Adepticon Aftermath

The place to discuss all that was! Visit the AdeptiCon website (www.adepticon.org) for past coverage, event results and photos!

Postby Soulmage » Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:24 pm

Hank, I'm not a type A, people just get so intimidated by my good looks that they tend to lump in in that category. :)

(Just kidding!!!!)

Actually I probably am. Part of my problem is that I am completely incapable of talking and concentrating at the same time, so I come off as a lot more serious than I actually am!

. . . that and I have such a deadpan delivery when I make a joke that you really have to get to know me to be able to sort it out.
Soulmage
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 5:19 pm

Postby fenris-77 » Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:37 pm

OGRE wrote:Papa, no offense taken.
Anytime I can be uttered in the same breath of the Adepticon Cuties I AM A O.K. WITH IT!!! I however will not be rubbing your belly next year no matter how much beer you feed me!
OGRE


I'll attest to this. Me and the rest of the Canuck crew had a positive beer fest in Ogre's room and there was narey a belly rub to be seen (good thing too!). Thanks for the hospitality Ogre!

As for the scores playing a good team, I think people need some perspective. We were doing very well until the last round when we had to play Dakka Detatchment 1, where we got absolutly demolished on both tables. We even had some rules issues and a couple of vaguely YMDC rules converastions (which we lost :D ). None of that prevented us from having a fantastic time. If you get smoked by a great team you need to suck it up, rules disputes aside. Any two groups of gamers have different sets of interpretive issues and I've never had any trouble working them out in game, in a team environment. Certainly everyone can point to an exception or two, but having spent a good deal of time with some of the CB folks over the weekend I seriously doubt that that they fit the bill.

Thanks for the fantastic weekend everyone, both players and staff (especially the staff!!). We'll be back next year with bells on.
fenris-77
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 10:45 am
Location: Kitchener, ON

Postby thehod » Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:03 pm

It sometimes just comes down to the luck of the draw as some Nid armies similar to CB in comp had higher scores but its sometimes a game of politics and getting a good draw of opponents. I dont think there is 1 game of 40K in my experiences that there have been no rules disputes. It happens and sometimes people get offended or you destroy your opponent and they dont like a particular army I admit that I feel the Nid Zilla list is a list put on easy mode but that does not take away from the ability of CB at all. I always say that its just a game of toy soldiers when it comes down to it and anyone who feels bitter after losing should relax and enjoy a drink/food. Our team didnt do as good with Battle this year but these were some of the best games we had with each of them coming down to the wire and I would rather have a close game than having a blowout as it is rather not as fun for one side. Usually I get over losing an hour after the game and have had only 1 game ever to haunt me really.
thehod
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:02 am
Location: Orlando

Postby Lumsden » Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:41 pm

I really like pop tarts.
Lumsden
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:45 am

Postby mkerr » Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:42 pm

Centurian99 wrote:Seriously though...CB did field a godzilla list. And everyone just LOVES to play against them. We fielded a Stealer Shock list, with genestealers up the wazoo. Sure it might have been fluffier for us to take a brood lord, but I think people just liked the fact that they weren't facing a dozen dakkafexes. ;)


Our team played against you and neither of our coalitions docked you points. I'm 100% certain that you got all 10 from my side. However, I didn't like the list nor did I appreciate that it could have been a bit worse, lol.

People play for different reasons, we came to meet people and have a good time while you guys came to win. I would have preferred to play against a less abusive army, but I wasn't going to ashcan your scores just because you built a nasty army and we drew an awful mission.

Did I enjoy the game? Not really, but it wasn't the worst of the weekend. The coalition members I played against were nice guys and under other circumstances we could have had a fun game (my teammates from the other coalition didn't report as favorably on your teammates). The mission heavily favored our opponents, which was tough. And finally, there was too much bickering, but that was because it was more important that you get all 32 points than to acknowledge that we came 1,200 miles to have fun.

Don't take it as criticism, I've had worse games in my own house but that's the nature of the tournament. If I wanted to point a finger at the problem, I'd have to say the problem lies in the missions; they encouraged kicking a team when it's down. For example, having an objective of a 1,601+ point win ("annihlate the enemy") or destroy rank and file nevers makes for a fun game.

All-in-all, I had a great time and can't wait to come back next year. Hank and the other organizers did a hell of a job and I'll sing Adepticon's praises in the South for the next 12 months.
mkerr
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:30 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby Redbeard » Sat Apr 07, 2007 7:47 am

mkerr wrote:Don't take it as criticism, I've had worse games in my own house but that's the nature of the tournament. If I wanted to point a finger at the problem, I'd have to say the problem lies in the missions; they encouraged kicking a team when it's down. For example, having an objective of a 1,601+ point win ("annihlate the enemy") or destroy rank and file nevers makes for a fun game.


I disagree here. My team was on the losing end of a battle with C.B. last year, and at some point we realized that we weren't going to win the game, so we needed to conserve as many points as possible. I had fun simply trying to get my boyz out of dodge. But, I'd rather play a tough uphill battle than score easy points. I don't think having one or two missions with annihilation as an objective makes for less sportsmanship like behaviour. It's a game, you're playing for an objective. Being on the losing side means you just have to adjust your perspective a bit to have fun. Instead of playing to win, you start playing to deny your opponent those last couple of bonus points, and if you succeed in that, at least you accomplished something. :)
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Postby mkerr » Sat Apr 07, 2007 10:23 am

Redbeard wrote:I disagree here. My team was on the losing end of a battle with C.B. last year, and at some point we realized that we weren't going to win the game, so we needed to conserve as many points as possible. I had fun simply trying to get my boyz out of dodge. But, I'd rather play a tough uphill battle than score easy points. I don't think having one or two missions with annihilation as an objective makes for less sportsmanship like behaviour. It's a game, you're playing for an objective. Being on the losing side means you just have to adjust your perspective a bit to have fun. Instead of playing to win, you start playing to deny your opponent those last couple of bonus points, and if you succeed in that, at least you accomplished something. :)


This isn't about "finding your fun place". I'm working on my 3rd ex-wife so I can make anything fun. This is about designing missions that don't require you to kick a team when they are clearly losing.

I don't think that having a mission or two with annihilation is a problem, but every mission had a variant of this objective ("all enemy troops are non-scoring", "1601 or more victory points than your opponent", "destroy the rank and file", etc.).

Of course, I understand the difficulty in designing missions for a tournament of this scale. It's tough to create fun and challenging missions that will lead to a clear tournament winner. In general, the missions were fantastic (especially the Gladiator missions!) but if it were up to me I'd minimize the "annihilate" obejctives in the team tournament missions to give the more competitive players the room to give less competitive players some slack.

In the game I was talking about two or three minor rules differences led to larger conflicts. In a game without an annihilation-style objective, the rules differences we had would have been diced off (or the leading team would gratiously allow the trailing team to play it their way). But the tertiary objective was destroy the rank and file so we needed two rulings to finish the game.

If you want to build a truly national tournament, then you have to consider that players are coming from all over the country to play and there will be some different interpretations of the rules. If you can design the missions to allow players to settle rules differences without help from the judges then you've done a great job.

There's definitely a trade-off here between a highly competitive tournament and one that appeals to every player. Can you have both? Certainly, I think Adepticon is doing that but I hope that next year the Team Tournament missions (and players) are a little more friendly to the average team.
mkerr
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:30 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Postby skkipper » Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:45 pm

great post mkerr. From an average team here and have little to no chance at any award but do come from far away to play in this "con". seattle here. I myself know this but still don't want to give away points to top tier teams they don't deserve according to tthe rules. Having the destroying as an objective most of the time is painful. a few minimze losses missions objectives could help.
skkipper
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:21 pm

Postby muwhe » Sat Apr 07, 2007 4:02 pm

Good feedback...
muwhe
AdeptiCon Oracle
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:15 pm

Postby Thistle » Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:56 am

Jen wrote:
Checkmake brought the uber form of our army and got perfect comp


I hope you have us confused we brought IG
Thistle
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 2:20 pm

Postby getupandgo » Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:40 am

CitizenNick wrote:
Matthias wrote:
5. Re-meeting gamers from within the city proper and discovering I don't have to drive 40 mins or more to play. I am dusting off the Space Wolves now and I am even considering buying a Drop Pod or two.


Sweet! Go metro gamers! Hey, want to help me kick some Tau players' asses?


Crying for reinforcements?
getupandgo
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:37 am

Postby Wild_Bill » Wed Apr 11, 2007 1:04 pm

My apologies to CB that TnA was not present this year to absorb some of the abuse. With us gone it had to be distributed to the other TT winners :wink:

While 25% doesn't sound like much. All it takes is 1 game out of the 4 to be ruled unfair to keep you out of the winners circle. At which point you really have to decide what your goals are and how that matches up to the reality of the situation. Subconcious bias is a bitch to beat for any honest team. But an absinthe filled hooker is very easy and eager to b.......er never mind. :roll:

But back to fun and exciting times I volunteer to man the super soaker full of KY at the Jen & Kari boxfest :D ("Hi girls! Love Ya")
"Sometimes, when Fred dreams he calls out Wild Bill." - Mrs. Fortman
User avatar
Wild_Bill
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:01 am

Postby Turtle » Wed Apr 11, 2007 4:37 pm

Don't forget guys that without those annihilate the enemy or wipe out the rank and file it's alot harder to get some seperation on the scores, and with 90 teams you gotta have more than sports and comp.

People will bring their prettiest armies to adepticon, and most people will be more pleasant in their games there. so how else do you decide who gets their name on the axe? In the game baby!!! Those extra mission objectives that are that much harder to get seperate the winners from the others.

Take our scores for example (Robot Ninja's) one less point anywhere and we would have dropped 3 places in the standings.

By the way Kudos to jeff and everyone involved in running it, I had a blast as I do every year. And I want to say thanks to all four of our opponents this weekend we had fun in all 8 of our games and would gladly play every single one of you guys again.

And to everyone else I just gotta say 6th ain't good enough for us you better be watching out for us next year. After all it will be the year of the Robot Ninja
"Here have a beer, Marines play better with beer: Rhysk
Turtle
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: just outside of mil-town

Postby SirNotInThisFilm » Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:34 am

were you the guys dressed up like this?
SirNotInThisFilm
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:32 am

Postby Turtle » Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:29 pm

dressed up like what?
"Here have a beer, Marines play better with beer: Rhysk
Turtle
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: just outside of mil-town

PreviousNext

Return to AdeptiCon 2007

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron