2 hours ago, SOTL said:

Big boy pants must be in short supply.

I mean it is a game with little plastic ships, but beyond that, I think that in situations like this, a case could be made that the big boy pants is not getting hung up on a technicality that has no effect on games that haven't been played yet.

I would like to point out, though, as it is kinda funny. One of the guys who's list didn't have it's configurations, actually went 3-0-1, the 1 is a skin which in the outryder cup means that he won/lost by less than 24 MoV. Also, the ruling was agreed up by all the team captains, so everyone had to abide.

Here is what happened.

Lists were turned in on 1/4, the event was on 1/12. On 1/11 one of the teams wanted to switch out Composure for Trick shot in one of their lists. They said it was an oversight. But, it was 7 days after the lists had been turned in. There was much discussion, but the rules don't allow for that sort of change. So, the team was told they must play with the list as is, with Composure.

Hours later that same team pointed out that the Pittsburgh team (my team) did not have the configurations on their Xwings or Uwings (in what felt like some weird gotcha revenge for the earlier decision). The mistake was completely mine. As the Pittsburgh Captain I was responsible to turn in the lists. It was a simple oversight on my part. I had 24 lists to submit, plus many other things to account for (hotels, car rentals, etc) so it was just missed. Being that I was not only the Pittsburgh team captain, but also the main organizer for OutRyder I CHOSE not to even ask the other captains to allow us to use the configurations. We'd set the standard earlier in the day, and as the captain of my team I chose to accept the consequences of my oversight. Is there a difference between changing a talent and adding a 0 point configuration, of course there is. But, I was more interested in setting the precedent that lists aren't changed after they are submitted. There is a good deal of pairing strategy that goes into the event and seeing the lists ahead of time caused teams to make strategies based on what was seen. Do I think that changing Composure for Trickshot or adding 0 point configurations would have made any real effect on what teams had planned,? Of course not. However, the standard had been set, and if we'd allowed the above changes, what happens at the next event, or the one after? I'm pretty sure the other captains would have allowed us to use the configurations, but I was more interested on just setting the example that you shouldn't ask to make changes.

Our player still scored all of his points without the configurations on his ship.

Bottom line is that the configurations were left off because they weren't on the submitted lists due to my oversight. And, I never asked for us to be allowed to use the configurations, so no TO (or concensus of captains) ever made a ruling on way or another.

7 hours ago, kris40k said:

The last world champ was playing with a ion bomb on the wrong ship because his friend screwed up his list when submitting it and people let it slide. This was at the World Championship.

Someone being a stickler about missing a standard 0 pts. configuration and not allowing it?

The Dude said it best .

That's actually an incorrect reference. The list was right all along, but the FFG stream overlay was incorrect causing the review to occur. It was thought to be a list building error, but that didn't end up being the case.

7 hours ago, Force Majeure said:

My understanding is that one team submitted an old list in error and then was not allowed to update after the deadline and after all the other team captains conferred.

Later, the team with that submitted the old list pointed out that a few lists from other teams didn't include the configurations on their lists. Since the collective group ruled that the list couldn't be updated with the first team, they had to stand by their ruling of not updating ANYONE's even if that meant no configurations.

I want to say it was commented "on air" during the live stream of the event, but I'm not 100 percent certain. I just remember shaking my head at the matter when I learned about it.

🤣 🤣 🤣

As a European, this hilarity has to have occurred at a US event, right?

1 hour ago, Rinehart said:

Here is what happened.

Lists were turned in on 1/4, the event was on 1/12. On 1/11 one of the teams wanted to switch out Composure for Trick shot in one of their lists. They said it was an oversight. But, it was 7 days after the lists had been turned in. There was much discussion, but the rules don't allow for that sort of change. So, the team was told they must play with the list as is, with Composure.

Hours later that same team pointed out that the Pittsburgh team (my team) did not have the configurations on their Xwings or Uwings (in what felt like some weird gotcha revenge for the earlier decision). The mistake was completely mine. As the Pittsburgh Captain I was responsible to turn in the lists. It was a simple oversight on my part. I had 24 lists to submit, plus many other things to account for (hotels, car rentals, etc) so it was just missed. Being that I was not only the Pittsburgh team captain, but also the main organizer for OutRyder I CHOSE not to even ask the  other captains to allow us to use the configurations. We'd set the standard earlier in the day, and as the captain of my team I chose to accept the consequences of my oversight. Is there a difference between changing a talent and adding a 0 point configuration, of course there is. But, I was more interested in setting the precedent that lists aren't changed after they are submitted. There is a good deal of pairing strategy that goes into the event and seeing the lists ahead of time caused teams to make strategies based on what was seen. Do I think that changing Composure for Trickshot or adding 0 point configurations would have made any real effect on what teams had planned,? Of course not. However, the standard had been set, and if we'd allowed the above changes, what happens at the next event, or the one after? I'm pretty sure the other captains would have allowed us to use the configurations, but I was more interested on just setting the example that you shouldn't ask to make changes.

Our player still scored all of his points without the configurations on his ship.

Bottom line is that the configurations were left off because they weren't on the submitted lists due to my oversight. And, I never asked for us to be allowed to use the configurations, so no TO (or concensus of captains) ever made a ruling on way or another.

So to summarize, you wanted to set precedent for not correcting 100% obvious form-filling mistakes, while simultainously forcing a player to play a partially crippled list (kudos to him for pulling it off anyway, but I highly doubt he was happy about it).

Can we please stop forgetting we're pushing plastic toys around to have fun ?

Many participants are names that are known even to me, and people who know each other. Or at least the degree of separation is very small. So chances are good that this did not lead to bad blood. In that case it is no big deal. Annoying, but just a bit.

In the end it's not the mistake of the TO. But it's his problem and his decision here was completely understandable, even if a bit self-crippling for the sake of a good vibe.

Those calling out the missing configuration... I hope they are ashamed of themselves because that is just petty.

On 1/19/2019 at 6:50 PM, Elavion said:

So to summarize, you wanted to set precedent for not correcting 100% obvious form-filling mistakes, while simultainously forcing a player to play a partially crippled list (kudos to him for pulling it off anyway, but I highly doubt he was happy about it).

Can we please stop forgetting we're pushing plastic toys around to have fun ?

I am thinking there are a lot of people that don’t play or understand higher tier competition. @Rinehart ensured everyone at the tournament played under the same rules and guidelines. He even stated that the cards were not game breaking and may not have made a big difference. What he did ensure though that everyone that played, played with the lists submitted a week earlier. That there was a level playing field.

I don’t care if you understand or accept it, but all players being treated the same is important as a TO. It rules out favouritism and any calls of unfair play. This is the reason why lists are submitted early, so that lists cannot be changed, so it takes away advantage of list spying. I think what Rinehart did was commendable and showed good leadership.

16 minutes ago, Archangelspiv said:

I am thinking there are a lot of people that don’t play or understand higher tier competition. @Rinehart ensured everyone at the tournament played under the same rules and guidelines. He even stated that the cards were not game breaking and may not have made a big difference. What he did ensure though that everyone that played, played with the lists submitted a week earlier. That there was a level playing field.

I don’t care if you understand or accept it, but all players being treated the same is important as a TO. It rules out favouritism and any calls of unfair play. This is the reason why lists are submitted early, so that lists cannot be changed, so it takes away advantage of list spying. I think what Rinehart was commendable and showed good leadership.

This is exactly the problem. The TO's job is to ensure that an event is enjoyable (which usually overlaps with making it run smoothly and by the book) to as many participants as possible, not to enforce rules just for the sake of it. Noone would mind if they added the configs; instead he choose to send a player in with a crippled list. That it worked out alright in the end is irrelevant to the discussion, since it was an unexpected result.

P.S. Regarding "understanding higher tier competition", I've been to at least 6 major X-Wing tournaments and made top cuts at 3 of them; I've also been a judge at a major tournament (though for another game). So I belive I have a basic grasp on it.

And if there's one thing I've learned over those years, it's that the more laid back the event, the happier the players are, regardless of scale.

9 minutes ago, Elavion said:

Noone would mind if they added the configs; instead he choose to send a player in with a crippled list. That it worked out alright in the end is irrelevant to the discussion, since it was an unexpected result.

That someone decided to point out the Pittsburgh's teams mistake shows that this sentiment is not true.

Exchanging a talent is a small change. Additionally, they are right next to each other on the YASB but not on the official squadbuilder. I guess that the team used YASB internally and it really was a misclick. Depending on the ship, it could be as nonsensical as leaving out the configurations. Insisting on that was already a tough ruling, but it is understandable. Much, much more understandable than calling out the configurations. But the fact that the missing configurations were in the TOs group means that he couldn't make a ruling that appears to be different from the first one.

It's just a shi*ty situation.

26 minutes ago, Archangelspiv said:

That someone decided to point out the Pittsburgh's teams mistake shows that this sentiment is not true.

No, it shows that they found a mistake in their lists. Nothing more. That sometimes happens when you're, you know, preparing a strategy for an open lists tournament, which is occassionally preceded by looking at your own team's lists.

I suppose you're right in that my statement that "I know noone would mind" is wrong but so is yours- we don't know, we haven't asked the people that pointed it out. And neither did @Rinehart . Instead, he publicised a statement that sets them up as petty. Actually, that's exactly the kind of thing that having a "council of captains" should have helped resolve effortlessly.

The more I think about it, the more I'm beginning to wonder if he actually decided to not bring that up just to make them feel bad about bringing it up, at the expense of his own teammate. I guess we'll never know the truth.

Going by the "truth usually lies in the middle" rule, I would guess they wanted to get some spiteful joy out of pointing it out, but never meant for them to actually play without the S-foils. Would make it a wonderful example of escalation of miscommunication, if you ask me.

So, to clarify: the 'victims' in this case were actually also the supposed 'bad guys' and they're fine with it and the missing upgrades had no material impact on the outcome.

So it's just the usual professional complainers who are outraged. As per.

Thought so.

5 hours ago, Elavion said:

No, it shows that they found a mistake in their lists. Nothing more. That sometimes happens when you're, you know, preparing a strategy for an open lists tournament, which is occassionally preceded by looking at your own team's lists.

I suppose you're right in that my statement that "I know noone would mind" is wrong but so is yours- we don't know, we haven't asked the people that pointed it out. And neither did @Rinehart . Instead, he publicised a statement that sets them up as petty. Actually, that's exactly the kind of thing that having a "council of captains" should have helped resolve effortlessly.

The more I think about it, the more I'm beginning to wonder if he actually decided to not bring that up just to make them feel bad about bringing it up, at the expense of his own teammate. I guess we'll never know the truth.

Going by the "truth usually lies in the middle" rule, I would guess they wanted to get some spiteful joy out of pointing it out, but never meant for them to actually play without the S-foils. Would make it a wonderful example of escalation of miscommunication, if you ask me.

I’m really not sure you know what in the **** you are talking about.

The Composure/Trickshot mistake was not a misclick. That team submitted the wrong list. They said so. They originally wanted to do the failed boost into a rock to get a focus, but learned they couldn’t do that. At some point the list was changed internally for them, but regardless they submitted Composure. It was not a misclick.

The conversation and discussions regarding the request to change Composure to Trickshot lasted way longer than they should have. At any event where there is a list turn in deadline, you can’t make a change after that.

I decided not to push the issue with the configurations for the reasons I said. I had no intention of making anyone feel bad, or feel petty. I simply wanted to honor the standard that was set, and not reopen the discussion that was the Composure/Trickshot change. Don’t read into anything here man, what I wrote is what happened and that’s all that happened.

I was the primary voice against the Composure/Trickshot change. I didn’t actually care if they made the change, but I didn’t want to set a bad precedent. If they’d been allowed to make the change, what’s to stop another team from stating they they meant to put IGD crew on Boba instead of Perceptive Copilot? Or that the ion turret on Kavil is supposed to be a dorsal turret? If you allow all of or any of those changes you are creating problems for future events. If Composure hadn’t been allowed, but the configuration changes had, now you have a double standard. So, in OutRyder IX, some team wants to make a small change. They are told no, but then they argue that Pittsburgh had been allowed to add the configurations and the change they are requesting is no different. Maybe it would be or maybe it wouldn’t be, but now the captains all have to determine if the requested change is small enough to allow. That’s a nightmare. No matter how that’s decided some team(s) are going to feel super wronged. Neither I, nor anyone on my team, wanted to open that box for future events by asking for the configuration cards.

We all know how small and trivial adding the configuration cards are. I get it. But, it was less about that and more about protecting the event in the future. Nothing more, nothing less. Please stop assigning motives to people involved. You weren’t there, nor were you part of any of the rules discussions leading up the the event. I’ve tried to be as transparent as possible here, and I promise there is nothing more to see or read into.

I should be shocked that the “THIS IS A GAME FOR FUN, FLY CASUAL” crowd on this forum is the one threatening harassment and abuse over a volunteer TO attempting to enforce the rules of a plastic spaceship game. But... I’ve been on this forum long enough to know better.

39 minutes ago, Rinehart said:

The  Composure/Trickshot mistake was not a misclick. That team submitted the wrong list. They said so. They originally wanted to do the failed boost into a rock to get a focus, but learned they couldn’t do that. At some point the list was changed internally for them, but regardless th  ey submitted Composure. It was not a misclick. 

In that case the ruling is 100% fine. I get why you couldn't let the configuration be added.

I stand by my first comment: the only petty thing was to point out lack of configuration.

17 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

In that case the ruling is 100% fine. I get why you couldn't let the configuration be added.

I stand by my first comment: the only petty thing was to point out lack of configuration.

I think it was pointed out that Pittsburgh was missing the configuration out of irony more than something petty (even though it felt petty). The team that pointed it out never actually said Pittsburgh couldn’t use them, they just noted that they were missing. Pittsburgh decided not to ask for them or pursue the issue for the reasons stated above.

54 minutes ago, Rinehart said:

You weren’t there, nor were you part of any of the rules discussions leading up the the event.

I'd like to echo this part of the statement. All of the captains had a civil conversation and voted to uphold the rules set by the Outryder rules committee. At the event, everyone had fun. From my perspective, there was no ill will during the entire event from any side effected.

7 hours ago, Elavion said:

This is exactly the problem. The TO's job is to ensure that an event is enjoyable (which usually overlaps with making it run smoothly and by the book) to as many participants as possible, not to enforce rules just for the sake of it.

This premise is wrong for elite competition in any arena.

Your frame of reference is great for a casual event, but an event that aspires to be a premiere competition needs to enforce the rules.

3 hours ago, Rinehart said:

I think it was pointed out that Pittsburgh was missing the configuration out of irony more than something petty (even though it felt petty). The team that pointed it out never actually said Pittsburgh couldn’t use them, they just noted that they were missing. Pittsburgh decided not to ask for them or pursue the issue for the reasons stated above.

You know what. I'm sorry for commenting. In the end my opinion is both completely uninformed and irrelevant.

I still think you handled it well from what I read here. But that, too, is not exactly relevant.

I very much appreciate the rest of the story, @Rinehart . I understand your viewpoint.

However, I think the X-Wing competitive community has serious problems, and the decision here -- and the explanation for it -- plays into those problems.

"All that matters are the rules. It doesn't matter how far over the lines you are; it's all the same."

That's an ignorant, damaging attitude toward enforcement in X-Wing, just as it's an ignorant, damaging attitude in real life. It genuinely disturbs me that so many members of the X-Wing community simply do not seem capable of reasoning abstractly to draw distinctions that are real distinctions. Instead, "It's the rule" is used as a substitute for actual consideration and reasoning. There's enough of that in the real world, and it's disquieting to see it in a hobby that loves to go on and on about what a "great community" it has.

As much as X-Wing likes to think it has 'a great community' most of you are complete plums.

5 hours ago, WAC47 said:

I should be shocked that the “THIS IS A GAME FOR FUN, FLY CASUAL” crowd on this forum is the one threatening harassment and abuse over a volunteer TO attempting to enforce the rules of a plastic spaceship game. But... I’ve been on this forum long enough to know better.

One of the worst things to ever happen to this game was the "Fly Casual" mantra.

17 minutes ago, AceWing said:

One of the worst things to ever happen to this game was the "Fly Casual" mantra.

While I understand where you are coming from, just because norms will inevitably be used by jerks to justify being jerks doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have norms.

Fly casual as originally intended has done wonderful things to promote a fun, welcoming atmosphere in the real world communities of X-wing players. It’s one of the reasons I got into the game and ended up meeting so many great people through it.

The problem is when there’s an implied “or else” added to the end, and it’s used to justify the harassment of individuals, many of whom volunteer their time and energy to the building up of the community (whether that’s TOs, podcasters, streamers, devs, play testers or competitive players).

5 hours ago, Rinehart said:

We all know how small and trivial adding the configuration cards are. I get it. But, it was less about that and more about protecting the event in the future.

That's my point. You shouldn't be "protecting the event" from things like that.

If anything, the correct course of action would be to have the following rule at future events:

"If a list containing ships capable of equipping any of the following upgrades:
-Servomotor S-Foils

-Pivot Wings

-Grappling Struts

-Integrated S-Foils

(...)

is submitted without them, the players are allowed to add them to their list during the event."

Pro-player approach over pro-arbitrary rules, people.