Hi, I have seen a lot of really intelligent and valid arguements to both sides of the painting and judging aspects of tournament play. I have been getting some really great feedback at the tournaments and I am going to try to incorporate them into the next tourneys I am involved in.
Just a few humble opinions on the thread:
Painting: Any attempt at painting is acceptable. Not all people paint at a good level or should feel bad for it. The game is about making a reproduction of a battlefield event, and all effort put into it is well appreciated. That is why no penalties are applied armies that are less than "perfect". Play and have fun with your army, but if somebody puts in a great deal of extra effort and makes the game look great, yes, they get kudos in points for it. This is a visual game, and if it looks good, people have more fun, and more people watch and wonder and stick around to find out about it. However you enjoy the game is valid, but don't you turn the details of your Unreal Tournement 2005 up as high as you can go to get the best look you can run on your machine?
Sportsmanship: The judging of a tournement is an attempt to balance a lot of aspects of play and overall enjoyment for the players. I have gotten some great feedback and will be dropping the single worst grade from the back of the Tourney sheet from now on. That should eleviate the bratty "got his ass kicked" retribution attempt. I have heard about that and you guys are right, people do try that, but it is usaully just one in a crowd who is too immature and takes losing personally. The back side grading needs clarification so that everyone doesn't just fill it out as a full points just because they don't understand (reasonable, it may need some work) or don't like it(valid, but let me explain).
There no real absolutes about how these things run, everyone can not be made happy, but we can try to comprimise to get the best for the most. The separation of sportsmanship and painting from best general is OK, but it is just the same a a Games workshop GT (which I have attended quite a few). Now it has its merits, because it allows several different kinds of awards, but it also has flaws because it creates a striation of attitudes in the player base. Some of the best painters could be real jerks (not all by any means, just examples), some of the best sportsmen had crappy armies, and the best generals sometimes cared about nothing but winning. So if we reward this in classes we possibly reward the disreguard of the other attributes of the "game" we play. The greatest player is a tactician, a gentleman and an artist to the best of their abilities, in that order. First play to win, that is about 75% of the overall score, be a good player, and a good sport is about 15% of the score and good painting and nice army design is about 10% (these are rough, but close). If you kick butt, but are a prig about it (exception for the deletion of one lowest score, note above) you will not do as well as someone who mostly kicked butt and had a great attitude and a nice army to boot. We are at a place to create the fan base that we will be playing in for the this game, think about who you want to play with and against, and shape the demands of the games that are or tournaments to that, its up to all of us.
With all due respect, Tournements are the foremost showcase of any sport in any field or game. That is why they are called Tournements. No golf, Nascar, chess or dart game that was a tournement is treated as just about the final results, it is always about representing the sport/game to the fan base or the public. If it doesn't look its best in all ways, the fan base reduces, if it looks great and attracts attention, more people watch. That is why there are uniforms, ads, cheerleaders and computer graphics. We reperesent it with in this "sport" with tactics, scenery, painting, attitude and fun.
Trust me on this one, if you agree or disagree on all the rest. I have played a metric buttload of tournaments and the worst games ever are with those that do not care at all about the game, the players or the fun. So we reward the combination of all of the social virtues of gaming that we find makes the game more fun and enjoyable to play for as many players as possible.
The system isn't perfect yet, but we are working on it, and you are all helping, thanks.
Just my humble opinion
William Refsland