Jump to content

Sportsmanship


ProximoCoal

Recommended Posts

sportsmanship prize?

wouldnt add it to the total score as people up or down people on sportsmanship competitively.

would say for the most part the malifaux community is generally very sporting and a good place to be (compared to other games).

we all have the occasional off day but overall this is one of the best tourney communities I have been involved in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally would just like to see more tournaments give a best sportsmanship award. It could just be a certificate. I quite like having a criteria for giving out points too, so that people don't just feel guilty for not giving their opponents the maximum. I could post the one I made if it would help?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the idea of getting a badge on the rankings for winning a Best Sports, just as we currently have for getting first place in a tournament. I think this is great!

I also saw an added criteria for the masters of "must not have been disqualified for an event this season." I can't think of any counter arguments to this, it's a solid idea that I'd like to see in the rules.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My position:

1) encouraging good sports is important, it is healthy for the community.  Most people in the uk community are good sports.

2) being positive about rewarding good sports is easier and more fun than trying to police the community.

3) with the right reward in place, and cross-community support from TOs, this could have a benefit of helping eradicate any poor behaviour.

4) I would like to see acknowledgement for good sports that is beyond an individual event, but can be seen across a season

 

I am not sure how to implement any of this. 

I am not sure if anyone agrees with me that if should be done.

I want to have a discussion about it

 

joel

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ProximoCoal said:

I personally don't feel there is an issue, but I still would like to see more acknowledgement of good sportsmanship. I do like the idea of a badge for the rankings (I'd like to see one for best painted too) but unfortunately that puts yet more work on Kai of 2G1P.

:+fate:+fate:+fate 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But seriously, a few thoughts.

I agree, a positive input into Sports is well worth it.

But with that said it can be highly subjective.

For example some players love running certain masters, however other members of the community HATE seeing them across the table from them - such as masters the rhyme with Dora the Explorer. This has gone to the extent that I know 2 players (I hope they won't mind me saying this) that would rather concede than play against that master. I still have flashbacks to 1.5 when I see Dreamer or Colette I have to resist walking round and slapping my opponent. But that's a personal view, is it right to dock my opponents points on the crew/master choice despite the player being a pleasure to play?

Equally another TO pointed on that sports can easily be influenced to being a bit of a popularity contest. The more well known community members (pod-casters, TO's and twitter addicts), are well more known and by and large liked by the community (naturally). This can the feeling of a less inclusive community due to large personalties that dominate it. (omg is that Joel Henery!!! ;-) )

But overall I think its great to encourage sports, I always thought that it was great in other systems that your total result was a combo of your sports, painting and game playing ability. 

Even a simple step to adding in more of a focus on sport in the tournament pack would be cool (and to be fair has happened over the last year or so).

Its great to have a discussion about it, thanks for all to opening it up. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wake of Godzilla said:

For example some players love running certain masters, however other members of the community HATE seeing them across the table from them... But that's a personal view, is it right to dock my opponents points on the crew/master choice despite the player being a pleasure to play?

Equally another TO pointed on that sports can easily be influenced to being a bit of a popularity contest. The more well known community members... This can the feeling of a less inclusive community due to large personalties that dominate it.

I agree that both of these are potential issues and this is why I like the idea of criteria for giving points.

For example:

Points Available - What for 

1-3                  - Was your opponent open with all of their information with the highest points going to those players who let you know about potential issues with an action before it was taken

1-3                 - Was your opponent able to make the narrative of the game come to life. The highest points going to those players who create a really memorable scenario.

etc.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the checklist/points list for a previous year at Adepticon for one of the 40k events:

Quote

 

Each round, players will evaluate their opponent by the following or similar criteria:

  • Was your opponent prompt to report for the start of the round? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent share their army list with you before the game? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent come prepared to play and bring all required items to play (dice, templates, rulers, rulebooks, codices, pens, calculators, etc.) Yes/No
  • Was your opponent consistent about game procedures, such as re-rolling cocked dice or picking up failed dice rolls instead of successes? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent appear to measure movement and assault distances accurately? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent put forward a good faith effort to play at a timely pace and complete the game in the allotted time? Yes/No (2 points)
  • Were rules issues that may have arisen during the game handled amicably by your opponent? Yes/No
  • Was your opponent's army easy to understand with clear conversions or completely WYSWIG? Yes/No
  • Do you think your opponent built an army based on the theme of the relevant gaming universe and supplied background for that army (as opposed to a force built purely for winning with little or no regard to that army's established background)? Yes/No
  • Would you voluntarily play this person again? Yes/No (2 points)

 

Simple questions, verifiable criteria, and less room for "I don't like you, zero points."

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, ProximoCoal said:

Some of these questions I would like to avoid. I want any information you give to a TO that which you are happy for the world to see. It would be really awkward if you had written no to 'would you play this person again?' and they saw it. Could lead to confrontation. 

Similarly, when do you fill this in? My first tournament was a Warhammer event that had a similar matrix. My third round opponent stood there and told me what score he should score for sports and why, and stood there watching me as I filled it in. Damn, that was awkward as he had been a nice opponent to play against but that move was all about him scoring as best he could.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So a Malifaux one could be 

  • Was your opponent prompt to report for the start of the round? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent share their crew list with you before the game? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent come prepared to play and bring all required items to play (dice, templates, rulers, rulebooks, codices, pens, calculators, etc.) Yes/No
  • Was your opponent consistent about game procedures, such as tracking conditions and wounds? Yes/No
  • Could you clearly see your opponents fate deck during duels and clearly follow the duel procedures (declaring soul stones, totals and triggers etc.)? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent appear to measure movement and assault distances accurately? Yes/No
  • Did your opponent put forward a good faith effort to play at a timely pace and complete the game in the allotted time? Yes/No (2 points)
  • Were rules issues that may have arisen during the game handled amicably by your opponent (if none please tick Yes)? Yes/No
  • Was your opponent's crew easy to understand on the table? (e.g. where proxies easy to identify and are models painted)? Yes/No
  • Do you think your opponent built an army based on the theme of the relevant gaming universe and supplied background for that army (as opposed to a force built purely for winning with little or no regard to that crews established background)? Yes/No
     
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 2ss;

It's a guiding principal of rankings, and it's also established upstream of them in Gaining Grounds, that TO's are free to run their events how they want to run them.  We can't dictate to TO's how to run their events.  As such the guardians of player behavior and sportsmanship are both the TO and the players at the event. 

Personally I wouldn't want to see 'soft scores' in event placing, although I'd probably do well out of it.  Having played a number Malifaux vents under such systems in the early days IMO it creates many more problems than it solves.  I also don't think we have a big enough problem, or are heading towards having such a problem, to warrant that kind of step.

Having best paints and best sports badges on rankings would be a good step IMO. Assuming the rankings guys are able / happy to implement this. It's also fairly practical as it doesn't increase the workload on TO's, as they publish this information already.  I'm generally in favor or more different kinds of badges on the rankings, as it give players things to aim for above and beyond simply placing well.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mythicFOX said:

My 2ss;

It's a guiding principal of rankings, and it's also established upstream of them in Gaining Grounds, that TO's are free to run their events how they want to run them.  We can't dictate to TO's how to run their events.  As such the guardians of player behavior and sportsmanship are both the TO and the players at the event. 

Personally I wouldn't want to see 'soft scores' in event placing, although I'd probably do well out of it.  Having played a number Malifaux vents under such systems in the early days IMO it creates many more problems than it solves.  I also don't think we have a big enough problem, or are heading towards having such a problem, to warrant that kind of step.

Having best paints and best sports badges on rankings would be a good step IMO. Assuming the rankings guys are able / happy to implement this. It's also fairly practical as it doesn't increase the workload on TO's, as they publish this information already.  I'm generally in favor or more different kinds of badges on the rankings, as it give players things to aim for above and beyond simply placing well.

agreed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mythicFOX said:

My 2ss;

It's a guiding principal of rankings, and it's also established upstream of them in Gaining Grounds, that TO's are free to run their events how they want to run them.  We can't dictate to TO's how to run their events.  As such the guardians of player behavior and sportsmanship are both the TO and the players at the event. 

Personally I wouldn't want to see 'soft scores' in event placing, although I'd probably do well out of it.  Having played a number Malifaux vents under such systems in the early days IMO it creates many more problems than it solves.  I also don't think we have a big enough problem, or are heading towards having such a problem, to warrant that kind of step.

Having best paints and best sports badges on rankings would be a good step IMO. Assuming the rankings guys are able / happy to implement this. It's also fairly practical as it doesn't increase the workload on TO's, as they publish this information already.  I'm generally in favor or more different kinds of badges on the rankings, as it give players things to aim for above and beyond simply placing well.

I was going to give my thoughts on this discussion, but this post says everything that I would've written and in a far more eloquent way than if i had done so myself. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd vote for keeping it simple, since there is no really objective way. I'm not sure I'd like having to fill in a 5 min questionnaire after each round and what the criteria should be. I'd rather have those 5 mins to chat with my opponent or anybody else in the room.

Also, some of the possible questions above make me wonder why you wouldn't address the issue earlier. Why, if I can't see my opponent's deck properly, didn't I tell him? I would be extremely confused if I got a bad mark for that, instead of one sentence "sorry, that building is in the way, can you shift your deck 3 inches to the left". I am also very much of the opinion that if my opponent forgets to bring a pen it doesn't make him unpleasant to play against. 

Plus, let's say player A is often getting no points for certain criteria in games.. will somebody tell him? Or will he continue and just not win any best sports prizes?

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mythicFOX said:

My 2ss;

It's a guiding principal of rankings, and it's also established upstream of them in Gaining Grounds, that TO's are free to run their events how they want to run them.  We can't dictate to TO's how to run their events.  As such the guardians of player behavior and sportsmanship are both the TO and the players at the event. 

Personally I wouldn't want to see 'soft scores' in event placing, although I'd probably do well out of it.  Having played a number Malifaux vents under such systems in the early days IMO it creates many more problems than it solves.  I also don't think we have a big enough problem, or are heading towards having such a problem, to warrant that kind of step.

Having best paints and best sports badges on rankings would be a good step IMO. Assuming the rankings guys are able / happy to implement this. It's also fairly practical as it doesn't increase the workload on TO's, as they publish this information already.  I'm generally in favor or more different kinds of badges on the rankings, as it give players things to aim for above and beyond simply placing well.

Always with the measured and reasonable response to "issues".

 

Currently trying to work out how to nail an abacus to Shenlong's base so I don't make playing me an even more "like wading through treacle" experience than it already.  If players have to fill out a couple of pages form in the interest fair play so be it. 

We should embrace this as a testament to our Britishness 

1) It is effectively a formalised form of tutting

2) It will increase the formation of queues

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I'm not part of the UK scene but rather than do a score sheet for people. What if at the end of an event every player gets to choose one person they played against to earn a token/ticket (virtual or physical). This is recorded by the TO and at end of year the Rankings shows how many a person has earned.

Don't use it to adjust scores or anything but at least it publicly promotes and acknowledges people who are consistently earning these. 

Sportsmanship shouldn't be boiled down to a set of criteria defined by a group or single person. Let a persons enjoyment during a game (something only he/she can define) be the deciding factor. 

Ill say that here in the Northeast of the US we've had success with this concept on an event by event basis. We do a raffle and everyone gets a single ticket to put in for an opponent they played during they day who they think was a great opponent. The concept mentioned above could be an extension of that which is simple and tallied over the year acknowledging those players who are cinsistently fun/stellar opponents. 

 

My Yankee .02 cents

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

We do a raffle and everyone gets a single ticket to put in for an opponent they played during they day who they think was a great opponent. The concept mentioned above could be an extension of that which is simple and tallied over the year acknowledging those players who are cinsistently fun/stellar opponents. 

I like this a lot. Even with clear criterias, I could fill out a form in a negative way. Who's gonna proof that I had done this in a dishonest way? Sure, if I would go so far, I would not be a good sports myself, but I heard from people being stingy about a loss and getting their revenge with that and those stories have been coming from different systems and persons on more than one Occasion.

If you have to vote just for a fun opponent, there is no room to get revenge on, since even if you lost every single match, you at least have to give someone the thumbs up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want soft scores to effect event placings (and therefore rankings) but I do like the idea of the clear criteria and for having the badges in the rankings tables so that the community can take pride in how awesome they are 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information