Was he DQd or just given a game loss, which in the elimination rounds is equivalent to a DQ essentially?

Was he DQd or just given a game loss, which in the elimination rounds is equivalent to a DQ essentially?

Where in the rules does it provide for a "Game Loss" option that can be imposed on the player?

I can't find anywhere in the rules where a TO can force a game loss, or win for that matter.

The only thing mentioned is a DQ(remove player from tournament) at the discretion of the TO for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Losing 3 minutes left to final salvo is sad. At least for viewers like me who watched the whole final length skirmish (the last 45min of that Miranda vs Poe)

Losing 3 minutes left to final salvo is sad. At least for viewers like me who watched the whole final length skirmish (the last 45min of that Miranda vs Poe)

Final Salvo favoured the Dash/Poe build anyway.

Losing 3 minutes left to final salvo is sad. At least for viewers like me who watched the whole final length skirmish (the last 45min of that Miranda vs Poe)

Final Salvo favoured the Dash/Poe build anyway.

That is true, but still better chance for miranda than in play

Dash/Poe won, eh?

Well, if Dash is back...

/dusts off Aggressors

"Hello VI, my old friend. Time to go to work again."

Was he DQd or just given a game loss, which in the elimination rounds is equivalent to a DQ essentially?

Where in the rules does it provide for a "Game Loss" option that can be imposed on the player?

I can't find anywhere in the rules where a TO can force a game loss, or win for that matter.

The only thing mentioned is a DQ(remove player from tournament) at the discretion of the TO for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Are you suggesting that there is no remedy available to TOs between do nothing and DQ? Despite both the untenable nature ofor that situation and the fact that FFG awards game losses in events they personally run.

I'm still struggling with the food thing, what kinda low rent hobble are they running when there isn't even a bowl of cheesy wotsits...

Was he DQd or just given a game loss, which in the elimination rounds is equivalent to a DQ essentially?

Where in the rules does it provide for a "Game Loss" option that can be imposed on the player?

I can't find anywhere in the rules where a TO can force a game loss, or win for that matter.

The only thing mentioned is a DQ(remove player from tournament) at the discretion of the TO for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Are you suggesting that there is no remedy available to TOs between do nothing and DQ? Despite both the untenable nature ofor that situation and the fact that FFG awards game losses in events they personally run.

We are only talking about X-wing and I'm not aware of any losses being given or the reasoning why.

TO's are there to provide rules calls,etc and settle disputes according to the rules. Most negative player behaviour falls under unsportsmanlike conduct which then allows for ejection from the tournament which is essentially a DQ.

The player in question here:

(a) - did not misrepresent his squad - he was on the stream multiple times and had and used mangler in all of his games.

(b) - his points written for his squad was 100 and that was the total INCLUDING mangler. He forgot to record mangler cannon but counted the points for it.

© - neither of the above 2 points offered any kind of advantage that the current tournament rules mention for this error.

There was no reason to do anything to this player other than to "write in the missing mangler cannon upgrade" on his sheet like the rules state.

I don't see any circumstances where a loss should be forced. Nowhere in the tournament rules is that written when determining who won or lost the match. You can go check it again if you like but I went over it multiple times today in light of what happened.

FFG may not have wanted to DQ anyone but they shouldn't be giving out losses when the rules don't provide for that. If you are caught cheating you should be DQ'd.

Under what scenario would a loss be appropriate and not a DQ? If their behaviour is questionable they should be warned and then ejected.

It's unfortunate what happened, but I think that more than anything it highlights the need for FFG to produce a concrete set of floor rules. There is only vague information on what to do if someone misrepresents their squad. Or on slow play. Or what do you do if someone picks up the wrong dial and now they know your move? These questions leave TOs in a tough spot, and the TO in Milwaukee made a judgement call while in a tough position. He can't assess intent. He didn't watch every game with the other player, to ensure the squad used was consistent. And beyond that call, I think the guys at Barrister Games ran a seriously great tournament.

It's unfortunate what happened, but I think that more than anything it highlights the need for FFG to produce a concrete set of floor rules. There is only vague information on what to do if someone misrepresents their squad. Or on slow play. Or what do you do if someone picks up the wrong dial and now they know your move? These questions leave TOs in a tough spot, and the TO in Milwaukee made a judgement call while in a tough position. He can't assess intent. He didn't watch every game with the other player, to ensure the squad used was consistent. And beyond that call, I think the guys at Barrister Games ran a seriously great tournament.

While I completely understand the difficulty of being the TO in this situation, I think it's worth learning from. After the TO discussed it in chat, I think there are some things to take away at this point:

1. I think the rules are pretty clear in this case: Amend the squad list. If it's possible the player was gaining an advantage from it not being listed, further investigation could be called for. It should be noted that the TO didn't actually believe that cheating occurred here.

2. The call for the loss/DQ was made almost immediately after finding the issue and with the old rules in mind (the TO explained this in chat). It could certainly have been considered longer and at least let the game play out while. This would allow TOs to further investigate the rules as well as check to see if there had been attempted cheating (which again, it seems there was no evidence for it and that wasn't even part of the TOs decision).

I agree that I want FFG to be clearer with floor rules, but I don't think this was a case where there was much ambiguity.

It's unfortunate what happened, but I think that more than anything it highlights the need for FFG to produce a concrete set of floor rules. There is only vague information on what to do if someone misrepresents their squad. Or on slow play. Or what do you do if someone picks up the wrong dial and now they know your move? These questions leave TOs in a tough spot, and the TO in Milwaukee made a judgement call while in a tough position. He can't assess intent. He didn't watch every game with the other player, to ensure the squad used was consistent. And beyond that call, I think the guys at Barrister Games ran a seriously great tournament.

While I completely understand the difficulty of being the TO in this situation, I think it's worth learning from. After the TO discussed it in chat, I think there are some things to take away at this point:

1. I think the rules are pretty clear in this case: Amend the squad list. If it's possible the player was gaining an advantage from it not being listed, further investigation could be called for. It should be noted that the TO didn't actually believe that cheating occurred here.

2. The call for the loss/DQ was made almost immediately after finding the issue and with the old rules in mind (the TO explained this in chat). It could certainly have been considered longer and at least let the game play out while. This would allow TOs to further investigate the rules as well as check to see if there had been attempted cheating (which again, it seems there was no evidence for it and that wasn't even part of the TOs decision).

I agree that I want FFG to be clearer with floor rules, but I don't think this was a case where there was much ambiguity.

Being ignorant of the current rules is no excuse. If you are going to TO then you need to make sure you know the rules especially for a regional. There is no ambiguity in the ruling in the tournament rules document where the squad list is concerned. Under no circumstances should this player have been ejected or whatever resulting in him leaving the tournament.

Sucks that the DQ/Round Loss in the Top 16 is the only thing that's going to be remembered about the Milwaukee Regionals.

There was a lot of cool games and cool lists abound in the tournament. New stuff from Heroes of the Resistance felt like it was getting a strong showing.

Player disqualified in Top 16. Mangler Cannon was not on his squad sheet.

For future reference, it sounds like the tourney document says to handle it differently:

If a leader discovers a player’s squad list missing

appropriate information, he or she should find that player

immediately and update the squad list based on the cardsthe player is using. If this would result in a significant and

potentially advantageous change, the leader should consider

investigating for possible cheating.

If we dont know any details of the incident we should refrain from telling people how it should be handled and trust the organizers judgement.

Here's why we need to be concerned:

-The TOs did not have the current rules on hand, nor were they familiar with them.

-They admitted to spending no more than 5 minutes searching for the new rules before deciding to give up on finding them.

-They then issued a ruling that they thought to be correct, but was in fact not correct.

-When shown that the rules for the scenario in question clearly did not call for a game loss (none of the opponents of said player reported cheating, to our knowledge. This could be inaccurate, but I would be very surprised. Cody is a great guy.) the TOs would not make any attempt to rectify the situation or admit any mistake.

I understand that mistakes happen. I understand calls are hard. You want to protect players from any cheaters, and you have to apply rules fairly and evenly, by the book.

Taken individually, most of the above points are understandable mistakes that can be forgiven as long as the time is taken to apply the correct ruling in the end, or at least offer a serious apology to the player who was incorrectly given a game loss in this scenario. None of this has happened, there was no interest from the TOs in rectifying the situation, only in defending themselves.

I have the impression that admitting their own fault is harder for them than sending a player home. When that player drove 5 hours to play in your regional, I'm disappointed that 5 minutes was too long to search for the correct ruling. I'm disappointed that no effort was made to rectify the situation after the incorrect ruling was applied, or at least to offer an apology and compensation.

This event has tarnished what was a great weekend for many players. As things stand right now, I will not be returning to a BGB regional. A very serious and respectful apology (not excuses or justification for their mistakes, I've heard enough of those.) might change my mind, we'll see.

EDIT: I forgot to add that yes, I certainly understand that the list was written incorrectly and that is a fault on the player that shouldn't be glossed over. However, there are outlined rules for that situation that were applied incorrectly.

Also to clarify, it was a game loss ruling, not a DQ. Functionally the same thing, but it is relevant to the conversation and seems to not be understood by everyone.

what surprises me most is that at no point have we heard that the player was attempting to be his own advocate. The player could easily have pulled up that rule in question as well as a judge. yes it was the judges call but its your job as a player to speak up and defend yourself as well.

This was a case of the judge not choosing to do the correct action and the player letting it happen. The TO seemed like an incredibly chill guy and I have no doubt that he would be open to being shown the rules.

Player disqualified in Top 16. Mangler Cannon was not on his squad sheet.

For future reference, it sounds like the tourney document says to handle it differently: If a leader discovers a player’s squad list missing

appropriate information, he or she should find that player

immediately and update the squad list based on the cardsthe player is using. If this would result in a significant and

potentially advantageous change, the leader should consider

investigating for possible cheating.

If we dont know any details of the incident we should refrain from telling people how it should be handled and trust the organizers judgement.

Alex has gotten no details wrong here. I was present for the situation.

Here's why we need to be concerned:

-The TOs did not have the current rules on hand, nor were they familiar with them.

-They admitted to spending no more than 5 minutes searching for the new rules before deciding to give up on finding them.

-They then issued a ruling that they thought to be correct, but was in fact not correct.

-When shown that the rules for the scenario in question clearly did not call for a game loss (none of the opponents of said player reported cheating, to our knowledge. This could be inaccurate, but I would be very surprised. Cody is a great guy.) the TOs would not make any attempt to rectify the situation or admit any mistake.

I understand that mistakes happen. I understand calls are hard. You want to protect players from any cheaters, and you have to apply rules fairly and evenly, by the book.

Taken individually, most of the above points are understandable mistakes that can be forgiven as long as the time is taken to apply the correct ruling in the end, or at least offer a serious apology to the player who was incorrectly given a game loss in this scenario. None of this has happened, there was no interest from the TOs in rectifying the situation, only in defending themselves.

I have the impression that admitting their own fault is harder for them than sending a player home. When that player drove 5 hours to play in your regional, I'm disappointed that 5 minutes was too long to search for the correct ruling. I'm disappointed that no effort was made to rectify the situation after the incorrect ruling was applied, or at least to offer an apology and compensation.

This event has tarnished what was a great weekend for many players. As things stand right now, I will not be returning to a BGB regional. A very serious and respectful apology (not excuses or justification for their mistakes, I've heard enough of those.) might change my mind, we'll see.

EDIT: I forgot to add that yes, I certainly understand that the list was written incorrectly and that is a fault on the player that shouldn't be glossed over. However, there are outlined rules for that situation that were applied incorrectly.

Also to clarify, it was a game loss ruling, not a DQ. Functionally the same thing, but it is relevant to the conversation and seems to not be understood by everyone.

I know it was a problem that the player didn't fill it out, but who looked over the lists to make sure it worked as well. That is just as much the T.O.s fault as well.

what surprises me most is that at no point have we heard that the player was attempting to be his own advocate. The player could easily have pulled up that rule in question as well as a judge. yes it was the judges call but its your job as a player to speak up and defend yourself as well.

This was a case of the judge not choosing to do the correct action and the player letting it happen. The TO seemed like an incredibly chill guy and I have no doubt that he would be open to being shown the rules.

Well, the player in question is a super nice, quiet, and relatively reserved young player. I'm not sure how much he questioned things, but from the reaction of other people that I know followed up and his responses in the twitch feed to questions, the judge was not very willing to admit a mistake (though at least he was willing to answer questions).

what surprises me most is that at no point have we heard that the player was attempting to be his own advocate. The player could easily have pulled up that rule in question as well as a judge. yes it was the judges call but its your job as a player to speak up and defend yourself as well.

This was a case of the judge not choosing to do the correct action and the player letting it happen. The TO seemed like an incredibly chill guy and I have no doubt that he would be open to being shown the rules.

Well, the player in question is a super nice, quiet, and relatively reserved young player. I'm not sure how much he questioned things, but from the reaction of other people that I know followed up and his responses in the twitch feed to questions, the judge was not very willing to admit a mistake (though at least he was willing to answer questions).

Right, but allowing yourself to get walked on doesnt help the situation at all.

Also there is a big difference from talking to the TO as part of the call, and being yet another player saying that he was wrong, especially after the call was made.

what surprises me most is that at no point have we heard that the player was attempting to be his own advocate. The player could easily have pulled up that rule in question as well as a judge. yes it was the judges call but its your job as a player to speak up and defend yourself as well.

This was a case of the judge not choosing to do the correct action and the player letting it happen. The TO seemed like an incredibly chill guy and I have no doubt that he would be open to being shown the rules.

Well, the player in question is a super nice, quiet, and relatively reserved young player. I'm not sure how much he questioned things, but from the reaction of other people that I know followed up and his responses in the twitch feed to questions, the judge was not very willing to admit a mistake (though at least he was willing to answer questions).

Right, but allowing yourself to get walked on doesnt help the situation at all.

Also there is a big difference from talking to the TO as part of the call, and being yet another player saying that he was wrong, especially after the call was made.

As I know the TO I don't want to take sides in this as I don't really know the details.

I will note though that shortly after turning in my squad list on Saturday I had some points backwards on one ship. I had tansarii listed at 18 instead of 17 and mangler listed at 3 instead of 4. When I went back to correct it he said don't worry about it as long as I'm not going over 100.

I realize that's not the same as forgetting to list an upgrade completely but I hope that wouldn't have DQ me if I had made the cut.

As I know the TO I don't want to take sides in this as I don't really know the details.

I will note though that shortly after turning in my squad list on Saturday I had some points backwards on one ship. I had tansarii listed at 18 instead of 17 and mangler listed at 3 instead of 4. When I went back to correct it he said don't worry about it as long as I'm not going over 100.

I realize that's not the same as forgetting to list an upgrade completely but I hope that wouldn't have DQ me if I had made the cut.

That right there shows some bias towards local players as your situation is essentially the same as his except he wasn't a "local". neither of you gained an advantage but you both had incorrect squad sheets.

I wasn't at the event and am not associated with any of the players. I'm from a different country altogether but I watched in horror on the twitch feed as it happened and tried to get the store to right their wrong through chat. They kept refusing to admit it was wrong and just kept saying it was a judgement call.

Arguing with a TO is never a recommended activity.

I had a bad call against me in a Store Championship where the TO allowed my opponent to change his 2 bank to a 1 hard on a Phantom with Navigator and kept it from flying off the board. I knew I was right but he was the TO and that was that.

As I know the TO I don't want to take sides in this as I don't really know the details.

I will note though that shortly after turning in my squad list on Saturday I had some points backwards on one ship. I had tansarii listed at 18 instead of 17 and mangler listed at 3 instead of 4. When I went back to correct it he said don't worry about it as long as I'm not going over 100.

I realize that's not the same as forgetting to list an upgrade completely but I hope that wouldn't have DQ me if I had made the cut.

And how would you have felt if you had made the cut and was disqualified for a typo? I know how I would feel, and I bet it's the same as many here....

A player should get at least a game loss for playing with a squadron that wasn't exactly the same as the one they registered. You require players to submit lists to remove the possibility that they could change things round to round. Leaving off an upgrade and having an unaccounted for 3 points is reintroducing that issue. It is a situation that can be abused. That no one is coming forward to say the player used a different upgrade round to round is likely the reason it wasn't a DQ (and probable suspension from FFG) but that doesn't mean it isn't an error by the player that should have repercussions.

If a judge spot checked a damage deck mid round and found it to be incorrect, but likely not intentionally manipulated, that player is likely going to take a game loss for the illegal damage deck. You're suppose to bring a legal damage deck, there should be consequences when you don't.

You're suppose to play the squad you registered, and there should be consequences if you don't.

As I know the TO I don't want to take sides in this as I don't really know the details.

I will note though that shortly after turning in my squad list on Saturday I had some points backwards on one ship. I had tansarii listed at 18 instead of 17 and mangler listed at 3 instead of 4. When I went back to correct it he said don't worry about it as long as I'm not going over 100.

I realize that's not the same as forgetting to list an upgrade completely but I hope that wouldn't have DQ me if I had made the cut.

And how would you have felt if you had made the cut and was disqualified for a typo? I know how I would feel, and I bet it's the same as many here....

sh*tty would be the answer. But since the mistake is entirely on me, I'd have no where to direct my ire but inwards.

That no one is coming forward to say the player used a different upgrade round to round is likely the reason it wasn't a DQ (and probable suspension from FFG) .

Or, it wasn't a DQ because the rules said it shouldn't have been... and you are going to try to argue that it would've been a probable suspension because of a bookkeeping error? are you high?