 1 point and my opponent gets 1 point if we don't play at all and go eat... while the rest of the competitors...compete?

So what they are saying is the first round is more important than the last round....so why didn't they end the event once the top 8 went to burger king??? Its a competitive event...the competition was over at that point.

Would it be possible for the top 2 players to ID the last 2 rounds and still get in? 3 wins, 2 ties.....

Highly doubtful unless that last round they are also playing other people who also want to ID.

Lets just say that in the tournament two players did ID in round 5 so now you'd have 1 @25, 2 @21, 5@20. If that #9 is still @15 points then it looks like it may be possible to ID into the final. Make it 4@21 and 4@20 it's still possible for all to ID and make it. Now all of this is looking at SIX rounds where some 4-0 player decides that he may be able to ID all the way into the cut. If however the scores don't pan out that way then there is a lot of chances people will be playing.

If no one wins, then there are 2 losers. That's the way things should be done!

If no one loses then EVERYONE'S A WINNER!!!! I guess both of them should get 5 points.

I love the fact that ffg stood by their choice with the ID decision. You want to not worry about the ID factor you and your opponent don't have to agree to one. Or just win all the games you play.

I love the fact that ffg stood by their choice with the ID decision. You want to not worry about the ID factor you and your opponent don't have to agree to one. Or just win all the games you play.

The top 8 didn't win ALL their games, and we all know they didn't win their last round of swiss...so what you meant to say is winning early is more important than winning later rounds of swiss.

How convenient...so when the best players have to play the other best players...they don't have to actual play....yeah, that makes a ton of sense.

I love the fact that ffg stood by their choice with the ID decision. You want to not worry about the ID factor you and your opponent don't have to agree to one. Or just win all the games you play.

The top 8 didn't win ALL their games, and we all know they didn't win their last round of swiss...so what you meant to say is winning early is more important than winning later rounds of swiss.

How convenient...so when the best players have to play the other best players...they don't have to actual play....yeah, that makes a ton of sense.

Don't forget a couple had 1st round byes and didn't play that round either.

I suspected this response...if it was anyone other than the top players from NOVA FFG may have responded differently

Bold statement. I'd be lying if I said this hadn't crossed my mind as well.

Sigh. Not what I was hoping to see.

"We made a bad decision, and this is why it is correct".

Basically doubling down and compounding the error. If this is truly their stance, I think things will only get worse.

It just means you will see less players who play for fun vs those who play to win at x-wing tournements.

If playing for fun and playing to win are two different things, then why do the "for fun" players care about IDs? IDs only matter for winning. If you only care about having fun, play all your matches and have a ball.

I suspected this response...if it was anyone other than the top players from NOVA FFG may have responded differently

Bold statement. I'd be lying if I said this hadn't crossed my mind as well.

Makes me feel less bad about probably selling my stuff

May avoid ffg games altogether.

******* crock of bull

The biggest problem with this statement (if it's actually true) is that FOUR SEPARATE tables of 8 competitors do not all decide to draw and call for a TO without there being talk between tables prior to the call to a TO.

Period.

There was collusion between the tables to decide to ALL do the same thing and then a TO was called simply to verify. The Tournament Regulations as recently changed to allow IDs was specific that the two players at a single table would call a TO at the very hint of one of them bringing up the possibility of taking a draw intentionally. The fact that four tables and 8 players ALL at the SAME TIME came up with the idea to take a draw is too coincidental. There was obviously under the breath talk between tables that it would benefit them ALL to ALL do it.

THAT SAID, I do understand why the intentional draw was added to the tournament regulations. I don't agree with it. But I understand. Unfortunately when 4 tables and 8 players all decide to do it, then any semblance of collusion and rigging has already been compromised.

And the worst part is. I LIKE how the tournament is structured. I like the point system. I like the 5 for wins, 3 for modified, 1 for draw, and 0 for loss... I like the MOV structure for tie breaks. I like the half point large ships. I like it all.

I also am a season ticket holder for a MLS team and I am a USSF Grade 7 and college soccer referee. I have no issue with 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw, and 0 for a loss. It works. AND I like the away goals rule in home and away matchups.

But I would have a major issue with any PRO team intentionally deciding to draw a game with their opponent. Secretly or not. In front of a neutral governing party or not.