I would much prefer all Armada tournaments to be simple double-elimination. No messy points and MVP, objectives become much more relevant instead of having to always play a super-aggressive build just to complete, big events don't take forever, and there would be no needed for trying to figure out how to handle drops and forfeits and byes.

Simple.

How is 10 rounds quick?

The issue is, will that player actually get disqualified? We don't have a judges guide but if people are being disqualified for not wanting to finish a horrible loss you may find more of a toxic tournament scene.

No, you'll have a smaller tournament scene. There is a difference.

Would you disqualify someone if they were going to lose 7-4 did not know that and conceded?

If not, why is there a double standard

I would much prefer all Armada tournaments to be simple double-elimination. No messy points and MVP, objectives become much more relevant instead of having to always play a super-aggressive build just to complete, big events don't take forever, and there would be no needed for trying to figure out how to handle drops and forfeits and byes.

Simple.

How is 10 rounds quick?

God's. . . The Las Vegas Open is. On squeezing 5 rounds into a league day. . . They start at 10am and end at 10 am (lunch breaks).

I brought that up because 10 rounds would be 2 days of that.

The issue is, will that player actually get disqualified? We don't have a judges guide but if people are being disqualified for not wanting to finish a horrible loss you may find more of a toxic tournament scene.

No, you'll have a smaller tournament scene. There is a difference.

It does matter though. If you disqualify someone, then they will feel alienated even if to them their decision was right.

Would you disqualify someone if they were going to lose 7-4 did not know that and conceded?

If not, why is there a double standard

No Double Standard.

The Standard is being applied to this person:

"I was going to lose really badly, and instead of playing the game out and respecting my opponent, I am going to throw a tantrum, complain, moan, and generally ruin the game for my opponent, because I hate it. Conceading and costing my opponent points, because I'm that much of Jerk."

There are many, many, many reasons to concede legally. Some days, it just happens.

But conceading to strip your opponent of points is gaming the system. Gaming the system is unsportsmanlike. Unsportsmanlike is bannable, as per FFG's code of conduct and universal games documents.

The issue is, will that player actually get disqualified? We don't have a judges guide but if people are being disqualified for not wanting to finish a horrible loss you may find more of a toxic tournament scene.

No, you'll have a smaller tournament scene. There is a difference.

It does matter though. If you disqualify someone, then they will feel alienated even if to them their decision was right.

Would you disqualify someone if they were going to lose 7-4 did not know that and conceded?

If not, why is there a double standard

No Double Standard.

The Standard is being applied to this person:

"I was going to lose really badly, and instead of playing the game out and respecting my opponent, I am going to throw a tantrum, complain, moan, and generally ruin the game for my opponent, because I hate it. Conceading and costing my opponent points, because I'm that much of Jerk."

There are many, many, many reasons to concede legally. Some days, it just happens.

But conceading to strip your opponent of points is gaming the system. Gaming the system is unsportsmanlike. Unsportsmanlike is bannable, as per FFG's code of conduct and universal games documents.

And you're still left with the facts that

1. You will not get TOs willing to DQ players for conceding to deny points, just as you did not get TOs willing to DQ players for conceding to grant points.

2. You mention legitimate concessions, which now have the capacity to hurt the party that is receiving that concession and has done nothing wrong. How can that be a fair thing?

Just absolute personal raw opinion here, which isn't going ot make me any friends:

Sorry. I guess I'm just of the opinion that the sort of person who is going to, for lack of a better term, throw a tantrum and concede mid-game because he's lost all enjoyment of the game - should walk. Walk away. Walk out of the store and walk home.

Games sometime suck.

If you're the sort of person who does this, I feel you should get that in check before you start playing, or you don't play. Because you're basically saying "You know what, there's a chance out there that I'm going to go and ruin someone elses game, and its going to be all my fault."

Don't ruin other people's games.

I'd rather have a 8 man tournament of people enjoying every game, come what may, then a 20 man tournament with people who wouldn't...

But that's me, raw and personal...

Why do you assume every mid-round concession is a tantrum? I mean seriously you've never seen a player reach across the table shake hands with his opponents and say "Oh man you kicked my ass, no point in playing out the last rounds, I can't survive". There is no point in vilifying someone giving up.

The issue is, will that player actually get disqualified? We don't have a judges guide but if people are being disqualified for not wanting to finish a horrible loss you may find more of a toxic tournament scene.

No, you'll have a smaller tournament scene. There is a difference.

It does matter though. If you disqualify someone, then they will feel alienated even if to them their decision was right.

Would you disqualify someone if they were going to lose 7-4 did not know that and conceded?

If not, why is there a double standard

No Double Standard.

The Standard is being applied to this person:

"I was going to lose really badly, and instead of playing the game out and respecting my opponent, I am going to throw a tantrum, complain, moan, and generally ruin the game for my opponent, because I hate it. Conceading and costing my opponent points, because I'm that much of Jerk."

There are many, many, many reasons to concede legally. Some days, it just happens.

But conceading to strip your opponent of points is gaming the system. Gaming the system is unsportsmanlike. Unsportsmanlike is bannable, as per FFG's code of conduct and universal games documents.

And you're still left with the facts that

1. You will not get TOs willing to DQ players for conceding to deny points, just as you did not get TOs willing to DQ players for conceding to grant points.

2. You mention legitimate concessions, which now have the capacity to hurt the party that is receiving that concession and has done nothing wrong. How can that be a fair thing?

Either way you do it there are going to be people who take legitimate issue with it. The old way, someone who even harmlessly concedes due to real life issues and might've looked like they were gonna beat the crap out of their opponent would hand their opponent a 10-0 win. I think FFG probably split the uprights on this one intentionally, since someone who gets 8 tournament points is better off than most, but also has a low MoV.

Being taken out of context and devil's advocated! Oh My, I really made a mistake here, Didn't I?


I'm talking about a specific set of contexts and attitudes. It shouldn't be universally applied.

I don't think I stated that I assume every mid-round Concession is a Tantrum, did I? But I can understand how it was misconstrued... Try to let me explain before any villification.

No, I was referring to a specific circumstance... Its the attitude of it.

But just having someone throw a tantrum and quit on me, all but throwing items on the floor as they did so... That's what I'm penalising.

There are many legitimate ways. I am not stating, at all, that every concession is a tantrum. I'm just saying that I am for penalising the person who is doing this wantonly, aggressively, and with intent of damaging an opponents game and score.

I am all for sportsmanship. "Oh man, you kicked my ass, I'm not coming back from that...." That's okay. its done with a smile. I'm not penalising that.

The guy who's all but table-flipping... Or in my case, actually attempting to table flip... Get out.

... Besides....

If someone else came into my league and was actually doing something like this...

... I'd probably Cry.

(Seriously)

... Besides....

If someone else came into my league and was actually doing something like this...

... I'd probably Cry.

(Seriously)

Well, what you're talking about is a bit extreme.

I can attest to the fact that I have not seen Lyraeus actually flip any tables.

Realistically the only way you should concede is if you have to leave the building and not come back....if you can't handle getting your but kicked, then don't play the game. Sure in a tournament I have had a person reach across the table and say I won. But I then told them I want to play it out for MOV. I told them to starting running away and lets finish the last couple rounds. If they aren't willing to do that then they should just leave for the day. I have also been on the receiving end of course...then it becomes points denial. (and actually once, managed to pull a win out once cause he got too aggressive trying to finish me off)

Hmm, don't know about that Mogrok; I know a few players across several systems who had to step out for a round to pick up their kids from school, pop back to their house for medication, etc, and came back well before the next round started. It's not extremely common but it's happened enough that I don't remotely question it anymore.

The notion that someone wouldn't accept a player concession for any reason is just... well it's mind boggling to be frank. Sure, it might be abusable, but the idea of 'no, you have to endure everything I say for as long as I say, because I deserve to win big!' borders on the absurd. Again, I've had a player not accept me conceding a game in a friendly match so I may be jaded (I conceded as it was 10 minutes after the store was scheduled to close, he wanted to start and finish his turn).

That doesn't mean I disagree with the spirit opposing those gamey 'other cases'. The most unfun game of Armada I've played are the ones where the opponent outright says, "yeah, I've lost. I've just lost." and proceed to mope and question every decision you make. But I've never dealt with someone intentionally gaming the system. So, if you don't have some extreme extenuating circumstances or your opponent is perfectly amiable, then just finish the round. This goes double for tournament games where even on the ropes, you can have a fun fists up, foot down, slugging match even if you still end up with a 1-10 result.

I would much prefer all Armada tournaments to be simple double-elimination. No messy points and MVP, objectives become much more relevant instead of having to always play a super-aggressive build just to complete, big events don't take forever, and there would be no needed for trying to figure out how to handle drops and forfeits and byes.

Simple.

How is 10 rounds quick?

God's. . . The Las Vegas Open is. On squeezing 5 rounds into a league day. . . They start at 10am and end at 10 am (lunch breaks).

I brought that up because 10 rounds would be 2 days of that.

Double elimination is tough with long games. Without spreading over multiple days, you would need to run single elimination brackets. It would have it's own quirks on final standings, but be pretty straightforward scoring and eliminate any concession problems. I haven't heard that LVO is elimination brackets, I'll check with the TO.

Just absolute personal raw opinion here, which isn't going ot make me any friends:

Sorry. I guess I'm just of the opinion that the sort of person who is going to, for lack of a better term, throw a tantrum and concede mid-game because he's lost all enjoyment of the game - should walk. Walk away. Walk out of the store and walk home.

Games sometime suck.

If you're the sort of person who does this, I feel you should get that in check before you start playing, or you don't play. Because you're basically saying "You know what, there's a chance out there that I'm going to go and ruin someone elses game, and its going to be all my fault."

Don't ruin other people's games.

I'd rather have a 8 man tournament of people enjoying every game, come what may, then a 20 man tournament with people who wouldn't...

But that's me, raw and personal...

Why do you assume every mid-round concession is a tantrum? I mean seriously you've never seen a player reach across the table shake hands with his opponents and say "Oh man you kicked my ass, no point in playing out the last rounds, I can't survive". There is no point in vilifying someone giving up.

There are times when a person just recognizes that they were beaten. Some people want to finish the game fast St that point so that they have more time to reflect on what went on and to focus their minds on the next battle.

... Besides....

If someone else came into my league and was actually doing something like this...

... I'd probably Cry.

(Seriously)

Well, what you're talking about is a bit extreme.

I can attest to the fact that I have not seen Lyraeus actually flip any tables.

I am more afraid of someone coming to play me because it is a tournament and them just conceding without touching the table.

(and actually once, managed to pull a win out once cause he got too aggressive trying to finish me off)

Yeah yeah... we all know who you're talking about here!

Did I miss it or did they take out the "you beat them" tiebreaker and reverted it to straight MOV?

Did I miss it or did they take out the "you beat them" tiebreaker and reverted it to straight MOV?

Yah it isn't there anymore....not that their software used it anyways otherwise the last tournament I was in would have prob been different.

I don't see this as being a huge issue. I think the majority of concessions would happen due to A) some real-world issue calling the person away, or B) personality clashes. In either of those cases, I think you'll find an 8-0 concession to be acceptable to the winning party. If it's the first example, what're the chances that an emergency comes up only after you've reached a point in the game where you're guaranteed to lose by more than an 8-3 margin? In the second, I would imagine that the concession would come up early enough in the game that a 220+ MoV wouldn't already be guaranteed. Concessions to cheat your opponent on points will be a rare occurrence. If people didn't readily concede when it was 10-0 to spare themselves having to play out the rest of the game, then I doubt they're going to concede in a similar situation with the spiteful addition of robbing points.

Now, as someone who has TO'd many events, I would give any concession a good amount of scrutiny. If it's my first example from above, hey, it's a game and real life is more important. And if they concede and manage to get back before the final rounds, I would let them re-enter. After all, the likelihood of them coming back from a zero point loss is pretty slim, and it saves someone else from sitting out a round. In any other situation, I'm going to give it a lot of thought. First and foremost, what does the game look like? If it's very early on and the conceding party just can't stand their opponent, let them concede. There's no reason to make anyone miserable. If it's mid-game, and the person feels like they're going to get crushed, I'd really encourage them to continue playing. At the very least, flip command dials and try to fly away. Don't stress the outcome of the game and just rush through it. After all, everyone showed up to play X rounds, and they'd be robbing their opponent of it. This assumes, of course, that their opponent is opposed to the idea of ending the game already.

Now if the game is already in 9-2 or 10-1 territory, or is inevitably about to be, then we're going to have a problem. And I'm talking extreme situations. Like the person trying to concede has a CR90 with one hull and no shields sitting point blank to the front end of an ISD and their opponent is going first. If it's painfully obvious that you're conceding to deny points, then you have two choices: A) be an adult and finish the game, or B) pack it up and concede any remaining rounds as well. You came to this event knowing full well that getting tabled is a distinct possibility. Your opponent came with that same knowledge. You are not going to deny your opponent their just rewards because your delicate pride can't handle getting your fleet wiped out. You can finish the game or get pulled from the tournament and reported, and let FFG decide what to do.

And this last example I don't see happening. I've played 40k tournaments for years, where you see serious WAAC d-bags (the "it's not cheating if you don't get caught" types) crushing fluffbunnies and gloating the entire game, and even then I never saw people concede games. Besides, as others have said, Armada can swing so quickly. There have been many times that I thought I was on the way to a 10-0 victory only to squeak by or lose, and other times where I thought I was headed for a tabling only to manage a minor loss or even a win. Hell, I beat the same local player twice by having a single ship alive at the end of Round Six with a single hull point. The first time won me a league, the second a tournament. This is a game unlike any other I've played before. And that's precisely what I'd tell someone who's trying to throw in the towel because they've already defeated themselves in their own minds.

Also, did anyone else notice that MoV used to be first tie breaker, then it was Head-to-Head, now it's MoV again and HtH is gone completely?

Such a strange discussion on conceding. Though, my standard for concession comes from go, where it's disrespectful to your opponent to continue playing once you've lost beyond a reasonable doubt. Not really any margin of victory in go.

Which itself is wrapped up in the intelligence and honor system of the society that produced 'go' as it is...

As you say, there is no margin of victory. It is either win or lose. So when one or the other happens, you should know it, and see it... And respect your opponent enough to admit it, as you say.

Which is, unfortunately, completely inapplicable to the Armada situation of having Margins of Victory