ITC 2017 Feedback

[Bane]

First and most importantly - Mike, you ran an amazing event! Great venue, easy to get to, super cheap by New York standards, and the event ran without a hitch. Definitely glad you made the pairing process 30 minutes, as even with the extra 15 minutes there were *plenty* of games that didn't finish.

 

Second, re: Clubs and National Teams. We played by the rules of the event - show up with 5 people, play 5 rounds, see what happens. If the idea was National Teams, like an ETC, you would have likely had the same 5 of us there. 

 

There is this unfair notion going about that we aren't a "club," that we formed this team off of the rankings etc., and that's all I'm seeking to correct here. Yes, we are highly ranked in the USA Malifaux Rankings (which truth be told are pretty shoddily maintained and missing lots of data ). But we're also a Club. Is it so hard to believe that people in the same very-competitive Club are also highly ranked? We've been friends since 2005. Since ETC 2013 in Serbia, when we all were able to finally attend an ETC together, we've been playing almost exclusively together at all team tournamnets and national events. We then went back to Serbia for ETC 2014, and I captain'd the 2015 team but Alex and Travis took a year off after years of ETC burnout. We've only ever played with each other for Bragging Rights 4-man events, generally splintering off with the others in our Club that didn't attend ITC. For the Malifaux UTS, we did a draft with 12 of the members of our Club to form the 3 teams. The definition of "Club" in the UK quite clearly means something different than it does here, and I'm certain geography has a great deal to do with that, but as a New Yorker, I've gone through several gaming stores through the years. I've had friends I wargamed with for 15 years leave New York for reasons unrelated to Malifaux. Does that mean they aren't my Club mates anymore? Hengl's entire former WHFB club went to AoS, leaving him to game alone when it comes to Malifaux. Does that mean they're his Club? Is there a rule that he can't be a part of a Club that exists on the East Coast? When we went to CaptainCon in February, basically the entirety of our Club made the Top 8 cut to Day 2. We spend all of our 2-day events together. We talk to each other daily in our club Facebook Messenger chat. I talk to these guys more than anyone else on Earth. 

 

Maybe the UK could have had a few stronger unified teams - no one is disputing that. But Poland sent some of their top ranked players all in one team, and they even merc'd someone who wasn't Polish, and no one seems to care. I know our team didn't care at all, they were great opponents and more importantly, great sports, but for some reason since the end of Saturday we've been hit with this "Super Team" moniker, as if it somehow diminishes anything that we did, and the other teams that took highly ranked players escape the same scrutiny. 

 

Define it how you want to paint the picture that you want - just know that you're wrong. Ask the Admins on AWP. Look at our Facebook photos and posts. It's easy to see who is with who, regardless of any geographical distance, and I'm sorry but trying to knock what my teammates did this weekend just comes off as sour grapes. Perhaps most importantly, there wasn't a single rules complaint or sportsmanship issue with ANYONE on Team Trump Card. Not one. We were visitors in the UK, we had a great time, and we were respectful. Just tip your caps, say congrats, and gear up to win the trophy next year. 

 

- Larry

[trikk]

49 minutes ago, Bane said:

First and most importantly - Mike, you ran an amazing event! Great venue, easy to get to, super cheap by New York standards, and the event ran without a hitch. Definitely glad you made the pairing process 30 minutes, as even with the extra 15 minutes there were *plenty* of games that didn't finish.

 

Second, re: Clubs and National Teams. We played by the rules of the event - show up with 5 people, play 5 rounds, see what happens. If the idea was National Teams, like an ETC, you would have likely had the same 5 of us there. 

 

There is this unfair notion going about that we aren't a "club," that we formed this team off of the rankings etc., and that's all I'm seeking to correct here. Yes, we are highly ranked in the USA Malifaux Rankings (which truth be told are pretty shoddily maintained and missing lots of data ). But we're also a Club. Is it so hard to believe that people in the same very-competitive Club are also highly ranked? We've been friends since 2005. Since ETC 2013 in Serbia, when we all were able to finally attend an ETC together, we've been playing almost exclusively together at all team tournamnets and national events. We then went back to Serbia for ETC 2014, and I captain'd the 2015 team but Alex and Travis took a year off after years of ETC burnout. We've only ever played with each other for Bragging Rights 4-man events, generally splintering off with the others in our Club that didn't attend ITC. For the Malifaux UTS, we did a draft with 12 of the members of our Club to form the 3 teams. The definition of "Club" in the UK quite clearly means something different than it does here, and I'm certain geography has a great deal to do with that, but as a New Yorker, I've gone through several gaming stores through the years. I've had friends I wargamed with for 15 years leave New York for reasons unrelated to Malifaux. Does that mean they aren't my Club mates anymore? Hengl's entire former WHFB club went to AoS, leaving him to game alone when it comes to Malifaux. Does that mean they're his Club? Is there a rule that he can't be a part of a Club that exists on the East Coast? When we went to CaptainCon in February, basically the entirety of our Club made the Top 8 cut to Day 2. We spend all of our 2-day events together. We talk to each other daily in our club Facebook Messenger chat. I talk to these guys more than anyone else on Earth. 

 

Maybe the UK could have had a few stronger unified teams - no one is disputing that. But Poland sent some of their top ranked players all in one team, and they even merc'd someone who wasn't Polish, and no one seems to care. I know our team didn't care at all, they were great opponents and more importantly, great sports, but for some reason since the end of Saturday we've been hit with this "Super Team" moniker, as if it somehow diminishes anything that we did, and the other teams that took highly ranked players escape the same scrutiny. 

 

Define it how you want to paint the picture that you want - just know that you're wrong. Ask the Admins on AWP. Look at our Facebook photos and posts. It's easy to see who is with who, regardless of any geographical distance, and I'm sorry but trying to knock what my teammates did this weekend just comes off as sour grapes. Perhaps most importantly, there wasn't a single rules complaint or sportsmanship issue with ANYONE on Team Trump Card. Not one. We were visitors in the UK, we had a great time, and we were respectful. Just tip your caps, say congrats, and gear up to win the trophy next year. 

 

- Larry

When it comes to teams coming from afar I think availability and finances are the crucial factor. Not everyone can afford to fly for the weekend as everybody has family, jobs, etc.

As for your "super team" - I couldn`t care less. You were great sports and if you want to be the champion you have to win against the best  The whole idea of debating if you were one or not is pretty pointless.

[OldManMyke]

Basically wot Larry said.   It was a get together with 4 other mates and play some games of Faux. Thats it.

[Oshova]

I don't understand this complaint about supposed "Super Teams" at all. For starters, the T stands for TEAM in ITC.

It's not even like the non-UK teams were the only ones to have collections of non-club members in a team. Black Joker Society is made up of friends who met on the tournament scene, there's no geographical alignment. Team Harrogate drafted in an ex-UK #1 to fill in a space in their team. I'm sure there are more cases of this happening.

Having played Trump Card (thanks for smashing me Larry), I can say that really they emody the spirit of the game just as much as anyone else I've played over the years. And I would say the same for the 2 Swedish teams we played as well. From the brief interactions I had with other non-UK players, and the general feeling in the room, this event showed sportsmanship and a love for the game, that was equal to any other event I've been to.

Now, next year... UK need to step it up. Let's ignore how the non-UK teams did really well. You let Yorkfaux be the best UK team! You let Black Joker Society be the 2nd best UK team! BJS had 2 Guild Ball players on our team...

[Joel]

Yeah, those jokers need squashing back down into their proper place

squigs will be SQUIGs however - loveable nut jobs - there is only so much you can do to control that chaos!

[mythicFOX]

Had a great time at the event and echo everything others have said about the venue and atmosphere.  Very well done to Mike and team. Great venue and great opponents as well.  Timings were good and the half hour at round start was really worthwhile.  Well done on clear time calls as well.  

My criticisms broadly come under the heading 'information sharing';

Public information and communication are good things. I don't understand why the event worked quite so hard to block them.

Refusing to provide standings, especially at close of play on Saturday doesn't serve any purpose.  For most of the event I had little idea how the other teams were doing, and even who they were. This was compounded by not tabling teams in order of standings.  At times this made the whole thing somewhat devoid of context.  Making standings public doesn't provide anyone with an advantage. They allow for increased banter, give people the ability to spot any scoring errors they may have made.

Blocking in team communication also felt really odd.  As an example; one of my players finished their game before me and let me know he'd won, so I sent him round the rest of the team to get a count of how they were doing (winning or losing).   He was stopped from doing this by a judge as apparently only the captain was allowed to ask this during a round.  I get people shouldn't be playing each others games for them but blocking team communication on this level seemed unnecessary.

There was also a sense that elements were set up to 'trip up' the players.  The abortive attempt to add a round of 2016 schemes when that wasn't in the rules pack, and having the pre-published round one objectives be setup totally differently to the remaining rounds wasn't helpful either.   Malifaux is complex and varied enough game to game to not need to throw curve balls at the players for no good reason.  Allowing players to prepare leads to smoother running on the day and makes the whole thing more approachable to newcomers.

Generally speaking if it's a rule on the day then it should be a rule clearly and explicitly printed in the rules pack.  I encountered a lot of rules on the day that weren't in the rules pack.

Trust this helps for next year.  Thanks again for a great weekend.  

[Euclid (#ScottishMeta)]

The whole "super team" thing is nonsense. Congratulations to the victors.

 

Now, I didn't attend this year for various reasons but have a few questions if you would entertain me:

 

1) did anyone utilise the "faction flexibility" that was available? Everything I've seen leading up to the event had people classed as "the neverborn player" of the team, for example. Would players being fixed faction make a difference?  If this was adopted, is it required to have the limit of one faction per team?

 

2) it seems there is consensus that the matching process was lacking.  For future iterations of this process how impactful do players think this process should be? If a team "wins" the match up should they be massively favoured or just advantaged?

 

3) I know team events work differently to individual events, so did the scoring for this event (a 1 point win the equivalent of a 10 point win) change how people play? Would there be any benefits to having some measure of "winningness" included in the round scores?

4) I haven't heard any reports of this, but my concern about attending as "the arcanist" player on the team was that I would always be playing interference if it was in the round. And if not I would always be leaving my Mark. Was this unfounded concern or did attendees have "repeat game experiences"? 

 

Apologies for the large post, especially considering I did not attend. I hope I am not coming across in any negative light with this post as it is primarily driven by genuine interest and a hope that the event is something more akin to what I would enjoy next year.

[Euclid (#ScottishMeta)]

7 minutes ago, mythicFOX said:

 Blocking in team communication also felt really odd.  As an example...

Wait what? This seems massively against the nature of a team event?

[Ludvig]

I had an amazing time! The atmosphere was incredible and I'd like to really thank the organizers again!

I really liked that lunch was offered and there was a whole team of TOs who were really friendly and engaged. You guys never looked rushed to me (although I'm sure you felt that way at times). Alcohol at the venue was also really nice  

 

The painting competition was confusing to me and I lost track of the timetable since it changed and I didn't know where to find the new one. 

I'm still not sure why you had to out which master you were going to play, just faction would have been enough for me but I didn't really mind either.

Knowing the standings would have been nice. I finished my games with a lot of time left each round but didn't really know which tables to watch or how well the team we were facing had done in previous rounds.

 

As for teams being "topped" or not I can only say that I was from one of the international teams and playing for a country not my own but I was mostly invited because I knew the other players and they had trouble filling out their team. A big challenge for non-UK teams is probably to even find a team of people willing to travel that far to play. 

If the UK and US had smack-talked each other and there was a lot of prestige then I guess it would be up to the UK players doing the smacktalking to put together a dream team. The players prepared to cross the atlantic are probably going to be pretty decent players and as one of them said above they do know each other privately. You can't really ask that they drag along a non-competitive clubmate that happens to live locally because that would probably mean a lot of international teams not showing up from lack of players.

[Math Mathonwy]

Our team was definitely a super team - we hand-picked the very best in Europe (it's a weird coincidence that four of them live in Finland but so it goes) and then proceeded to win every game (though I heard later that some wins might've been misreported for the final score cards).

...

It was a splendid event and I had tons of fun. Each and everyone I ended up playing with was an utter delight as a human being and seemed to know what they were doing so that the game side was also absolutely brilliant. I also managed to finish all five of my games which is something that I have never before managed in an event.

The venue was brilliant and nearly all the tables were good. Or, actually all the tables were good in that they looked nice but some were a bit weird with terrain and there was mostly just woods, single plants, fences, and buildings. There were some tables with Severe terrain that wasn't forests and I saw a couple of pieces which might've been Hazardous but out of the tables I played on, four seemed very similar to one another.

Announcing the Master was a bit unfortunate in that some Masters are pretty easy to tech against and lose some of their charm if they aren't a surprise as such. But I do understand that going with just Factions loses some of the meta-effects. It did favour the less-counterable Masters such as the Wave four stuff.

Numbering the tables seemed a bit useless - especially once the Strat+Schemes were released only after the numbering (which was definitely good thing, mind).

I really enjoyed the team aspect, though. I'm unlikely to travel this far for singles tournaments but team things are just so cool at this scale.

Huge thanks to the people who made the event possible as well as all the participants. And congrats to the American All-stars (too bad you dodged us as the European All-stars).  

Hope to see you next year!

[balgor]

Just found out, I cant attend next year....GUTTED

[Joel]

15 minutes ago, balgor said:

Just found out, I cant attend next year....GUTTED

NOOOOOOO!!!

[trikk]

11 hours ago, Euclid said:

The whole "super team" thing is nonsense. Congratulations to the victors.

 

Now, I didn't attend this year for various reasons but have a few questions if you would entertain me:

 

1) did anyone utilise the "faction flexibility" that was available? Everything I've seen leading up to the event had people classed as "the neverborn player" of the team, for example. Would players being fixed faction make a difference?  If this was adopted, is it required to have the limit of one faction per team?

 

2) it seems there is consensus that the matching process was lacking.  For future iterations of this process how impactful do players think this process should be? If a team "wins" the match up should they be massively favoured or just advantaged?

 

3) I know team events work differently to individual events, so did the scoring for this event (a 1 point win the equivalent of a 10 point win) change how people play? Would there be any benefits to having some measure of "winningness" included in the round scores?

4) I haven't heard any reports of this, but my concern about attending as "the arcanist" player on the team was that I would always be playing interference if it was in the round. And if not I would always be leaving my Mark. Was this unfounded concern or did attendees have "repeat game experiences"? 

 

Apologies for the large post, especially considering I did not attend. I hope I am not coming across in any negative light with this post as it is primarily driven by genuine interest and a hope that the event is something more akin to what I would enjoy next year.

1) I think Team US used it to swap between Tara and Nellie (Hope I didn`t give up your secret strats :D)

2) The team that won should have an advantage but currently the flip didn`t really matter as there was no way the enemies could force your comfort pick away.

3) The scoring system benefited winning 10:9 or losing 9:10 because the differential didn`t matter at all and the VP scored was also there.

4) We played Kaeris 5x times and he usually went to Headhunter/Collect the Bounty and we picked the table with Set Up, LYM or DtG most of the time.

 

One more thing. Even though I was critical towards the matching system I would like to very strongly state that was my best Malifaux weekend ever and I had a blast and I learned a lot. The venue was amazing. The players were amazing and Mike did an awesome job!

 

Two things I`d consider:

In most sports when 2 teams have a similar W/L ratio and played each other their head-to-head is a determining factor instead of total goals.

Block playing Sandeep and Hamelin 5 games in a row

[mythicFOX]

5 hours ago, Euclid said:

4) I haven't heard any reports of this, but my concern about attending as "the arcanist" player on the team was that I would always be playing interference if it was in the round. And if not I would always be leaving my Mark. Was this unfounded concern or did attendees have "repeat game experiences"? 

I attended 'as the Arcanist' for my team and played; Head Hunter, Interference, Stake a Claim once each and  Squatters Rights twice.  Across the weekend against five masters from four factions. 

So no less variation for me than any other event really.

[Tris]

I think it would be great to provide an official place on the forums, social media sites etc. to look for mercs/teams.

I don't know anything about the reasons for six teams to not attend, but I could imagine that some of the players could've formed a decent merc team to participate anyways.

 

Also, there would be less reason for a team of 5 to let it be if they lose one or two people - they could go and ask for a merc to fill in.

 

I know that it's already possible now to just ask around, but it would be much easier for everyone if all those requests could be gathered in one place 

 

[Von Woozle]

On 22/05/2017 at 11:53 AM, OldManMyke said:

Id do updates on day one.  Day 2 i delibrately stopped them as they could give tactical advantage. 

Streaming was discussed but I dont know enough about it or people who do.  Plus what would you stream, general stream of the room, a single table?

It's really up to who is in charge, but the more the better in my book.  Interviews the teams, show a top table or people of interest. 


Basic streaming is very simple as you just need a camera and an internet connection.

 

On 22/05/2017 at 5:18 PM, Psientologist said:

The only point these were held back was to not interfere with the event at the end, which although admittedly is a bit lame for the spectator the people in the actual event's experience matters more.

Bag-o-tools wasn't live which is usually there but Mike not only owned up to that he just took screen shots and shared them on social media (Facebook and Twitter).

If you wanted more detail, not just which team faced which team then I did post the pairings (the teams made) after each round on arcanereservoir.com
I apologise if that still isn't enough information, but if you'd like more please elaborate.

I would be very much up for streaming, doing commentary etc. and I'm sure Mike like's the idea of streaming too, but it's not as simple as want.
It costs money to have the equipment to start with, then taking it up, preparing it, more time is then spent making sure it's going smoothly etc.
I'm sure you watched (as did I a bit) the Guild Ball event Vengeance the week before but the Steam Forged themselves put that on and they're based around NWGC.

I got the impression that stream at Vengeance was organized by Steamforged and they knew an AV guy.  (Heard them say it was nice of him to give up his wkend to watch something he knew nothing about)  They could have well hired someone or the equipment as it certainly was very good and the basic set up you need to be doing live commentary.  Seems to make sense that a famous podcaster like yourself does the commentary  


Yeah Bag-o-tools is great for a normal event, but this was the team world championships!

[Tris]

25 minutes ago, Von Woozle said:

Yeah Bag-o-tools is great for a normal event, but this was the team world championships!

Also, not everyone in the world is aware of bag of tools - just post "the rankings for round x are available at bag of tools"  plus the link a few times per day on facebook or the forums and everyone interested might know where to look

[Psientologist]

12 hours ago, Von Woozle said:

It's really up to who is in charge, but the more the better in my book.  Interviews the teams, show a top table or people of interest. 


Basic streaming is very simple as you just need a camera and an internet connection.

 

I got the impression that stream at Vengeance was organized by Steamforged and they knew an AV guy.  (Heard them say it was nice of him to give up his wkend to watch something he knew nothing about)  They could have well hired someone or the equipment as it certainly was very good and the basic set up you need to be doing live commentary.  Seems to make sense that a famous podcaster like yourself does the commentary  


Yeah Bag-o-tools is great for a normal event, but this was the team world championships!

I'll fully admit from my side of doing "media coverage" I was under prepared and found it all a lot more difficult/intimidating to do.

You're right basic streaming just needs a camera and Internet connection, however that's still more stuff to bring and also, although EG NWGC has internet connection I was having trouble connecting my laptop half the time (100 people connecting to one thing will do that).
Also "basic" is fine but if it were to be done I imagine Mike would want it to be done properly.

I believe you're correct about Vengeance and that is my issue, this was the first International Team event for Malifaux but it's not run by Wyrd so someone would have to bank roll (for lack of a better term) streaming.

I appreciate like @Tris said, not everyone knows about Bag-o-tools, first off, they should  but secondly I'm not sure why it's fine for a normal event but not ITC?
 

[Oshova]

8 minutes ago, Psientologist said:

I appreciate like @Tris said, not everyone knows about Bag-o-tools, first off, they should  but secondly I'm not sure why it's fine for a normal event but not ITC?

It depends what information you want. If you want breakdowns of what each table's Strat and Schemes were, and who was playing on each, then Bag-o-tools as is doesn't give you that. It is build for singles events, and so gives all the information necessary for a singles event. There is much more information to show for the ITC, and so this would need to be built in on top of what is already there. Now, I'm not saying this needs to be done, but for someone to be able to know what is going on across all the tables at a glance, you do need more information than what Bag-o-tools currently gives you.

I say, get the whip out and get those Scottish lads to build a better version for ITC 2

[Psientologist]

49 minutes ago, Oshova said:

It depends what information you want. If you want breakdowns of what each table's Strat and Schemes were, and who was playing on each, then Bag-o-tools as is doesn't give you that. It is build for singles events, and so gives all the information necessary for a singles event. There is much more information to show for the ITC, and so this would need to be built in on top of what is already there. Now, I'm not saying this needs to be done, but for someone to be able to know what is going on across all the tables at a glance, you do need more information than what Bag-o-tools currently gives you.

I say, get the whip out and get those Scottish lads to build a better version for ITC 2

Oh agreed and that's why I attempted to fill the gap in information, although that was harder than it should be as people don't like filling in sheets properly.

Also yeah, I'm sure the boys can do it but it's not a surprise they didn't make a system for one event out of no where haha

[trikk]

1 minute ago, Psientologist said:

Oh agreed and that's why I attempted to fill the gap in information, although that was harder than it should be as people don't like filling in sheets properly.

Also yeah, I'm sure the boys can do it but it's not a surprise they didn't make a system for one event out of no where haha

As a non-sheet filler I think I would suggest just going to the captains after the pairing ends and ask for the masters

[Psientologist]

1 minute ago, trikk said:

As a non-sheet filler I think I would suggest just going to the captains after the pairing ends and ask for the masters

A possibility but far more awkward and much more likely for me to be in either the players or the organisers way.

However, I know I have a lot to improve on if I want to do something similar next year. Lots to think about.

[maca1066]

On 23/05/2017 at 0:11 AM, Bane said:

Second, re: Clubs and National Teams. We played by the rules of the event - show up with 5 people, play 5 rounds, see what happens. If the idea was National Teams, like an ETC, you would have likely had the same 5 of us there. 

 

There is this unfair notion going about that we aren't a "club," that we formed this team off of the rankings etc., 

 

Maybe the UK could have had a few stronger unified teams - no one is disputing that. But Poland sent some of their top ranked players all in one team, and they even merc'd someone who wasn't Polish, and no one seems to care. I know our team didn't care at all, they were great opponents and more importantly, great sports, but for some reason since the end of Saturday we've been hit with this "Super Team" moniker, as if it somehow diminishes anything that we did, and the other teams that took highly ranked players escape the same scrutiny. 

Define it how you want to paint the picture that you want - just know that you're wrong. Ask the Admins on AWP. Look at our Facebook photos and posts. It's easy to see who is with who, regardless of any geographical distance, and I'm sorry but trying to knock what my teammates did this weekend just comes off as sour grapes. Perhaps most importantly, there wasn't a single rules complaint or sportsmanship issue with ANYONE on Team Trump Card. Not one. We were visitors in the UK, we had a great time, and we were respectful. Just tip your caps, say congrats, and gear up to win the trophy next year.

Larry I am glad to hear you guys are a club and it shows good plays hanging out and playing together makes people better at the game they love. Will be hosting more games with my club to up our game in response ;). 

sportsmanship - You guys were a great team to play, Too much infaux enjoyed our game .... sorry we didn't finish, it wasn't through lack of trying I promise :p.

good job on winning and people may be being  disingenuous and looking for reasons as to why you did better than them, its natural but also unfair on you guys.

UK teams just need more practice. also blaming the 'weaker' members of our teams doesn't help.

Look forward to seeing you guys next year, getting another beer and closing the 9-0 gap.

Conor

[maca1066]

On 21/05/2017 at 9:08 PM, OldManMyke said:

If you could please put all your feedback on the just completed ITC in this thread that would be great.   Good, bad, suggestions, everything is welcome.  The event will only get better if you let me know what you want.

Thanks in advance and thanks again for making this a great event

Mike good event as always, admin was spot on, Venue was good and information must have been clear because John seemed to know. (He managed tipairbus up against opponents so guess he did it right )

played 5 great games against 5 great opponents but can you please ban oxfordian mages? Played 12 over the course of the weekend

More seriously the space matts at the bottom of the hall would have been better as just masking tape on boards. I didn't play on them but they hurt my eyes when I looked at them between breaks.

baring my game against Larry I finished all my games... sorry @Bane but I think the booze had the better of me. I think 150 mins all up was spot on.

as @PanzerHarris said good luck pleasing everyone the pairing system. I thought it was fine. Each version has pros and cons. I like the only 1 faction and master per round per team, think that should stay.

too much of infaux will be in training for next year, losing 6-4 to the eventual winners who were deffo the better  team and yorkfaux putting us back in place and destroying hopes of best UK; yorkfaux were also the better team i'd like to add. 

[Cryberg]

Everything during the event was spot on I think. The only thing I think can be done better next year is to have a facebook page or event where it is possible to find a updated time schedule and stuff like that. Maybe you used the UK malifaux group for that, I don't know, I don't have access to that one, but I was always looking in this forum hoping that the last dokument was the one we were using.