Really wqell articulated, so I'd like to go through point by point
QUOTE(Loriness @ Jul 27 2010, 01:09 PM)
My believe is that every feed back should be taken seriously, because we want to make it a better event next year. Once you read pass the e-rage, there are important points in there to consider for next year.
Mm, I actually doubt it, well maybe I can bring myself to read it again sometime when it's less emotionally draining... But my initial impression was that most of Kirby's complaints were down to his own misconceptions and predjudice. His lack of willingness to argue his case leaves me feelng less pity, especially now I understand he's no tournament newbie at all. As addressed in my recent post above.
Now going through my list of improvements.
Win/Draw/Loss system - a new thing, but I believe it is a good thing. The points are spread properly (in my view) because a minior win -14pts, is equal to a draw with all secondary objectives and bonuses (8+3+3=14).
To be honest, if you think about it, it is the same as Minor/Major/Total (14, 14+3, 14+3+3), nothing substantial has changed from the 3 tier system, just the way it works. Minor = primary, Major = Prim+Sec, Total = Prim+Sec+all bonuses.
Glad you liked it and this was the aim of the new system - to still allow differentiation but without the risk of the primary being overshadowed by a host of extras. I have no doubt that more tinkering will ensue but I have no wish to return to a system where success on the primary mission can be overshadowed by secondary and tertiary bonuses...
Composistion - close but still/never be perfect. I am not a fan of comp, but I play what is given. There are some blips in the score where paper does not match real world. I ran a basic stats of battle/comp comparison and the relationship is near 0 (for High Lords).
Really? Terracon found a strong correlation between comp and battle, so this is curious. Could it be the calibre of the general is a more important factor in HLoT to the point where it over rides the comp element?
Sport - good, but can be improve. The bonus should be 0.5 points to find out the best sport while giving others 17.5/20 if they fulfill the sports critera. Eg. Luke is great, got max sports but no bonus. Does that deserve a 4-5 point gap?
With 0.5 bonus per vote, you have your best sport without penalising the good sports in overall.
A reasonable suggestion.
Timing - you did great with the resources you have. nothing to complain.
Thanks! We do try...
Painting - I know why you did it, but marking mid game is a distraction. Only increase time and/or resource can solve this problem, but your marking critera was published and articulated well. My opinion is reduce your TO discression from 6pt to about 3-4. Nearly 1/5 of the marks is subjective for the best painted might be too much. 10% will allow you to award the best painted army without turning the event into a beauty contest, while still making painting count.
Really cannot see another way to do this. I need to take the time to speak to each of you and give the reasoning behind my scoring. 5 minutes is a very short time to judge an army, yet I have to do it in this time if I have any hope of getting to see every army. with 90 players, assuming just 5 minutes per player, that's 7 and a half hours marking painting.
I cannot understand the players who genuinely felt their game was unfairly held up by paint scoring never once articulated this to me at a time when I could have done something about it.
However I take a dim view of my interference causing such major disrupption. You know in advance there's a time limit. You should be able to managfe a 5-10 minute interruption for paint scoring and should be expecting as much. This is how every tournament Ive been to marks painting. They may not spend quite the time I do, but I believe that led to the best set of painting results Ive ever managed. I'm very open sort of guy, so if I approach your table to mark paint scores but there's only 15 minutes left and you're still in the middle of the game - simply requesting I come after the battle, that you really can't manage the interruption just now, is bound to work.
The point is there is not time for me to mark painting outside of playing time. It is a necessary burden that all players experienced, some worse than others (Valkyrie copped me 3 times as I caught up with several of his opponents at different times). I expect players to make allowances. As a regular tournament player I figure having 1 or 2 games end due to time is pretty much par for the course. SO long as we get at least 5 turns, I figure it's pretty reasonable, and shorter games will happen at tournies. SOmetimes it's opponent's fault, sometimes one's own, more often it's both your faults, maybe you asre both laughing too much, but whatever, it's a tournament game -finishing due to time is part of the landscape.
Table - We are in need to some 5th ed table. Table with lots of difficult terrain but minimal-non LOS blocking is pure pain. We need to have an alliance of clubs to share terrains for continual success of 40k tourney as a whole.
Ohhh, + 1,000,000,000!!!
Seriously - someone who had a list of contacts for all the clubs, what they'd be willing to provide, and then help work out the logistics in a timely manner would be awesome. I am sure many TO)s are re-inventing the wheel sourcing terrain/tabletops and so forth from all over the shop where as if there was a coordinator who could help with logistics, wow...
Suggestions from clubs in how the TRournaments can show their appreciation - eg can we help with recruitment - maybe pass out some info about the club to players from relevant suburbs? TOurnaments do generate revenue, so it is conceivable that a modest appreciation fee would be available.
I already paid to hire a van for Lords, it would have been possible to visit several clu7bs to secure terrain.
Cost - The current level is around $10/game so $50 for LoTs is not unrealistic. $50 for early bird, $55 for on the day? It should work.
Yes this is the price structure I am hoping to set for next year. The biggest factor will be the venue cost, but we do have some wriggle room of course with the extra $10 per head.
Mission - Own mission is not the best for tourney. KISS is important, it does not have to be book mission, but it needs to be clear and simple. For me, the Secret Mission means I just need to wipe out the opponent to ensure I win.
Thats all, at the moment.
Lol, both you and jasonc seemed to feel similarly about this mission. However jasonc's observation merely proved the risk of relying on anecdoctal evidence, Mark's feedback forms suggests the mission mix was much more varied than he thought.
But not to worry, the mission choices were deliberately a bit conservative this year so you can all get used to the concept. They'll be slightly more complex next year and we'll try to mix it up a lot more with more choices, and no easy ones.
Someone else suggested forcing the precious to be 6" away from a table edge, which sounds reasonable to me.
Thanks for the great feedback, Loriness. Such A well reasoned argument deserved a full response.