Hoo boy. Here we go. Competition and OFCC

[Blustorm]

I think Murphy's Lawyer is on to something....

[pretre]

Well as for OFCC it is not dead, on the Fantasy side, but change is happening. There are players that are fighting for it to be a more competitive event even though Best General is not the point of the tournament/event. I know there were some who submitted Hard Core lists and argued that it was still in the spirit of the event but looking at their list you can tell they wanted the Win. Since the event has grown and attracted more players, and the newer guys see it as a competitive event instead of a break from the normal highly competitive events, what OFCC stands for has become kind of Grey.

 

I think the Senate needs to sit down and have a discussion on this, which I am sure they probably do all the time, and let the community know what their Mission Statement is. They could also have OFCC split in to two differently paired events. Have a more competitive event run separate from those that want a more Fluff based game. And having a Swedish Comp or something like it seems almost mandatory with the number of players that are showing up to the events.

 

The OFCC will most likely change some more and if it still has a Fluffy side for less competitive players I will be wanting to attend. If it becomes a strongly competitve event I will most likely not attend becuase Winning is not why I play.

 

But that is just my opinion and I don't speak for you or anyone else.

Heh. I had to go back and look at it again. Requoting for the second page.

[AbusePuppy]

As far as power levels at OFCC go, I definitely think there's some issues. Nominally they are curating the lists to prevent the strongest from getting through- which I don't agree with, but we can assume for the moment that is the goal- but there have been quite a lot of very strong lists appearing the past several years. The aforementioned SM+SW list is certainly one of them; I also saw multiple Heldrakes back during their heyday as well as Necron armies full of flyers, etc.

 

As I said before, I'm all in favor of OFCC being a very "soft" event with a focus on just providing an environment for folks to come together and have good games. But someone definitely needs to take a long, hard look at how things are going and where they want to be and make some decisions about how the event is run, because I think there's some distinct problems with it at this point.

[Brother Glacius]

You know, he is entitled to his opinion. Let the man blog.

[AbusePuppy]

I don't think anyone was telling him that he shouldn't have an opinion? I mean, the point of sharing opinions is so that other people can discuss and analyze them and add their own thoughts on the matter.

[Lord Hanaur]

Back to the OP, but Lord Hanaur did you see nine broadsides or lictors at the OFCC? Were there any examples of armies which you though were over the top? 

No.  and I did not attend the 2014 event, as I just could not commit to it with all that's gone on with my eye surgeries etc... 

 

I expect none of that to be at an OFCC event.  I don't think they'd be allowed.  But who knows?  Maybe they would be. 

 

I think some of what I said is being taken out of context.  I wasnt really referring to OFCC as having 9 Lictors.

 

Also:  dont publish my blog text in this forum please.  link to them if you want to.  comment freely as well.  My blog is not monetized for what its worth and never has been.

[generalripphook]

No.  and I did not attend the 2014 event, as I just could not commit to it with all that's gone on with my eye surgeries etc... 

 

I expect none of that to be at an OFCC event.  I don't think they'd be allowed.  But who knows?  Maybe they would be. 

 

I think some of what I said is being taken out of context.  I wasnt really referring to OFCC as having 9 Lictors.

 

Also:  dont publish my blog text in this forum please.  link to them if you want to.  comment freely as well.  My blog is not monetized for what its worth and never has been.

Just curious but if you did mot attend how can you comment on OFCC being a Forgeworld and escalation fest? Along witht he "gone are the two armies clashing" line.

 

I am not trying to argue with you, I am just curious as to how you formulated your opinions.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Maybe everyone should back off some now. Lord Hanaur is very much allowed his opinion and weather you share his opinion or not he is not wrong for expressing it. Again I will say I agree with him in that what OFCC has become is something different than what I have heard from many of the Old School players. (The guys who started it and played in a freezing barn if I remember the story right.)

 

OFCC was suppose to be an event for players to go to have fun playing a game outside of the competitive environment where Sportsmanship and Artistic skills are what is important, not getting the Win.

 

Now I was on the Fantasy side of things and not all too sure of how the list raters worked on the 40K side of things but things were not all fine on the list submission side of things. In fact I never want to help on that side of things after hearing what went on behind those closed doors. The list raters and event runners went through hell and deserve my respect for the nonsense they went through and they didn't get paid to do that thankless job either.

 

But we have to face it, OFCC is changing becuase many want to push the event to be more competitive becuase that is just how they play. The Philosophy of OFCC is not shared by all attendees and many are seeing it as just another tournament with a weird comp system becuase the idea of limiting your own power level is alien to some players. And not bringing the Biggest Cheese list does not equate bringing an OFCC list which are suppose to be balanced lists that both players can have fun playing with or against. Win or lose players should be enjoying themselves and there were some players that felt their opponent didn't get that.

 

As far as lists being vetted before the event I can tell you for a fact a lot where turned in the Week before the event (and yes they had issues and were asked to have the players tone them down which didn't go well.) and some of the lists were turned in on the Saturday Morning of the event. Do you see the problem?

 

Now the senate needs to work on the next event and they know these problems already and are working on solving them for the next event but as with all humans they all do not agree on what is to be done about it. Their job (again unpaid job) is not an easy one and no matter what they decide they will piss off a lot of players becuase the event doesn't reflect how they Play.

 

We all have differing opinions on what makes 40k/Fantasy fun for us to play and there is no right or wrong. Now that said the senate needs to put out a mission statement as to what the OFCC event is all about in a clear voice and make hard deadlines and a clear cut comp system so no one is confused by what an OFCC list should look like.

 

Again these are just my opinion and though I am not in the senate I know they have a hard job and I am not calling them out at all. But this issue is one that must and most likely is being addressed now. And we as individuals will not all be happy with what their decision will be.

 

So give Lord H credit for posting his opinion becuase it sounds like he just wants the event to run smoother and his concerns are already on the Senate's table for discussion.

[Chappy]

The senate hasn't stopped discussing OFCC since. We are very involved in what is to come. Be patient. We have irons in the fire.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

The senate hasn't stopped discussing OFCC since. We are very involved in what is to come. Be patient. We have irons in the fire.

Understood and appreciated. I hope you understand I was just expressing my opinion and not trying to start a fire. But no one should be surprised by now about this topic, it comes up all the time becuase players care about OFCC succeeding. Most of us understand you are all working on this issue and hope to hear more becuase, well we're geeks and that is what we do.

[pretre]

Re reposting blogs. It's out there, we are discussing it. I don't see the problem.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Re reposting blogs. It's out there, we are discussing it. I don't see the problem.

I think he felt called-out and accused of being out of touch becuase he was unable to attend. Also some of the counter arguments were made using very specific examples but not addressing his points directly. And the ones making the counter arguments might also be the ones bringing the more competitve lists without realizing it and making it hard for them to see his point.

 

And he was directly told he was "wrong" for his opinion in one post which is insulting and pointless since it is just an opinion.

[WestRider]

Yeah. White scars plus great company.

I know there's more to Thunderscar than just the Command Squad+TW Deathstar, but this just reminded me that Highlander does very little to counter a lot of DeathStar Armies.

 

It also rules out a bunch of very fluffy Armies (like CSM without Cultists, SM with significantly more Tacs than Scouts, and SW with significantly more GH than BC), while, as has been mentioned, completely banning some others.

[VonVilkee]

Yeah the second you think specific comp will reign in lists you have already failed. All it does is shift the power points, the "competitive" guy will game the system anyway as that is what he does. While the guy who wants to just show up and play will have a much harder time bringing the tools to deal or just decide to stay home. Things like highlander don't make it easier for the guy who has the right attitude for the ofcc to play, it makes it harder for him cuz he won't buy the stuff to make an army that specific. The overly competitive guy will buy or trade for the models to game the system.

 

Comp does little to fix attitudes or behavior. It also just gives them more of an excuse to game the system for every advantage they can. I'm a fan of give them enough rope to hang themselves and be like looking at all the lists showing up you are out of line.

 

Suggestion... Don't let teams pay until lists are submitted and approved? This means they have no investment yet and it might be easier to uninvit those that don't get it... Just rambling thoughts on a whiskey soaked Friday evening.

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Yeah the second you think specific comp will reign in lists you have already failed. All it does is shift the power points, the "competitive" guy will game the system anyway as that is what he does. While the guy who wants to just show up and play will have a much harder time bringing the tools to deal or just decide to stay home. Things like highlander don't make it easier for the guy who has the right attitude for the ofcc to play, it makes it harder for him cuz he won't buy the stuff to make an army that specific. The overly competitive guy will buy or trade for the models to game the system.

Comp does little to fix attitudes or behavior. It also just gives them more of an excuse to game the system for every advantage they can. I'm a fan of give them enough rope to hang themselves and be like looking at all the lists showing up you are out of line.

Suggestion... Don't let teams pay until lists are submitted and approved? This means they have no investment yet and it might be easier to uninvit those that don't get it... Just rambling thoughts on a whiskey soaked Friday evening.

Well before a player decides if he wants to attend maybe he should ask himself questions. Are they showing up to see if they come in first to be best general? If so this maybe the wrong event and there are plenty of other events where this mindset is the goal.

 

At the OFCC the mindset should be to win the best Sportsmanship award and not worry about any losses. If everyone showed up with that mindset the OFCC would be known as the Must Attend event in the North West but if it becomes all about best general or team than it is no different than the many other events in the North West. Why have an event with only one winner when you can have one where everyone wins by having the best games of the year.

[AbusePuppy]

So if the only "real" reason to attend is to win Best Sportsman, why even have a Best General award if no one is supposed to be trying for it?

[Lord Hanaur]

Just curious but if you did mot attend how can you comment on OFCC being a Forgeworld and escalation fest? Along witht he "gone are the two armies clashing" line.

 

I am not trying to argue with you, I am just curious as to how you formulated your opinions.

I didnt think I needed to be there in order to be told what lists were there, which I took a great deal of interest in as you can imagine.  And it was quite openly known that Forge World etc...  would be allowed so this was no great secret.

[generalripphook]

Well what I am saying is there is a difference between how a unit looks on paper and how a player plays it.

[Guest]

Well what I am saying is there is a difference between how a unit looks on paper and how a player plays it.

And often, there is a difference between how FW pictures it and the conversion that you play against....

 

Perfect example, those Dreadnought drop pods are a fair amount larger than the regular drop pod. The FW ones are nifty because the dreads can assault out of them. And yet, you'll see players using "count as" FW dreadnough drop pods, and yet, they don't match to picture nor the size of the actual model. 

 

I've seen a real on once. His was a count's as normal drop pod....

[Murphy'sLawyer]

So if the only "real" reason to attend is to win Best Sportsman, why even have a Best General award if no one is supposed to be trying for it?

That shouldn't be the reason to attend the OFCC. If you noticed there is a Best General award but the prize was not as good as the Best Sportsmanship or the Best Painted.

 

You should be playing your game well and using your skills to the fullest while having fun. But your list shouldn't be designed to make your opponent's game hell. It should be a toned down list than your normal, heck bring those aweful units you never play, and just play to have fun with it.

 

Heck the Best Generals in my mind are the ones who can take a bad list and still win games from their skills.

 

In other words OFCC is Not like other tournaments where the focus of the event is to Win games, the focus is for players to come together to have more relaxed games they can enjoy while being surrounded by others who are in the same hobby for very similar reasons, becuase they enjoy it for the experience. Some of my best games I have played I lost, but the experience with my opponent made the game pure win. The joy of laughing and having good company is way better than the feeling of just getting a win. If you can do both cool but that means winning is not your first priority.

[Swan-of-War]

Is this being conveyed to new teams though?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the comp had to be relaxed a bit to accommodate some grumblers.  I saw that as perhaps some people aren't aware of how OFCC differs from "regular" tournaments.  

[VonVilkee]

Being some one that switched from fantasy to the 40k side, with multiple ofccs under me belt on both sides. The 40k side of things has always struggled more with the spirit. This is not unique to just this event I find that the arms race and attitudes get out of hand in the 40k community easier. Must be something about the guns. Either way if it is about the sportsmanship than as less competitive player you should look forward to trying to convert some of those overly competitive guys. Play rule of cool bring tools to deal with the game, rely on captain matching to even out somethings. Finally realize 40k is to variable to limit everything based on paper show up and play, don't judges player on his list loosen up and have fun anyway. Remember sometimes that tough list is all the models they have painted, show them the light and maybe you will foster next year's best sport...

[Murphy'sLawyer]

Trying to discribe what OFCC is about can be difficult. It is not about throwing games, play your best and have fun. It is not about gimping yourself so bad that you are frustrated, bring a balanced all comers list. In fact it has nothing to do with the list honestly, it is all about the attitude you come with.

 

If you show up with the attitude that you are "going" to win your games you may not get what OFCC is about. If you show up believing you are going to have fun and great conversations with a group of guys you like hanging out with, and get a few games in to boot then you will walk away knowing what OFCC is about.

 

The bringing toned down lists are just to ease up the competitiveness feel of the games and put players more at ease. If everone could bring that attitude in the first place then there wouldn't be a need to comp any list, but we're human and male so sometimes our competitive nature comes out without reminders. We have the rest of the year to get our teeth kickings in so let's take this weekend to enjoy the fun of the game instead of dominating your opponent.

[PourSpelur]

Would changing the Best General award to a trophy help?

By shifting prize support to paint, sportsman and raffles (no extra tickets for winning games) you'd send a pretty clear message. "We all want to win but it's less important than enjoying the game"

I'd even be down to make one for next year.

[AbusePuppy]

You should be playing your game well and using your skills to the fullest while having fun. But your list shouldn't be designed to make your opponent's game hell.

 

So a couple things:

 

One, people who play competitively aren't there to "make [their] opponent's games hell." That's exactly the same kind of elitist nonsense that, done the other way around, says that casual gamers are a bunch of clueless n00bs who rage about rules they don't understand. It would be nice if folks on both sides would drop the rhetoric, because it's not helping any.

 

Second, how does OFCC's system- and in particular the Best General aware we're talking about here- support or encourage that type of play? You say that players shouldn't be trying to win best general at all because that's counter to the spirit of the event, but you still reward them for doing so. You say that the most truely skilled general would be winning all their games with a bad list, but the list rating system in no way supports that belief (indeed, it actively punishes it.) To be quite frank, having been on these forums for more than a few years, having participated in and read most ever topic discussing the issue, and having attended OFCC and discussed it with many of the other attendees, I still have no idea what the organizers think the Best General award is "supposed" to be about. That's more than just "a bit confusing to new players," that's bordering on the realm of actually discouraging comprehension.

 

If OFCC isn't about winning games, why award players for winning games at all? There's no trophy for "punched the most opponents in the dick" because you're not trying to encourage that. If you don't want to encourage something, don't reward it. Giving out awards for Best General sends a message to the attendees that generalship is one of the important parts of OFCC, even though the organizers have said time and time again that it supposedly isn't.