Rankings 2015 idea

[Insidiously Mad]

I have only been to two malifaux tournaments and although I have enjoyed them, the idea of a punitive regime for mistake (rather than cheating) would actively discourage me from attending more. I honestly believe this will increase animosity rather than decrease it as people are worried about being punished for mistakes. I could be wrong of course, but the idea of a black mark or rankings punishment for making a mistake could discourage people with less experience from attending tournaments. Also one of the reasons I don't play Magic or Warmahordes is because I find the tournament scene too hyper competitive and I think this would help push Malifaux in that direction (which might be what some people want, just not me)

I think the better solution, as has been mentioned, is enforcing a format of physical list writing (with SS values) and a spot to note to schemes on said sheet. This would solve the vast majority of dodgy mistakes in a positive active way rather than a negative way. I do think this is necessary as I don't think keeping your schemes on your iphone (as I have done in the past) is a good idea. A standardized form for each game would go miles in my mind.

[shakes1066]

All a bit George Orwell....

[Ausplosions]

"Oh, I'm sorry. Your dyslexia causes you difficulty reading and/or writing?

Well, just make sure you don't make a mistake 3 times, or you are OUT!"

Seems legit.

"Oh! You picked the wrong Schemes and now are unable to score one, meaning you are at a disadvantage? And you are imposing that disadvantage on yourself? Cool.

You still get a warning ".

Yeah. I think you are confusing Malifaux tournaments with something not consisting of pushing models around a table in a basement.

[Clousseau]

All very interesting. So, a few comments from an experienced TO.

 

Firstly, a TO has to be prepared to make those difficult decisions, and that's something most TOs probably never think about. It can be a horrible job but something I've had to manage a few times (and once is too many).

 

Secondly, I've never knowingly had anyone cheat at one of my tournaments (but that could just mean it wasn't noticed or reported), but mistakes are made at every event, from minor scoresheet issues, to some of those mentioned in this thread. Any issue resulting in a potential score or result change should be handled sensitively in private, and remain as private as possible (although the individuals involved may end up making things public - that is outside of the TOs control, though I would look on it badly if what was said was inflamatory, untrue or similar).

 

The TO can certainly help with the preventative side of things. I make changes after each event, and will certainly take on board what's been discussed in time for Gunsmiths 2. I'm really glad that cutting decks is to return as I insisted on it when GG14 came out, and was only player pressure that made me drop the mandatory element.

 

In my opinion all issues should be dealt with at the time of the tournament (or immidiately afterwards in certain circumstances). With the exception of outright cheating, I personally think that's as far as it should go. I do understand that a player making the same mistake repeatedly is a potential issue, but I'm not sure that what is being proposed is the solution (though I can't think of a better one off hand).

 

I certainly do not agree with black marks appearing on the Rankings.

 

It has been suggested that players should write down their crew inc upgrades, but this will just add time to what are already tight schedules, especially on 4 round events. What we need to do is encourage a quick points check when explaining one's crew to one's opponent. If the TO has to check everything beforehand we'll never start a round, checking a 'hand-in' sheet during each round is feasible, and checking post event is too late. It also puts the emphasis on the TO rather than the player to identify a problem. More thechnical solutions related to a crew builder app may be an idea, but I don't think we could impose this. Also I'm a bit concerned that making a big issue of this could lead to players just having fixed lists, and I don't think any of us think that's suitable for Malifaux.

 

At the end of the day we have to prevent cheating (of course), minimise mistakes, and not put off players, new or old, from taking part in their favourite hobby.

 

Finally, we should recognise that TOs make mistakes (and if its 3 strikes and out I'd better not make one at Gunsmiths!). Again that's something that better score sheets and score trackers can help to eliminate. I certainly make improvements to my Exel sheet after every event. So maybe the regular TOs should get their heads together to creats a "best of the best" score sheet and programme.

 

Whilst on holiday I though of putting together a Guide to Being a TO. Maybe I should get that drafted and shared?

 

Post turned out longer than expected and with more parentheses than McDoogle

[Soul Puppet]

I'm not sure any of this is necessary.

 

Outright deliberate cheating is an issue. Is this happening in the Malifaux scene? I can't say for sure but I am aware of some instances of suspect behaviour from certain players and that concerns me.

 

The thing is, we must be careful to distinguish between a NPE and actual cheating. We are all human and can't expect to get on with everyone we meet, that's just life. Ultimately, if you feel your opponent is cheating then you should challenge them. If you don't feel confident to do so then report it to the TO.

 

If the same player's name is repeatedly coming up, then the TO has grounds to monitor said player's games. Easier said than done and would be made easier by having assistant TOs that can 'walk the room'. Anyone found to be deliberately cheating by the TO should be removed from the tournament (most rulespacks even have this in them).

 

So I guess what I'm saying is that the system works fine as it is already, maybe just a little more vigilance is needed albeit rarely.

[mythicFOX]

I'll be brief.

Like I said few posts back; I'd rather we had the conversation than not. I want to be clear the idea was never intended to be about 'punishment' or 'black marks'. This was never about minor everyday errors. This was supposed to be about creating a minimum standard of play we expected players to meet.

Personally I don't think it's too much to ask that 95% of the time players; select a legal crew, correctly record their schemes, and play with a 54 card deck. I would hope even the newest players are confidently clearing that bar.

Clearly my idea is not the way to go, and I accept that. No hard feelings.

- James

[M_Ruckuss]

Personally I don't think it's too much to ask that 95% of the time players; select a legal crew, correctly record their schemes, and play with a 54 card deck. I would hope even the newest players are confidently clearing that bar.

 

This I agree with James- these should all be happening, and we need to continue to have these debates to ensure it does, and that our community continues to be fun to be a part of

[M_Ruckuss]

Edit: lost n translation/ typical idiocy

My apologies to Ausplosions- I misunderstood the tone of his post, not appreciating the irony. My sincere apologies...!

[Ausplosions]

The latter of your points, as stated above, is harsh in my opinion.

This I will also keep brief: The former statement IS insensitive and not the kind of post I would expect from a member of this community. Want to talk about mistakes, fine. Want to talk about recognised medical conditions/disabilties covered by the DDA. and how 'thats just tough', fine PM me. That's not a conversation I will have on a public forum.

edit: mix of tense

You do realise I was speaking in the defense of people who may have reading and writing difficulty? I was saying it was unfair for those people to punish them. . I don't see the issue?

[deValmont]

Has anybody actually suggested that writing down the wrong scheme would result in a warning? I've not seem mention of this in this thread as anything other than 'Oh bugger, now I can only get 7 points' and I don't think anybody's arguing that that's not punishment enough.

[mythicFOX]

Has anybody actually suggested that writing down the wrong scheme would result in a warning? I've not seem mention of this in this thread as anything other than 'Oh bugger, now I can only get 7 points' and I don't think anybody's arguing that that's not punishment enough.

 

The idea was that where TOs have to repeatedly step in and arbitrate the results of a players games then it would result in them receiving a penalty.

 

Thanks to my own ineffective communication and the magic of the internet that has somehow morphed into us discussing banning people for spelling errors. Which is clearly absurd and not at all what I wanted. 

[ProximoCoal]

'magic of the internet' was so well said I had a very visual image of a flash of golden glitter before atomic holocaust, love it

[Ausplosions]

 the magic of the internet that has somehow morphed into us discussing banning people for spelling errors. Which is clearly absurd and not at all what I wanted. 

 

 

I didn't mention spelling errors. I said reading and writing difficulty. Which may include spelling errors I guess. But in the world of Rankings Punishments, someone who has difficulty reading may sometimes struggle with some details on both their own and their opponents cards. 

 

You are correct, penalising or banning someone for spelling errors would be ridiculous. But is it any more ridiculous than banning or penalising someone who may not read as well as you do? Or someone who makes and honest mistake. 

 

I didn't say anyone was advocating banning for spelling errors, but that isn't really that much more ridiculous than punishments for honest mistakes. 

 

If you think it is more than an honest mistake, then it is the opponent's job to report it to the TO, and the TOs job to enforce rules. But having a "mandatory sentencing" policy seems largely unnecessary and more than a little heavy handed. 

[mythicFOX]

Spelling was mentioned earlier in the conversation by someone else.  My point remains that the system being discussed isn't actually the system that I was proposing. I never advocated banning anyone from events and I never advocated penalties for simple play mistakes. Somehow that seems to be what's being discussed though.

 

I'm talking about dealing with situations where judges repeatedly have to rule on the outcomes of player's games.  IMHO honest mistakes or not you shouldn't be a top ranked Malifaux player if you're regularly turning up to games without; a legal crew, a 54 card fate deck, two correctly chosen schemes.

 

I would be highly uncomfortable with a situation where one game in six a player is getting a game loss for having an illegally constructed crew, and is still ranked as the one of the best players in the country. Clearly there's something wrong with that scenario.

[Barnaberible]

From reading through I think what James was suggesting has been misinterpreted

 

I dont think anyone is suggesting that there is a problem with cheating on the scene at the minute or that anyone should be punished for making an honest mistake, but some things that were highlighted at the GT might become an issue if a system isnt introduced to help TO's deal with issues if and when they arise.

 

I don't think anyone wants people to be banned or penalised for honest mistakes, I quite often make mistakes and I'm sure my opponents do but should these mistakes be reported to the TO? Well my opinion is yes and no really

 

If I make a mistake, realise it, stick my hands up and say sorry and take back the action or flip that was made then no problem. eg at the GT against Mark Byrne I inadvertently flipped a card for an action I couldnt take, realised it and said sorry I cant do that, I'll just discard that card if thats OK? Mark said OK, no problem. In this case it was using pull the void with Tara as her last action, which you cant do.

 

If I hadnt declared the mistake (or not realised I had made the mistake) and Mark had gone away, read Tara's cards and thought 'wait a minute he couldnt have done that' then I think Mark has every right to contact the TO after the fact and tell him. I would then expect the TO (or Mark) to get in contact with me and tell me what I had done.

 

If then I continued to make this 'mistake' a few more times I would expect some kind of formal reprimand

 

However if Mark didnt realise, or didnt contact the TO then I might not know I have made the mistake and do it again and again and more importantly no one else would have a record that I keep making this same 'mistake'

 

So I guess what I'm saying is this concept has merits but in reality I think it needs a bit of a tweak and probably would work better as creating a forum (or similar) for TO's to discuss any recurring problems that are reported and then for them to decide if (and what) action needs to be taken.

 

If these recurring problems arent reported or recorded in any way then who knows if this is the first mistake I've made or the 50th?

 

I'm not saying that new players should be penalised for anything what-so-ever but what I am saying is that, at the minute, we dont seem to have a way of identifying or recording if certain people are making 'mistakes' every game.

 

Now, unfortunately, the burden of this task would seem to be best handled and co-ordinated by Mike Marshall as he runs the rankings which is the central point for all tournaments to report to. Wether he would want to, or be willing to take on this responsibility is a completely separate question but if he did I think he should be supported by other respected TO's and players within the game, maybe on a regional basis as they would more than likely personally know any players involved in any controversy.

 

For example if people had a problem with me continually bending my tape measure in every game I played in I would prefer it if Mike came to me and said 'Scott, we've had several reports that you are continually bending your tape measure, you need to watch this and if you continue to do it we might take action against you'

 

And I would also think that if lets say there was a problem with a NE player then maybe they would respond well to a word from Greg for example

 

And I should emphasise here that I have NEVER suspected cheating in ANY game of Malifaux I have played (apart from the game at the GT where I lost 8-0 to Martin, I'm sure he must have cheated, I just cant figure out how)*

 

We also shouldnt confuse this with what I would call 'gamey play'

 

The scene is very relaxed, even at tournaments, and most opponents I have played will allow slight mistakes, for example activating Bishop and saying I'm going to charge x and declare built in rams rather than activating Bishop, declaring built in Rams and then saying I'm going to charge x

 

I have, however, been gamed in tounaments and if I get the order of wording wrong the opponent has called me on it and said no, you declared the charge first therefore you cant have the rams

 

Is this nice? No, is this friendly? No, would I do this? No, does this create a bad impression of the community? Maybe

 

But this is in the rules, and this is tournament play so if this happens then simply deal with it and move on, and if you cant deal with the minute amount of times this happens at tournaments then maybe tournaments arent for you.

 

What I dont think we should do is create a problem where there isnt one (Bishop example isnt a problem) but equally what we shouldnt do is allow a problem to develop where there might be one (and again I am NOT saying there is one) where a simple example of better admin and increased communication between TO's could stop it developing.

 

To dismiss the idea of sanctions out of hand in an ever growing scene is, in my opinion, naive.

 

*This is a joke, I dont think Martin cheated he's just a good player, at least until he reached the last round

 

[M_Ruckuss]

From reading through I think what James was suggesting has been misinterpreted

 

If I hadnt declared the mistake (or not realised I had made the mistake) and Mark had gone away, read Tara's cards and thought 'wait a minute he couldnt have done that' then I think Mark has every right to contact the TO after the fact and tell him. I would then expect the TO (or Mark) to get in contact with me and tell me what I had done.

 

If then I continued to make this 'mistake' a few more times I would expect some kind of formal reprimand

 

 

To dismiss the idea of sanctions out of hand in an ever growing scene is, in my opinion, naive.

 

 

 

Agreed, but continued "mistakes" imply that it is becoming a deliberate error, i.e. cheating.

 

I am not saying sanctions are wrong, I am saying centralised sanctions, are not, in my opinion, the way to solve these problems; they will just create more issues...

[mythicFOX]

Intent is almost impossible to prove.  

 

IMHO at the point there's an established regular pattern of someone receiving game losses / score adjustments because of the way they're handling their games it doesn't matter if their behaviour is deliberate or accidental.  It needs to improve one way or the other.

[M_Ruckuss]

Intent is almost impossible to prove.  

 

IMHO at the point there's an established regular pattern of someone receiving game losses / score adjustments because of the way they're handling their games it doesn't matter if their behaviour is deliberate or accidental.  It needs to improve one way or the other.

 

I agree with you-but I would be band under this system, having 'needed' to learn the hard way- I dare say I will make mistakes again. Therein lies my issue- its a rush to set up and a these tournaments I didnt pick an available scheme. Ive done this three times, yet I can't be a complete idiot as im currently qualifying for masters. Is the fact ive hamstrung myself at these tournaments (even finsihing 4th at Halifaux not sanction enough without being cast of the rankings or being docked points. Its hardly like i'm making the 'mistakes' noted above to gain an advantage...! Under the proposed system I would be banned- should this be the case? A genuine question (for my mistakes, not just being me peeps!).

 

If I were to select bodyguard (please note i'm picking about the only scheme I would NEVER take for illustrative purposes) and didn't write my target down like 5 times fine, I see your point, but i'm afraid I cant reconcile the two scenarios. 

 

And having someone dish out black marks and docking points is, in my opinion, rankings big brother. While there are a number of people I trust without question in their integrity of the game, we could struggle to find enough of us agreeing on who should  be "Big Brother", or indeed if anyone would wish this role. I actually see some of the merits. its the application of central punitive measures I still cant reconcile with.

 

And I only ised 1 ellipsis Mr Sime, so there! 

[Barnaberible]

I don't think anyone is saying you would be banned under this system, the scheme one was amicably resolved and you handicapped yourself so I don't think it would require TO intervention.

Let's take the bodyguard example

The first time you did it it would be noted by the TO and shared with other TO's and pointed out to you. The second time you did it it would be pointed out to you again and you would be told that if you did it again you might face a points deduction. If this didn't jolt you into remembering to write it down and you did it again it would result in a formal warning. If this STILL didn't jolt you into remembering to write the thing down you would be penalised, and quite honestly you would probably deserve it!

Like I said the original proposal requires a little tweaking as to what does and does not justify action being taken and the exact number of mistakes you could make before action being taken but I think the principle is sound

If your late for work and keep being told 'try not to be late' where's the motivation, I'd your told 'next time your late your getting a verbal warning' you set the alarm earlier!

[M_Ruckuss]

A fair point- I just think its a tricky situation and poses more problems than it creates, but I tale your above example as a good point. 

[mythicFOX]

For the record (again); I have never proposed banning anyone under this system.

 

The harshest penalty I propose is to have your ranking suspended. IE not appearing on the rankings table until enough penalties dropped off that you moved to a lower penalty.  Example; I receive penalties in January, April and September.  I therefore wouldn't be ranked from September and January.  I could still play events and take part in the community as normal while my ranking was suspended, then in January my first penalty expires and I appear on the rankings again.  So it's not actually all that harsh.

 

 

One thing I think it's worth pointing out is how 'not recording your schemes' can advantage you.  Say I take two henchmen and don't write down which one if my bodyguard, if one is killed I can claim the other was the bodyguard.  If my opponent doesn't check my record (and a lot of people don't) then I get an advantage.

 

As others have said there's plenty of room to tinker with this.  Maybe the penalties should accrue more slowly, I suggest three strikes as I suspect the rate of detection / reporting will be fairly low.  I'd venture most people would make three mistakes for every one that actually gets reported by a TO.

[M_Ruckuss]

For the record (again); I have never proposed banning anyone under this system.

 

The harshest penalty I propose is to have your ranking suspended. IE not appearing on the rankings table until enough penalties dropped off that you moved to a lower penalty.  Example; I receive penalties in January, April and September.  I therefore wouldn't be ranked from September and January.  I could still play events and take part in the community as normal while my ranking was suspended, then in January my first penalty expires and I appear on the rankings again.  So it's not actually all that harsh.

 

 

One thing I think it's worth pointing out is how 'not recording your schemes' can advantage you.  Say I take two henchmen and don't write down which one if my bodyguard, if one is killed I can claim the other was the bodyguard.  If my opponent doesn't check my record (and a lot of people don't) then I get an advantage.

 

As others have said there's plenty of room to tinker with this.  Maybe the penalties should accrue more slowly, I suggest three strikes as I suspect the rate of detection / reporting will be fairly low.  I'd venture most people would make three mistakes for every one that actually gets reported by a TO.

 

I agree with your [oint re bodyguard, hence the reason I started the example above.

 

Suspended in tantamount to banning in my view- exclusion of any kind should be reserved for cheating, not idiocy (he says, referring to his own examples of mistakes).

[Cunning]

Personally, as a player and TO, if the scheme is not accurately recorded then you should not gain VPs for it.  That's enough penalty for what I would hope is a mistake.

 

I do agree if someone seems to constantly make the same error that somehow plays in their favour then they need keeping a close eye on but i'm not sure if the proposed method is the best way to do this.

 

Having said that I dont know what the best method would be.

[Pierowmaniac]

Personally I really don't see the need for this - has the tournament scene really become this competitive at the top tables?

The only outcome I can see from this is a drop off from newer players intimidated by penalty rules.

 

I'm personally very prone to genuine mistakes and don't play at many or place high at tournaments some of the penalties discussed would pretty much put me on negative ranking points! - Which TBH I wouldn't really be bothered about, but I imagine other people similar to me would be.

 

If somebody is becoming 'known' for suspect behaviour then somebody needs to have a polite quite word with that/those individual/s (not easy I know) and if its still not resolved then just let the TO's at tournaments said individual is attending know, so they can keep a closer eye on things.

 

Having said that a general guide for TO's discussing gaming infractions and how to deal with those would be a good resource.

[Soul Puppet]

And I should emphasise here that I have NEVER suspected cheating in ANY game of Malifaux I have played (apart from the game at the GT where I lost 8-0 to Martin, I'm sure he must have cheated, I just cant figure out how)*

 

*This is a joke, I dont think Martin cheated he's just a good player, at least until he reached the last round

 

You mean you didn't notice that every card in my deck had a Ram except the two Jokers (which were both Red)? 

It's true though, that I seem to have developed a bit of a habit of playing like a chump if I'm on the top tables in the last game or two of a tournament. Maybe it's just simply that my opponent is better than me.