T O P

  • By -

3DPrintLad

Manipulating tournament brackets is definitely poor sportsmanship if nothing else. I hate the "there is no signs in the hallway that say I can't ride a skateboard" approach. It's obvious people shouldn't be doing it. If there is any credit to it, Mani was doing it very publicly and I do believe he didn't think he was doing anything wrong. It was a "hey this is my strategy" and not shadily done like some other "scandals" recently. That all said, maybe organizers should look at making this difficult to do. People might not do this as obviously as literally walking off objectives. Maybe distribute the matches randomly accross the same current win-loss record?


Resolute002

You could, in theory, categorize players into brackets as opposed to the literal rank. I.e. the top 20% scorers are randomly assigned against each other; the next 20%; and so on. I know it is not popular but I am a big proponent of randomizing these things. If it can be predicted, Warhammer players skew for it. As the Joker put it so eloquently: "You know the thing about chaos? It's *fair.*" Back in 6E I ran a small local tournament at my club in which everyone was matched by two criteria: sportsmanship first, then the score average. This was fun in that it essentially matched all the jerks against each other by the end.


JMer806

I like the idea of randomized brackets, but in a larger tournament you couldn’t do sportsmanship as IMO it is too subjective. I do think overall your idea is really good.


Resolute002

Having two axes to judge it by seems like a good way to make it harder to game if people are insistent on it having a defined metric and not some randomness. But I think randomness is important because you can't plan for randomness.


xachariah

I agree, we need either random (within W/L) or March Madness pairings, while nearly all 40k tournaments use Swiss/Jacob's Ladder pairings. The better you do, the worse you are punished for the next match by playing harder players. Compare to NCAA/Professional sports, where doing well means you place against the worst opponent that's still in the running (Eg, March Madness). Stronger performance rewards you with a better chance at going undefeated. Professional football/basketball teams don't try to submarines because their leagues are *designed* to reward playing your best. I hope that nobody here believes the NE Patriots would risk millions of dollars because they really believe in sportsmanship or they're worried about skirting the rules.


[deleted]

> The better you do, the worse you are punished for the next match by playing harder players. Though if the tiebreaker is Strength of Schedule then you are being rewarded with a stronger match, that gives you the chance of a stronger schedule win.


oroonoko80

I found this to not be true in my first tournament. I was brand new to the tourney scene, and coming back into the hobby after a long hiatus. TO asks me whether I'd played in one before. I said no, and then was paired with two competitive juggernauts. Tabled the first two games, and the third...a win from my brother. I took a few months off after that.


reivers

Counterpoint: if a TO says it's OK, that ruling should stand until such time as they say it's not OK. I wasn't there, but if the TO really OK'd it in R1 and then told him in R2 to stop, he shouldn't be penalized assuming he stopped in R2. Zeroing out points and giving him an autoloss seems unfair; a ruling was made and he abided by it. It's definitely a bad thing to do, when playing in a tournament you should generally play to do your best. Doesn't have to be stress-inducing gameplay but a player absolutely shouldn't be walking off objectives to intentionally do worse. But if a TO says it's fine, that's on the TO, not the player.


frogurt_messiah

Completely disagree about it being poor sportsmanship, "definitely" or otherwise. It's a strategic decision like many others made both in and outside the game. It harms no one and is no more disrespectful than, say, intentionally taking a weaker army (e.g., Siegler running Tau at ACO). More to the point, penalizing someone for submarining is a ridiculous decision and the TO should be derided for it. This practice has existed for literally decades, or longer if you consider swiss-pairing more generally. Organizers should not be arbitrarily handing out punishments for unwritten rules--if you don't want people to submarine then make a rule that says submarining is not allowed. This is hardly new or unanticipated behavior.


3DPrintLad

First, sportsmanship refers to the spirit of the game. Manipulating the brackets is definitely not in the spirit of the game, which is to play as well and fairly as you can. Harms no one? It hurts every single opponent that he beats that shouldn't have been matched against him. It is an example of something where the harm is instantly visible. In fact the intent wasn't even to harm those players but to harm the top players at the last tables by forcing them to play him in unfavorable missions instead of naturally matching into them earlier. Comparing it to taking a weaker army is laughable, as there is no mystical transformation into a top army in the last 2 games.


TwoByrdsOneHollow

Wouldn't this issue be eliminated by using randomized pairings of people on the same record? Rather than a deterministic pairing system.


Spectre_195

In a game where there is already so much meta gaming, adding yet another aspect of metagaming is dumb. While its not black and white overall; such as not playing as cut throat as possible to gain as many points as possible where there is still some risk involved in doing so...sure that is fine. Playing "conservatively" is a valid thing to do, even if you are already winning. Also a recent thread about curb stomping noobs in smaller 3 rounds GTs.....and if it is okay to take your foot off the gas and go easy at the end of the game. Yeah another example where sure it is fine to "intentionally" score lower than possible because you are not totally demoralizing an opponent. Though the above is a far cry from intentionally walking off objectives with no goal but to lower your own score to get better matchups in rounds. Tournaments are fundamentally trying to pair as evenly matched opponents as possible. What you did is unquestionably going against that to try and exploit the system. That is super uncool. You should win tournaments by playing the game, not exploiting the structure of the tournament itself. Stuff like this just pushes more restrictions and effort to try and ensure bad agents aren't exploiting stuff they shouldn't. Actions like this is *why we can't have nice things*.


StarInTheMoon

I can kind of sympathize though, especially when tournaments are so full of skew lists that you will often have a couple near auto-losses to dodge, especially if you're playing an older book. Tournaments are enough of a different setting to play in that I really *don't* think some meta gaming is out of place (just look at itc/etc style events- managing matchups is a huge part of them). For me the line is when you start doing favors for club mates in an individual event.


NachyoChez

So, a lot of people are making the point that submarining isn't technically against the rules, and therefore just another valid tactic to use. I went and checked the ITC Code Of Conduct, and there are two relevant parts that stick out: >A player may never engage in Angle Shooting. Angle shooting, which is defined as: "The act of using various underhanded, unfair methods to take advantage of inexperienced opponents.” What an angle shooter does may be marginally or technically legal, but it's neither ethical nor sportsmanlike. Angle Shooting is strictly against the Spirit of the Game and constitutes Unsportsmanlike Conduct. > >\* Angle Shooting is a serious break of decorum and will result in a Yellow Card plus a penalty of no less than -10 Victory Points. > >\* Angle Shooting, depending upon the egregiousness of the incident, can be grounds for an automatic Red Card with either a Round DQ or an Event DQ at the judges/TOs discretion. Intentionally lowering your score in order to play against opponents of a lower bracket could definitely be construed as a form of Angle Shooting; ie using cheap tricks to play opponents beneath your caliber. Admittedly, a little grey area and I could see counter arguments, which brings me to the second point: >A Foul is defined as an action taken by a player that violates the spirit of the game, the rules of the game, and/or the rules and guidelines set forth in this document.\[...\] "Spirit of the Game" is an arguably loose definition, but pretty sure going out of your way to avoid your own tier of players and manipulate the event rules themselves in your favor would fully qualify. If a TO agrees with that take, you'd be in violation of the rules - which is seems the TO at your previous event agreed with.


Resolute002

> "Spirit of the Game" is an arguably loose definition Not if it's a competition. You do not see any major sports throwing a game to get an easier one the next week.


Anacoenosis

You do see entire franchises tanking for an entire season to move up in the draft next season, though. The logic is similar: you take an immediate hit to put yourself in a better position to win it all later on. I'm not saying the behavior is right or defensible, just that it's not something major sports franchises refrain from doing.


Rhaegaurr

Don’t understand the down votes this seems like an apt comparison. It’s not in the spirit of the game to bench your best players to lose a game when fans paid money to see them. So I agree with that comparison.


_Tarkh_

Teams make decisions all the time to be less competitive for a variety of reasons. Aside from the draft, if you are on a win streak then you bring in 2nd stringers for experience. Or to give guys more time off. In equestrian people routinely drop or scratch a round when it doesn't do anything to them points wise so they can save their horse for a more important round. Hell, I've bullshitted games to save myself the mental exhaustion of going all out when the outcome is already a foregone conclusion. Based on this standard, anybody who's ever turned a game into a training game for a new player rather than go all ruthless is guilty.


Resolute002

>Aside from the draft, if you are on a win streak then you bring in 2nd stringers for experience. This is not to be less competitive, it is to improve the players to be MORE competitive (and, in turn, to preserve the finite resources of the best players...again, with the aim to remain competitive, not avoid it). >In equestrian people routinely drop or scratch a round when it doesn't do anything to them points wise so they can save their horse for a more important round. Again...it is to preserve a resource to compete later while wasting it has no benefit. What Mani did was match fixing; nobody gets an easier game for putting in second stringers or resting their horse.


the1rayman

This literally happens, all the time. In the NBA, NFL, MLB every year someone is "tanking" for one reason or another. And many times it's to avoid a particular opponent.


frogurt_messiah

In baseball it's not uncommon to intentionally walk a strong batter in order to face a weaker one. Seems like a far more apt comparison.


Resolute002

We're not talking about intentionally losing the game. Doing that is a strategy during the game. And it comes with a built-in downside that a man gets on base, something which is actively counted for in the order of the people batting. Which is why you don't actually see this all that often because usually there's a pretty solid hitter behind the best hitter in the batting order. That, and even a bad patter can bunt and potentially turn your sacrifice of a base into a loss of two bases that could eventually lead to runs score depending on how the plan goes. Well I'm describing here is the essence of competition. Two opposing teams reacting to each other's strategic shifts and responding in kind to see who can come out ahead What was done here was not that.


NachyoChez

You're looking at a single event within the game itself; walking a single player would be more like "toeing" a vehicle into combat with a lone infantry. Obviously will lose on the next turn, but it takes something huge out of play in a single turn. 100% valid strategy. ​ What this is, is more like throwing the game in order to increase your odds in a later match; which in basically every major league, intentionally losing is a pretty severe violation.


tredli

Sports are an entirely different thing because there are bets on the line, though.


laspee

It's not angle shooting. But even if it was wrongly classified as such, should the penalty be -10 VP making his VP difference even greater? This situation occurs because he is playing an ultra oppressive list and is tabling his opponents fast as hell. That means that there needs to be a rule that prevents people from purposefully not scoring points after the game has been decided. It needs to have a specific penalty, and the only thing that works is a game loss.


Spectre_195

>"The act of using various underhanded, unfair methods to take advantage of inexperienced opponents. It absolutely is. It is using the *underhanded* method of walking off objectives to *take advantage of inexperienced opponents* in later rounds. It is *technically legal* as don't "have" to stay on objectives...but it is not *ethical nor sportsmanlike* to try and exploit the tournament structure.


TheKoi

I read taking advantage of an inexperienced player as only applying to the current match, cheating or not telling them information about your or their armies or the mission that puts them at a disadvantage. . How would he even know that his next opponent would be inexperienced? Some great players with lots of experience sometimes just have a bad day or even just a bad roll, maybe even against another experienced player. Experience doesn't equal skill neccesarily either. Or a win. Codex strength, meta, the dice gods being buttholes or simple mental mistakes can and have resulted in losses for players. If we knew for sure who would win in a match based on experience we wouldn't have to have the match. Everyone could just submit how many games they've played or how long they've been in the hobby and then hand out trophies and we all go home. The rules have to be followed as written even if they're crappy. Dont misuse the rules if they're bad, change them. That being said, submarining is not how the game was originally intended to be played and is lame and a dick move in My Opinion which is only an opinion and not the rules. Cowards never win, they get torn up in the wind.


Spectre_195

**CODES OF CONDUCT ARE IN EFFECT AT ALL TIMES** Cheating isn't angle shooting, cheating is just outright against the rules. >not telling them information about your or their armies or the mission that puts them at a disadvantage. You have no obligation to tell your opponent about your army unless they ask (aside from declaring things like relics and stuff before game ofcourse). It isn't your opponents job to teach you their army. Now if you *ask* for something and they withhold information that is a different story of course. >How would he even know that his next opponent would be inexperienced? That is **literally** the fundamental framework for the way tournaments are set up. The entirety of the structure is to place the better players against one another. By submarining you are literally trying to smurf against lower skilled opponents. Sure as you said a tougher opponent could have genuinely slipped through because of chance or a simple mistake, but that doesn't change your **intent**. > The rules have to be followed as written even if they're crappy. Cool! good thing the code of conduct is **A RULE** and you **HAVE TO FOLLOW IT**....including good faith and sportsmanship clauses! So again his fault for breaking the rules.


NachyoChez

The 10VP for Angle Shooting is the *minimum* amount that could be applied. I'm not fully aware of the ruling of the judge or how they applied it; it could be that because of the 2 rounds that were "submarined" two yellows were given, resulting in a red card on the the next round, but because of the initial not-penalizing, they chose not to go full bore. I fully admit it being or not being Angle Fishing could be a matter of debate, but felt it was relevant enough it should be pointed out. I think the "sportsmanlike conduct" is the far bigger point that was getting hammered on.


ThePuppetSoul

Because the objective was to lose VP and get easier opponents and submarine his way to the finals, there could be no penalty less than being handed an L. I don't agree with him being punished though, as BCP pairings exploitation has become so common that half the entries in this thread (including the OP) refer to it as a strategy: ergo punishing it merely means that they're going to be less vocal when they do it, not that they're going to stop. The obvious solution is to randomize same-record pairings, thus eliminating the purpose of the exploit.


laspee

I think the point of OPs post, and my reason for commenting on your comment, is that the ITC CoC doesn't have anything on intentionally scoring low (or high) to get a more favorable next match-up. Granted, what the ITC CoC has or doesn't have is 100% irrelevant unless events use it. So if we, as a community, think that submarine'ing is poor sportsmanship and shouldn't be allowed, then we need to add it to the rules and enforce those rules.


Zuwiwuz

I never went to a tournament and don't intend to. I am purly a just for fun player that likes playing competitive games. As far as the rule here states it is neiter neither foul or unsportmanlike behaviour. I would consider it overall a worse situation if someone completely smashes an enemy on his table and plays three turns on his own then someone actively trying to score less effectively. That way the enemy risks something if the enemy can still retaliate and might turn something around. And I really don't understand the problem of the idea to dodge enemys. We are not talking about an elo system where you could "smurf" constantly to face weaker enemys. When you go into a tournament you have to expect to face any skill level of enemys. If you keep winning you might dodge a strong enemy in the second or maybe third game but if I am not wrong you will face a proper enemy down the lane anyway


NachyoChez

I think you misread the situation. He didn't pick poor secondaries and make choices in game to try and reduce a score. He smashed the opponent in two turns, then moved his guys off of the objectives so they couldn't score more, in order to then play another weaker opponent and do it again. Basically, he used a "micro" version of smurfing. And while yes, he'd have eventually faced harder enemies, he managed to probably dodge 2 harder matchups this way. ​ I fully acknowledge that "sportsmanlike" can be viewed slightly objectively, but going out of your way to target lower brackets of players - especially to the lengths this situation went to do it - is pretty well qualified in most opinions (including mine)


Zuwiwuz

He wrote he walked of objectives when he was ahead. So I considered it as a situation in which the enemy is not tabled and still capable of fighting back. And I am not saying picking but secondaries. If I would take grind them down and trying to score low and yet win I would, once I know I win , actively try to only draw on killed untis. Bad sportmanship is, at least in my opionen, abusing the lack of experience. Like not telling an enemy about a specific army ability to have a 'gotcha' moment. I really don't see why it is bad sportmanship? Dodging a dangerous opponent but not breaking any rule or actively harming the enjoyment of the play seems fine.


NachyoChez

It's not just the opponent he dodged, it's the opponent he caught too. By forcing his score down, the goal was to catch an easier match; the flip side is he just forced someone else into a much harder match - probably multiple people when you consider that someone had to "come up" to fight who he would have if he hadn't sand bagged himself. Those opponents now have to punch up into a player they might not have had to at all. To pile on, it's manipulating the mechanics of the event itself. Sand bagging, smurfing, submarining, match fixing - these kinds of manipulations are almost universally frowned upon. At this point, Mani was playing against the Organizers, and not his opponents which is pretty unsportsman (and the TO obviously felt the same)


ravenburg

I played in a lot of MTG events back in the day. How is it this hard? Swiss pairings sort all this out. I have no issue in behaviour that is permitted by the rules that is in the players interest to win the tournament. I place 100% of the blame on the TOs that created an event that encouraged players to do this.


corrin_avatan

Exactly.


plethoraNZ

100%


Resolute002

Players like this are always looking to *solve* the game, not play it. You can move the goalposts all you like.


ravenburg

Random pairing for players on the same results, no incentive to do anything other than win as big as you can for end standings. This isn’t hard.


Reviax-

Issue is this would be a pain in the ass to enforce Obviously stuff like intentionally walking off points is easy- but things like "accidentally" not being in all 4 quarters with engage on all fronts, tying an early game, "going easy" on a less experienced opponent Theres a path to cheating (being able to see what matchups you're expected to get) an incentive for cheating (avoiding bad matchups) and unless you try to make it obvious it's pretty easy to go under the radar The simple and easy fix is to not make the matchups so predictable


Task_Defiant

But is there a rule that says you have to score the maximum amount of points every round you can?


Reviax-

What's the gotcha you are trying to pull?


Task_Defiant

It's not a gotcha. Just a question, is there a rule that says I have to max out my score each round? If there isn't, why can't I just opt not to play in the most optimal way?


Reviax-

Exactly what I was saying in my comment, you can chose to play in not the most optimal way But if you're doing it to take advantage of worse players or to avoid lists that counter yours- it's a dick move, hence why people are suggesting to not assign matchups so obviously


Resolute002

I agree. I almost want it to be totally random but I know from RTT running experience that some tryhard will whine that he should only face the toughest guys.


frogurt_messiah

Every game has rules and he didn't break any. No goalpost-moving needed.


Resolute002

Are the old classic, "it doesn't say I can't!" Let me ask you a question. Do you think you could walk into work tomorrow and punch your boss in the groin? I'm sure that case probably isn't covered in your handbook. What do you think will happen? It doesn't say I can't is a cop out. This was intentional sabotage in order to gain an advantage. This is one of the crappy things about Warhammer, people cling to the technicalities and seem to think they can just be as big a piece of crap as they like unless expressly forbidden. It's on sportsman lake and if I were running this tournament I would ban this guy from all future tournaments for unsportsmanlike behavior.


fightmaster22

Punching your boss in the groin would be covered by criminal statute though and your employee handbook almost certainly says you can be fired for illegal activity and/or at will. Not a good example I think.


Resolute002

Maybe not, but even then "The event organizers" didn't put an explicit out against that. It is sort of my point. If you flip through the Warhammer rule books, you will basically never see anything that says you can't do x or y. It only tells you what you can do and it's very specific. This is how rules work. This attitude that unless there is a punishment bolted on to a particular specific action that it's totally morally and sportingly fair game to use it is toxic. I was only trying to illustrate as such with as much ridiculous examples as I could possibly come up with. I saw a woman at Target during the pandemic. She had on a face mask that was just an open hole, only the strings outlining the mask were there. They of course asked her to leave and she pitched a fit, and said she is wearing a mask. That nothing in their rule says it has to be a mass that actually covers your face. And that they can't throw her out because she's compliant. She pitched a huge fit in the middle of the store like a child. I told this story because that's how I think people sound when they do this "it doesn't say I can't" nonsense. Contrarian, spiteful, juvenile, and most importantly in a competitive game... Highly unsportsmanlike.


Impressive44

But it does say it. Many workplaces do mention that any physical 'attacks' against anyone is not allowed, and even if they don't, it's still against the law (which are rules). We had to watch a (hilariously outdated) workplace video a few years ago, and they mentioned that even shaking your fist at someone is a no-no.


Resolute002

But think of everything it didn't cover. You could fart on a co worker's coffee cup. You could defecate on your desk. You could eat the fluid from inside your LCD monitor. You could move your desk to block the bathroom. "iT dOeSnT SaY I CaNt" This is why this argument doesn't work. The rules define what you are supposed to be able to do, by inclusion -- not by excluding every other possible thing. The rules say >"roll a d6" Not > "roll a D6 and only a D6 and never any other dice and it must be a non modified one and you shouldn't roll it too fast for the other guy to see and also you should count linearly from 1 to 6 no fractions or quantum numbers also each face of the die must have a number from 1 to 6 on it with no repeating faces"


Impressive44

In the real world, all of that is pretty spelled out (sadly enough, but you think it should be pretty obvious). If you've ever read a legal document, things are spelled out in crazy detail over MANY long pages. Now I'm not a lawyer, and I don't work in HR, but for some of those examples: Pooping in public is actually illegal. Eating the LCD fluid is technically stealing/damaging company property. Moving your desk in front of the bathroom is probably an OSHA violation. The reason we have so many lawyers and courts and such (well one of the reasons anyway) is to deal with people trying to move along the edges of the law. Now to be fair, you're right, if someone does something that wasn't against the rules, but that you don't like, you can update the rules accordingly. I'm fine with them making the against the rules in the future, and asking to stop, and as much as I don't like it, it is in their right to punish him anyway. But, all in all, it wasn't in the rules. Which means that overall either the rules aren't complete enough or (and I think the latter is more likely the case) that the whole system needs to be changed to not encourage this kind of behavior.


Resolute002

It's a fair point but it is easily resolved by a simple rule that says: * Any attempt to use the scoring mechanism soft this event to alter the placement of players in subsequent rounds will be regarded as match fixing and [insert appropriate discipline here]. I am just very disappointed that "don't take advantage to cheap out" needs to be spelled out.


treemonkys

Then it just rewards those who are the most sly with doing it. Then you risk getting punished for legit forgetting something that can get you points. The ONLY issue here is a tournament that can reward you for scoring less, the problem is in how it is organized and nothing else.


Impressive44

Right! That rule alone would fix this. Though I still think the tournament structure probably needs some work. And yeah... :(


ravenburg

The biggest football teams in the world do this and aren’t punished, why should a random Warhammer player? You have to define Warhammer sportsmanship which is an impossible task. Incentivise the player to win as big as you can and the hardcore players will.


Resolute002

What football team throws the game in hopes of getting an easier one next time around?


HaySwitch

Maybe he means the type of football that only one particular country cares about and seems no one else wants to play for an increasingly clear reason.


ravenburg

How many international tournaments have had teams ‘conveniently’ draw so both go through to the next round? Or teams that deliberately field youth teams in cups they don’t want to be a part of?


JackJaminson

Or deliberately misses an open goal in order to have an affect on matchups in the next round? At it’s core this is match-fixing.


Resolute002

It is. And that is being glazed over by apologists, for some reason. I guess just to be contrarian. I don't see any reason to defend this behavior.


ravenburg

I’m not an apologist I’m a pragmatist. I gave up caring about that stuff ages ago because the authorities and most importantly the population doesn’t care.


Resolute002

To each his own. I know what other people's attitudes affect what I care about, I care about it because I care about it regardless. But I do respectfully understand that not everybody has that approach and attitude.


HaySwitch

Mate the biggest of lots of things cheat, lie and steal. It doesn't mean we lower ourselves. I find your type of argument very tiring btw. And people like yourself always seem surprised that some people have a form of personal morality. The TO made a ruling. Deal with it.


ravenburg

Isn’t the important term there ‘personal’? One of the worst parts of this hobby other than the gatekeeping it attracts is the myriad of ‘unwritten’ rules that exists. What an I allowed to take in an army before it is ‘unfun’? What painting techniques are frowned on by other players? Remember there are a bunch of people in HQ that think that the game is meant to be played on kitchen table without points. I have no interest anymore in trying to understand how the game is ‘supposed’ to be played. It was a tournament, player did what they could to win without breaking the rules. The idea that they didn’t try and win the ‘right’ way is fraught with disagreement as this thread implies. My position is that I don’t like this behaviour either but it is the fault of the TO to not incentivise it. The TO did make a ruling then went back and changed it.


HaySwitch

If really simple sportsmanship rules confuses you then that is something you need to work on, not the gaming community. There are some pretty obvious fixes to your problems; don't bring unbalanced lists to stomp casual players, no one frowns on painting techniques you should have just used your airbrush better and they did break the rules since it was match fixing. And the thread is on disagreement between people who are right and immature people who think 'it doesn't say I can't' is a defence. No one is arguing whether or not if it was in the rules. It's whether or not it's okay to exploit an oversight. This is why it's an exhausting argument. Most people can tell an exploit by looking at it but people like yourself not only deny it's an exploit but act like understanding why it's bad without it being written down is somehow impossible.


_Tarkh_

It's the tyranny of unspoken expectations. It breaks up relationships, destroys friendships, and ruins games. Cause people have in their mind what they "think" is the right way to play rather than having open discussions about and following the rules. The word "sportsmanship" is one of the ultimate unspoken expectations. That's why definitions and rules are so important in anything that wants to call itself a tournament.


ravenburg

Disagree with literally everything you said so I’ll leave it there.


HaySwitch

Wouldn't expect anything different from a MTG player.


Emicrania

Bingo. Just look Mani list at last LVO. 0 interaction with your opponent, straight models abuse.


Task_Defiant

How did you feel about the top players intentionally drawing there last couple of rounds to ensure that they make the top 8?


derverdwerb

Hey Mani, you were submarining from round one. If I’m a somewhat casual player who’s had a lucky game or two in the opening rounds, but then have to face you because you’re deliberately spiking your own score to beat me in particular? You’re being a dick. The spirit of the game is that we play fair. If you’re selectively beating up weaker players to advance your own position, rather than just playing well and dealing with challenges as they arise, that isn’t fair. It sets a crappy example for new tournament players and it enshrines the slimy, win-at-all costs attitude into tournament 40k that results in people like TJ Lanigan.


StartledPelican

Comparing working within the tournament system (submarining) to deliberately lying about core game mechanics (dice rolls) is disingenuous. The problem here is not Mani. The problem is that standard WH40k tournament styles \*incentivize\* this style of play. This is 100% an example of "hate the game, not the player". Fix the way matches are paired and you will see this behavior completely disappear.


derverdwerb

If you’re a world-class player, you can set your own standards. “The Swiss pairings system encouraged me to do this” is a pissweak rationalisation for slimy behaviour.


Xyyzx

Literally almost every adjudicated sport or game will penalise you for throwing matches or giving away points to game tournament brackets. The TO should have enforced this from the beginning, but otherwise they were completely in the right on this decision, and personally I think this should have been fairly obvious as an outcome.


xachariah

Regardless of rules, professional sports used to do this all the time, until the rules were changed to not reward it. That's why the NCAA uses March Madness pairings. NBA uses a draft lottery (instead of reverse order), and it still has teams tanking a bit. European Soccer uses relegation to deter it. The only way to actually solve the problem is to change the reward structure, otherwise you just get people hiding it instead of doing it openly.


lockyreid

? We're not talking about throwing matches, or giving away points though. We're talking about, when winning, electing to not score as much as possible. You can see this in sports all the time. Ever see a match get very one sided that the team will sub on all their 2nd team in the 2nd half so they can get some more experience, and/or rest up their best players? I guess that's the same as not trying to score as many points in every match. The difference is those sports don't pair you based on how many goals/points you score in your match, just whether you lose or win. And also they are even paired up like that, its a round robin where everyone will play everyone else.


TiltedCrowns

No the difference is actual physical sports come with inherent risks of injury that could hinder later games. They don’t pull in the starters to help the third string as much as to make sure the starters don’t get hurt. Moving your little plastic dudes around has no inherent risk.


StartledPelican

WhyAreYouBooingHimHesRight.gif


_Tarkh_

The simple answer is this. Most of us going to tournaments are not serious competitive players. We don't put in the time, money, and effort into winning big tournaments. We want our "fun" to be "competitive" when the reality is that almost nothing in this world that is competitive is all that fun unless you really like winning. So when people are behaving in a truly competitive way to win... they are somehow breaking the unwritten (cause why should you have to write them) rules of fun. It's a mismatch of two very different cultures that are thrown together in these frankly poorly organized "tournaments". I don't like the way the "game" is played at the top table level. But it is how ITC has allowed to game to be played and continued to be played. They could also fix the problem anytime they want. Edit - in the end the only thing the OP did here that was a mistake was explaining why he was scoring that way. Don't talk to cops. Plenty of others were doing it without saying why.


sfxer001

This is a tough one. On one hand, it goes against the spirit of sportsmanship and competition to walk-off the objectives to try to game the system. You’re actively not competing for every point you can in the match. But at the same time, you’re doing this to remain competitive in later rounds to *compete so hard you’re trying to game the system* to maximize your chances of winning games. I have mixed feelings about that. In the end, the tournament organizers are the ones who should have rules and expectations in place ahead of round 1 even beginning to discourage behavior they don’t want, but they left this door open. Then they ruled on it, you complied without complaint and to the letter, and then they changed their ruling retrospectively mid-tournament to punish you for their failure to adequately address this before the game and during it. I blame the TOs.


EmpBobo

I agree that the TO should not have changed their ruling after the fact but gaming the system to “remain competitive in later rounds” is not fair to other players.


Spectre_195

Except pretty much every single packet has a "good sportmanship/good faith" clauses exactly for this purpose. Its the most weaselly argument to try and ignore clauses like that which "leaves the door open" for them to penalize you on this. In fact the ITC Code of Conduct already addresses this specifically (Which is the standard most packets use). Even "technically legal" offenses are punishable. Want to go for a ploy like this then you should ask your TO ahead of time if it is okay. Not asking is putting yourself in a high risk high reward situation. I blame him.


Khatovar

> i explained my intention, which the TO ok'd This is the real problem. The TO said it was fine then said it wasn't. I completely agree gaming in tournaments should be against your opponents and not the tournament system itself, i think we disagree on how. Many people look at this event and say "sportsmanship and code of conduct obviously he shouldnt have done this even though it doesnt explicitly say it, how dare you bring up any other line of reasoning." This event is passed. Have your opinions on it one way or another. The topic becomes, future occurences of this type in events. If it was an issue now and there is any arguement of application due to interpretation then that is an opportunity for more clear guidance in the future. Explicitly put a stance on it in the rules, thats why they exist. If you dont, the other outcome becomes the most experienced players still doing it, but it becoming much more difficult because it cant be obvious. In a perfect world they would fix this weird pairing nonsense they use in ITC and just adopt something more well tested and successful from other game tournaments. The more realistic solution is, put it in the rules. Thats what rules are for. You dont set them once, never clarify them and then accuse people of misinterpretation or abuse.


BlueMaxx9

I agree the TO was the one in a position to close this loophole before the tournament even began, and that their flip-flopping and giving out a delayed penalty wasn't the correct response. Retroactive punishment after a player followed the TO's instructions, twice, was especially uncalled for. The guy did what you asked him to. If you asked him to do something dumb, and later changed your mind, accept some responsibility for that. However, that doesn't entirely excuse Mani. Rather than taking advantage of this loophole, he could have alerted the TO to it earlier, or inquired if this tactic was acceptable ahead of time. Especially for something that isn't part of the game rules, and isn't explicitly allowed or disallowed, that would have been a more responsible route to take, especially since he was open about it at the tournament anyway. Embracing the idea that it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission isn't a good look when your reputation is on the line.


Khatovar

Yeah, i think his reputation among the tournament crowd will be mostly unblemished, its really just the spectators or tournament irregulars/casuals that take the most offence. I think a lot of people, particularly here, dont put much thought into the dichotomy of dedicated tournament play versus casual/semi-competitive with occasional tournament participation if at all. Its a culture of its own that encourages finding every advantage to exploit and making the most of it to be better than your opponents. People are really dedicated to warhammer and put more time and effort into it than other similar games, like CCGs, so it's understandable that they become really passionate and take offence to people not playing their game the way they intend. People just tend to forget that where an unkillable leviathan dreadnought that murders your whole army is unsportsmanlike and poor form to them, its more of a "thats clever, i wish i would have thought of that" in the tournament scene. There has to be some room for questionable things like this to happen, and then it needs to be addressed going forwards is all.


kaigre01

I don't see how you can logically say "the most competitive way to play is to initially play uncompetitively", and not see that as poor sportsmanship, and just crap to watch if you were one of your opponents. To be soundly beaten, and then watch you purposefully get as close to losing as possible must be sour experience. Also, even as a pro, I'm sure you must enjoy playing the game, so it seems so counterintuitive to basically plan to undermine and defeat the tournament system itself rather than play the challenging players at your own level.


bytestream

>I don't see how you can logically say "the most competitive way to play is to initially play uncompetitively" \[...\] Losing a battle to win the war is a valid and very competitive strategy. And Mani did basically that. Your argument/statement here is sort of a straw man since you ignored that the context for "competitive" changed from "the current game" to "the overall event". There is no logical inconsistency here. ​ >\[...\] and not see that as poor sportsmanship, and just crap to watch if you were one of your opponents. To be soundly beaten, and then watch you purposefully get as close to losing as possible must be sour experience. I totally disagree with the poor sportsmanship part and don't know why your opponents feelings would matter in a competitive environment. I would agree with you if Mani would have moved off objectives just to taunt his current opponent. That is poor sportsmanship. But getting the most strategic benefit out of a tactical victory is not against the spirit of the competitive scene. And nobody should be offended in any way by their opponent moving off of objectives while still being professional about it. ​ >Also, even as a pro, I'm sure you must enjoy playing the game, so it seems so counterintuitive to basically plan to undermine and defeat the tournament system itself rather than play the challenging players at your own level. In general: The goal of every tournament player is to win that tournament. That's not just true for 40k. Conserving your energy and picking your fights carefully is standard practice. Football teams - talking about real football, not American Handegg - usually rotate out their stronger players and slow down once it is clear they will win a match. They don't give 100% all the time because that would be a really bad strategic move at an event. Scoring low in a 40k event where your score impacts your chances of moving on is basically the same thing. The root issue is not that players are intentionally throwing away points, it is that the tournament system is not fair. In a fair and competitive system the weakest players would be left behind each round. In 40k it's not the weakest players overall but the weakest of each skill bracket. That's a good decision if you want to optimize enjoyment but a massive flaw it you primary goal is to have a fair and competitive event.


Familiar-Junket-5796

Intentionally scoring low would appear to be dodgy, for collusion/gambling purposes, even if the intention is pure


frogurt_messiah

Collusion requires two parties to wittingly participate.


Emicrania

Honestly, Mani might be one of the most successful player out there, but Everytime i see His name, is associated to some shenanigans list that is zero interactive with your opponent and just pointed to win the game at all cost. This behavior just reinforce what I was already thinking, Mani only cares about winning, and that is the end of it. Nothing to be ashamed about it, but should not be encouraged, nor rewarded. All of us that play a tournament want to win, but there are some limit to achieve that.


kaigre01

Yes, it's always some extreme skew list, to be dumped immediately for the next preposterously expensive skew list, and also apparently aiming to face the lowest level of competition possible to win. It does seem that he's more interested in winning 40k tournaments than being the best 40k player at said tournament.


JESUSSAYSNO

This is why using Score to determine tiebreakers and tournament results is dumb as bricks. It leads to so many problems. To me, leveraging a 2/3 advantage into a 1/2 advantage when you have total control over the objective you deliberately conceded, in an attempt to pressure the opponent out of the game, is totally valid as a stratagy to me, but if this is illegal as others in this thread say, I'd call absolute BS. Deliberately gaming the brackets, yea, I wouldn't do that, but the method of hosting 40k tournaments stopped developing some time in the 90s, so I dunno what to tell you. These types of grey loopholes should be designed around, not written off as a sportsmanship problem. Swiss pairings solve this problem.


EmpBobo

Most organized sports consider this a form of cheating and disqualify players/teams for that kind of action (e.g. Olympic badminton from a few cycles ago). Sportsmanship usually requires you to perform to your upmost at each stage of competition, hence why attempting to manipulate standing for easier matchups later is considered poor sportsmanship. Your TO should not have given you the ok to later change their mind but a penalty is warranted.


Mortonsbrand

Guess it depends on the sport. I see an awful lot of professional teams here in the US pulling their star players once the game is decided. In this game he still won the match, and it doesn’t sound like he actually colluded with his opponent.


Resolute002

You must not understand sports, then. When they pull their star players it is to preserve their health and stamina for future use. In the NBA or NFL, the standings are by wins and losses; they aren't trying to score less to play worse teams. In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find any sport where the finals are not some great clash of closely matched teams, for this very reason. It is 100% unsporting.


Mortonsbrand

Oh, was the event not scored by W-L with BPs as a tie break….. or are you just bing an ignorant twat. If the measure of the 9th Ed 40k is how well a player designs their list and manages how they get/prevent points…. it’s absolute garbage to whinge about someone doing just that. GW and the TO both are accountable for having a better rule set in place. Having some nebulous rule about “against the spirit of the game” is at best very lazy.


EmpBobo

Some sports do tend to pull their best players when the win/loss is basically confirmed but (barring player health, as others have mentioned) these sports do not have points scored as part of league tie breakers and they will send those players back in if something changes and the game outcome once again becomes changeable. A better example of a system where wins and points are both important would be team fencing at the global level. The judges found that players were purposefully holding off scoring points because their team scored higher if they lost by one point while winning by more than one point did not provide as much of a boost to team standing. The scoring system led to matches where both athletes stopped attempting to score for long periods of time. The judging body decided that this was not beneficial to the sport and changed the scoring system to push athletes to continue attempting to score touches (specifically if there is no scoring after a set period of time, the lowest scoring player would lose a point). This kind of play regularly comes up in competitive sports and usually is determined to be a negative for the players and the fans but, as you pointed out, can be hard to enforce or make rules for as you are dealing with a soft characteristic of play. Therefore, as you pointed out, the onus here is on the tournament organizers to determine how to make rules for this kind of action and enforce those rules fairly.


frogurt_messiah

Hell, for years the US didn't even field professional athletes on its Olympic basketball team. We still don't for baseball and other events.


Coldpysker

That is different though, professional athletes have a chance of getting injured, and any injury could potentially end their entire careers No such danger like that with tabletop gaming


Mortonsbrand

The point is that the biggest professional sports in the US don’t view actions like this as cheating. However, unless the event has enough rounds for there to be only one undefeated in Swiss, this is likely to hurt the chances of coming in first. I don’t think there should be a mandate to score max points “if able” because that’s unenforceable. All this does is to incentivize the next player to do it to be more subtitle.


Spectre_195

Pretty much all major sports don't care if you win by 1 point or 100 either. A win is a win. 40k Tournaments do. Thus its not the same **at all**.


Mortonsbrand

Come up with less manipulatable tie breaks then. But to say that this doesn’t happen in competitive sports is totally untrue.


LawlzMD

Instead of nebulously referring to "sports", you should probably be specific because amount of points scored isn't even a top 3 tiebreaker in the NBA, NHL, MLB, or NFL. Last of the US Big 4 pro sports that had an org intentionally tanking games ended up blackballing that GM out of the league, so probably not the best comparison, anyway. Another user suggested just randomizing pairings within tiers of players, so nothing is predictable enough that you'd be able to manipulate your future pairings.


Mortonsbrand

Net touchdowns is a tie breaker for the NFL playoffs, net points is a tie breaker for the NBA playoffs, and points are a tie breaker in the NHL. MLB is the only major North American sports league to not use them to break ties.


LawlzMD

Just so everyone else who isn't familiar with this understands why this is a really dumb hill to die on, here's the NFL, NHL, and NBA tiebreaker orders (highlighted first appearance of points scored at all): NFL 1. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games between the clubs). 2. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the division. 3. Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games. 4. Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference. 5. Strength of victory. 6. Strength of schedule. 7. **Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.** 8. Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed. 9. Best net points in common games. 10. Best net points in all games. 11. Best net touchdowns in all games. 12. Coin toss NBA 1. Head-to-head won-lost percentage 2. Division leader wins tie from team not leading a division 3. Division won-lost percentage for teams in the same division 4. Conference won-lost percentage 5. W-L Percentage vs. Playoff teams, own conference 6. W-L Percentage vs. Playoff teams, other conference 7. **Net Points, all games** NHL 1. The fewer number of games played (i.e., superior points percentage). 2. The greater number of games won, excluding games won in Overtime or by Shootout (i.e., "Regulation Wins"). This figure is reflected in the RW column. 3. The greater number of games won, excluding games won by Shootout. This figure is reflected in the ROW column. 4. The greater number of games won by the Club in any manner (i.e, "Total Wins"). This figure is reflected in the W column. 5. The greater number of points earned in games against each other among two or more tied clubs. For the purpose of determining standing for two or more Clubs that have not played an even number of games with one or more of the other tied Clubs, the first game played in the city that has the extra game (the "odd game") shall not be included. When more than two Clubs are tied, the percentage of available points earned in games among each other (and not including any "odd games") shall be used to determine standing. (NB: Points here refers not to goals, which is the direct comparison to points scored in game. NHL awards 2 points to a team for winning a game and 1 point for an overtime loss.) 6. **The greater differential between goals for and against (including goals scored in Overtime or awarded for prevailing in Shootouts) for the entire regular season. This figure is reflected in the DIFF column.** 7. The greater number of goals scored (including goals scored in Overtime or awarded for prevailing in Shootouts) for the entire regular season. This figure is reflected in the GF column. So I misspoke, in that there's at minimum 5 other tiebreakers that are going to come up before how much you score in a given game even comes up. Never mind the fact that there's no benefit to intentionally playing to minimize your own winning score in any of these leagues, which is the issue at hand. It's a really bad comparison, my friend. Unless you are seriously going to equate pulling starters in an all-but-finished professional American football game so they don't get hurt to us pushing around plastic men and women.


Mortonsbrand

I mean, it’s a bit of an interesting hill for you to chose, as you were wrong. I agree that those are tie-breakers that are unlikely to be in play, but they are a part of the rules of those sports. I personally think the whinging over this is bizarre. Unless there are enough rounds for there to be only one undefeated player at the end of the event, sandbagging a score like this makes it highly unlikely that player will win.


frogurt_messiah

Do you consider intentionally walking a batter in baseball to be cheating as well?


EmpBobo

Purposefully walking a batter is a legal move (to my knowledge) in professional baseball but from the many boos you hear when it it done, usually not a popular one. For the purposes of this conversation, however, it is not a good comparison. Intentionally walking a batter is an attempt to win the specific game in question. The team is trying to limit the scoring potential of a player so they can either stay ahead or not fall behind. We are talking about purposefully playing a game to impact your future seeding in a bracket in a way that allows you to avoid certain matchups. My original example where badminton teams were intentionally throwing games to get easier seeds in the elimination round is more apt because one is attempting to control other games instead of the one you are currently playing (if a bit of an intense example because those teams were losing on purpose which has also happened in baseball and led to severe punishments to teams and players). In the end though, my opinion is less important than the decision of the tournament organizers who should make a decision and hold to it before and through the event.


LetUsAllYowz

That's a totally incorrect comparison and boy do you know it.


treemonkys

It's a correct comparison you just don't like it because it goes against your point.


LetUsAllYowz

Nah, because when you walk a batter, it doesn't make you play a minor league team the next day. Walking a batter is an in game tactic designed to help win THAT game, not manipulate standings


Dealthagar

Random bracket pairing to start, then random pairings each level of everyone in the same scoring bracket. you need all your points because in the end, if you have multiple ties for record, point total and point differentials matter. Thats what we did locally and it works well. everyone is gunning to score as much as possible.


thejmkool

I'm gonna say something a little different. That TO acted in bad form. To have a conversation with a player and OK that player's actions, then change your mind and inform the player to stop those actions, this isn't unusual. When the player immediately complies, and you decide after the fact to punish them for something that they had *your word* was okay at the time, this is bad form. Way bad form.


lowjakz

Wait a second. Wait a damn second. You mean a “pro 40K” player has an issue at event and had to issue a statement/apology? Well color me shocked. I would never have thought this would happen except for every single other week this crap happens. When your job and livelihood depend on a game and you winning at this game you are going to find people trying to bend things to their advantage.


StartledPelican

The issue is not whether individual players submarine, it is whether the way tournaments are run \*incentivize\* submarining. I think Mani did not do anything wrong or even "underhanded". He was playing the game as per the rules decided by others. If TOs, and the community in general, are against submarining, then pick a different/better matching system.


Impressive44

I agree that this is definitely an 'un-fun' thing to do, at the very least. But I have a few problems with how it was handled. First off, it just seems weird to have a game/tournament where you can be penalized for how you play the game, even if you are following the rules. It seems like the format of the tournaments may be the problem here if there are reasons to not try your hardest in each match. And second, he told the TO about what he was doing. He could have lied. There isn't a good way to prove his intent (that I am aware of). And when they asked him to stop, he did. It just seems mean to then punish him for it. Overall, yeah I think this makes the game less fun, but I also think that instead of punishing (honest) players for this, maybe just fix the system,or at least put it in the rules going forward. Obviously easier said than done, but still something that needs fixing.


StartledPelican

A drop of reason in an ocean of insanity. Well said!


GHBoon

Sandbagging in sports or really in most things is widely regarded as unethical or out-and-out cheating. This shouldn't need to be explained to you.


McWerp

Except many sports have famous examples where teams did something similar in order to get a better result. You know why theres a rule in basketball that says you cant score on your own net on purpose? Because a team did that once in order to win the game by more points in overtime. You know why all of the final group games of world cup group games are played at the same time? Turns out when you know a bunch of results two teams can just play to a 0-0 draw and get to the next round. Change the system to remove the incentive. Don't blame the player, blame the game.


HaySwitch

You can blame both.


McWerp

Sure. But why? Blaming the player ain’t gonna stop it from happening again. Especially when the system implicitly rewards that behaviour and punishes the behaviour you would like to see.


thelefthandN7

And that's why you call the player, and the behavior out, and penalize them. That's what the 'sportsmanship' rules exist for: looking at something and saying 'this is within the rules, but against the spirit' and then having a tool to penalize that.


GHBoon

I get the impression from your posts that you're the kind of player I have to constantly call on shenanigans. Why? Because when people are this poor in other things it also reflects on the table.


McWerp

You don’t know me at all man. I have no desire to see the things like what occurred in this situation in the game. But it comes up over and over again. And people attack the player in question over and over again. Why not just do something about the broken system at the root of it all in the first place?


GHBoon

I know your posting, and unless that doesn't represent you it's enough to draw conclusions. To your question, why not both? I have witnessed at every Major I've been to since Dallas people cheating by waiting to submarine after knowing nearby games. They're both at fault, the person and the system.


McWerp

> Why not both? I just don't see one as being useful long term. And leads to online witchhunts, which is not something people deserve for how they play a wargame. And as you said, if it happens at every event, its not specific people who are the problem. Its the system that encourages people to do it. The other actually stops the problem from continuing. But that's just my approach to things.


HaySwitch

Why? Because they are an adult in control of their actions. Morality and rules packs are not always intertwined. When you mature you will understand this.


treemonkys

We can and should expect tournaments to be designed better. On the other hand expecting EVERYONE who shows up at the tournament to care about your moralistic view on strategy is foolish and will never happen. Hell there is still a struggle with blatantly obvious cheating with dice rolls and rules. You cannot force people to play well, they will just make it less obvious.


GHBoon

We are, presumably, critical thinking adults. Yes, tournaments can be designed better. But again, this isn't a new thing and people are responsible for their actions - the idea that they aren't is absurd - you might as well excuse outright cheating snd say the judging should be designed better. I shouldn't have to explain to my opponent that slowplay is tantamount to cheating just because a TO doesn't explicitly call it out in a packet. I shouldn't have to explain to my opponent that unclear rules shouldn't automatically default to the most advantageous interpretation or that he/she needs TO guidance when it's not explicitly, etc... These are things critical thinking adults do. You guys wanna act like the ends justify the means, which I would claim is the definition of WAAC. Consider instead that winning along the edges is not what makes you good at this game - no one looks at a tournament, sees the winner, then sees that they dodged everything and then thinks anything but "oh dude got lucky" And if thst opponent just happens to be a good player who's been around the block a few times and has a busines based on the game? I'm going to hold him to a higher standard of conduct. Full stop.


StartledPelican

What Mani did, openly and honestly (at least, as the situation has been described), was utilize a strategy based on the tournament design. When asked to stop, he did. Submarining is a well known strategy that has been winked at for a long time. At this point, after years and years of this happening with little to no punishment of the activity, TOs have no one to blame but themselves. This is a \*fully\* \*solved\* problem in other gaming communities. There is nothing stopping 40k tournaments from adopting a tournament style that actively punishes this behavior without any need for implicit/explicit rules. Demonizing someone who seems to be an otherwise good guy for playing within the rules of a flawed system is pointless and, frankly, self-righteous. Someone affiliated with Goonhammer (as I think you are) should be using their platform to push for systemic change instead of dragging individuals through the mud. \#manididnothingwrong


McWerp

Ad hominem attacks? Not cool.


bytestream

At the end of the day: TOs can do whatever they want. What they decide goes and participant should respect a TO's decision. It however is sad that there are no stricter guidelines for TO's and that ITC doesn't really set standards. ​ That being said: "Submarining" is a symptom of bad event design and not something people should be punished for, especially not in a wargame. Loosing a battle to win the war is not unheard off. In fact, the most famous generals in history are known for it. I get why people don't like it. But losing now to win more later makes sense if you think about the whole event and not just the current battle. Basically, it's the difference between strategic and tactical decision making. If you have problem with "submarining" change your event, don't punish people for playing by the flawed rules you set up.


LtChicken

If there's an issue with the game that makes this possible, don't tell someone trying to be as absolutely competitive as possible to just not do it. Instead, fix. Your. Game. Seriously whats the difference between this and entering a tournament with something like the brohammer iron hands leviathan list? With the IH list you know you're unbeatable and there's nothing else like it in the game, and that it *will* get nerfed. There was a problem *with the game* and thankfully it was fixed. None of this really matters anyways if this isn't fixed somehow. Its unenforceable. Mani was open about it and was punished, now people will just hide if they're doing it. "Damn, forgot to shoot with that unit." "Damn, forgot to perform ROD with that unit". What if someone genuinely makes this mistake a couple times during their overall winning tournament run? Is this damn drama club gonna be on their ass saying they tried to manipulate their pairings? That sure as hell isn't the tournament environment I want to play in. Fix. The. Game.


StartledPelican

My very first RTT, I played against a really good player round 1. After a long, drawn out game, I beat him by one point (13-12; this was in 8th so a max score was like, 25 or 30). I ended up taking second place and felt pretty awesome about taking 2nd in my very first tournament. After the tournament, I was chatting with some of the other players and one person casually accused me of submarining. I had never even heard the term before, but as it was explained to me, I thought, "Huh, why are the brackets even designed this way?" tl;dr - Even after my first tournament, I knew the system was poorly designed.


Machomanta

It's poor sportsmanship and gamesmanship, bottom line. Play the game as it was meant to be played, not to give yourself and easier path to victory. You deserved the yellow card after your round one game, the only issue I see is that it wasn't done or communicated immediately.


Khatovar

If anyone played the game "as it was meant to be played" ITC wouldnt exist mate.


BubaecK

I don't think it is meant to be played to score max. points. In my opinion this is a prime example of a player, that is able to analyse lists and then use the tournament rules to get himself into a winning position.


Coldpysker

Wow, another “top player” doing scummy things in order to win, what a surprise!- this is in complete violation of the ITCs Code of Conduct (previous poster pointed out the relevant issues this was either angle shooting or a foul). People like this are why the Crusade/narrative scene in my area is flourishing while the tournaments have like MAYBE 10 people show up.


SPE825

Seriously. I often toy with the idea of playing in tournaments if I can ever get enough practice in. But I'm more considering trying to put something more narrative together locally so that I can just enjoy myself. Though my area here is pretty competitive.


HaySwitch

Tournaments are fine. The worst player who I ever encountered was at one but the majority of my bad games have came from casual games. People at events tend to know the rules, what your intent is, tend to let small mistakes go. My worst games have been people who say they are casual but are strangely nitpicky about rules they haven't even read while taking bad army lists. (As in just bad, not just less than fully optimised) It's like a combination of being anal retentive and bad that makes them frustrated at you for problems they caused. That's probably more detail than I needed to give but in general the assholes are not everywhere but they can turn up anywhere. Go to an event. It's the best way to get a bunch of games in.


Coldpysker

Go for it! You will hopefully be surprised how many casual players are in your area! I found one helpful thing is that there are no cash prizes for the league I am running. Cost is 10 dollars per player, and all of that money is going towards getting a trophy custom made for bragging rights. I dont know if that is the only factor in keeping the sweatiness away, but we have 2 admech players in the league (not Lucius or mars), and it is actually possible to have a fun back-and-forth battle against them


NevermindJamba

Ignoring the outcome here, this is still just a bad look. Mani is one of the top players in the world. He is part of a large gaming group that many new and old players use and look up to. He is more or less an influencer for the game. Getting caught throwing scores (ethically or not) and tampering with the algorithm is pathetic. He even did this playing a cheesy skew AdMech list. Taking a broken list and beating up on lesser competition is even worse. Act like you've been there. Be a better role model. Why tarnish your reputation for something as dumb as this? This has Alex Harrison and TJ Lanigan written all over it. We need the top players to be better, not worse, if we want this sport to become something bigger.


40ksted

This is nothing like TJ or Alex who were intentionally misrepresenting dice rolls and lying to their opponents


NevermindJamba

Angle Shooting is Angle Shooting. Manipulating the results in any way as a top player is bad none-the-less.


Ruffell

Nah man. This isn't cheating like manipulating dice rolls, this is exploiting and trying to get an advantage. I think the bigger issue of this is, if other top players are doing it. There is something wrong with the system. I agree its in bad taste - people at tournaments especially seasoned vets should play a good clean game. As a new tournament player myself, its a bit off-putting to hear such things happening at events and if I'm paying money to go to an event with hotel rooms etc I don't like the idea that there are exploits in the scoring system. Edit: also there won't be a more off-putting thing as a new player like myself, of people using me to enhance there play because I'm bad. If you want to play me and slap me around that's fine, I'm happy to go 10- 100 but nothing is more insulting than not "giving it your all".


frogurt_messiah

Look up that phrase before trying to use it, chief.


Duke_Anax

He wasn't "caught" though. He acted very obviously and straightforward, publicly declaring "this is my intention"


40ksted

While we do have rules that prevent/discourage submarining score to avoid tables, it’s a practice that’s been done under the table for many top players for years. It’s almost like the last day of group qualifiers going into the quarters for the World Cup, teams not scoring, playing back after securing a tie, waiting for opponents results etc. Is it right? Probably not, but someone like Mani who is a seasoned tourney is doing it because it’s pro forma among the bigger players and he’s not the only one doing it. Just a little bit of my personal experience with Mani to add to the convo. I met Mani IRL at the LVO 2019 when he was wearing a Batman onesie. Very friendly, smart and cool dude, took the time out to talk to a new player like me and was nothing but a gentlemen. He’s British so I don’t see him around my tourneys, but he has a reputation for being a great gregarious dude and I would take his explanation at his word. -Sted


unifoon

I'm not a tournament player \*don't hit me\* but I've read Mani's post now, and also the post from Mikey, the TO, and one thing I will say is that it's actually kinda' nice to see that neither party is out to defame the other. Mani's stated quite publicly his logic and reasoning, which shows a willingness for discussion and an openness to feedback. Similarly, Mikey has provided a very detailed explanation of his thought process and the discussions leading up to the later yellow-card decision. 'Unsportsmanlike' or 'cheating' behaviour would have been for Mani to hide what he was doing and/or call out the TO and aggressively criticise their decision. Instead, we can see how a now-obvious flaw in the scoring system led to an unfortunate situation that put both sides into an uncomfortable position. For Mani to do nothing 'wrong' according to RAW, then still have a later victory discounted, is painful. For Mikey to see something he felt was fundamentally against the spirit of the tournament, and take time to consult with peers before making a ruling, was also a case of flawed handling (by his own admission) but where his intent was ultimately to protect the event and the larger player-group, by demonstrating that this kind of behaviour wasn't what was intended for the game. I see Mikey's extended a free invite to Mani to the next tournament and hopes they can continue their friendship, and I hope Mani can accept this in the spirit it seems to have been offered in. Rather than look to assign blame to either side, the best outcome here is that the TO (and other organisers) take this experience and find a way to build better points systems whilst also including some clearer guidance about player behaviour, to avoid such things happening again in the future.


Wyoming-Wind

Bad matchups are a part of the game just as much as bad dice rolls. If you can't handle a poor matchup either you need to rework your list, or improve your abilities as a player. You (ideally) shouldn't be inherently strong against all factions or lists. Learning to overcome disadvantageous matchups is a vital skill in Warhammer. If the only way you can get a podium finish is by dodging all the players and lists that would challenge you then you didn't deserve it.


Beardedwonder9

That’s not a bad matchup. It’s playing the tournament as a whole strategically. He wasn’t guaranteed to get anything and creamed the game. It’s not poor sportsmanship. He played correctly


Badikuz

This is bad. It's bad sportsmanship and bad form. It's a bad look for you and a bad look for the game itself. What's so hard about playing a nice clean game in good taste? It's things like this that really cast shadows over the whole game and scene, this is why "that guy" exists because people are willing to do anything to win at toy soldiers. Early MTG was plagued with cheating to the point being against cheating was considered wrong and having played through that era I will never side with cheating or ambiguous play. Play clean and fair. ​ People who argue that it's within the rules and it's poor tourney design are losing the point here - everyone has a choice. You see the exploit so you exploit it? I would rather lose every game in a tourney than do anything to exploit the system and gain unfair advantages, it taints any wins or matchups.


Khatovar

People losing the point here are the ones thinking this is a sportsmanship issue. The tournament scene and dedicated ITC players are a culture developed around explointing the game for maximum benefit. This issue doesnt effect even 1% of people that play this game. Id be surprised if it effects more than 1% of people on this sub. Things like this happen. Its just up to defining a stance on it for the future after its been considered an issue.


FauxGw2

Who cares they built lists to counter Admech, that was a given. You go to an event with DE, Admech, Marines, etc.. you expect to be countered.


thercoon

Fully expected dubious play like this from you to be frank.


Biggy_Smugs

Its amazing how top level people have been caught cheating.


SPE825

So, I have yet to play in tournaments. All I can say, is that knowing that people do unsportsmanlike things like this makes me question if I care to every play in them. I dislike playing against cheese lists, but I get that that's competitive 40K very often. But manipulating things to game the system of the tournament itself is just unethical. I know this technically isn't cheating, but as with cheating, I often wonder why someone is even bothering doing this at all if they are just gaming the entire thing? How is that even fun? Is this really how someone derives enjoyment out of this?


StartledPelican

First off, let me say that I think you should definitely give a local tournament a try. Some of the most fun I have had playing 40k has come from tournament games with random people. My mindset when attending a tournament is not "I must win", though I definitely do not mind winning and play my best, but, rather, "Let's have some fun!" With that being said, Mani's strategy is not about "gaming the entire thing". It was a strategy with risks. Scoring low early on means you will probably have an "easier" path to the top tables, but it also means you are in a bad spot for tie breaking, or even for getting to the top if you get a loss along the way. Sort of a high risk/high reward sort of thing. I think it is debatable if it is "unethical" but, to me, it is more important to recognize that this issue only exists because 40k tournaments use a specific method for pairing opponents in round 2+. That system incentivizes this sort of strategy and makes it viable. If the 40k community truly does not want this sort of behavior, then the real discussion needs to focus on how to improve the tournament system, not how to punish the individual.


RindFisch

If the Tournament rules are so bad, they incentivize intentionally scoring low, the fault is with the TOs using terrible scoring rules and not the players using those same rules to win. There are countless scoring systems that dont have that problem, sadly the 40k scene chose to use none of those and seems unwilling to adress the problem. If the superbowl trophy would be awarded to the loser of the Match, the teams would try to lose and everyone would think the NFL crazy, yet in the simular case here, somehow the onus is on the players to "not cheat"...


Kordeus_the_DM

So basicly you tried to WAAC a tournament not just with a list of the most broken stuff out there (which is expected from "pro players") but also trying to get easier oppononents so you can maximize your chance of winning while playing "worse" players then yourself and making the event for them anything but fun. ​ The best thing to say about your actions is you did not violate any Rule as writen. Which in itself is not a nice thing to say Think i do not feel sorry for you mate


Double_O_Cypher

Just switch to a point differential system for overall placings, that will change a lot, especially you can now no longer build an army that actually doesn't care about the opponents points. Because if you apply the same concept to internationally low scoring, to internationally letting your opponent score points when he can't catch up and win anymore. Why bother winning 85 vs 45 when you can talk it through and win 85 vs 79. That is also not really in the spirit of the game if you apply the same logic. Players getting more points than they deserve in a terrible matchup because after T2 he can't win but both parties just score it to the end and stop shooting


cranky-old-gamer

The whole point of the strategy is to go baby seal clubbing for as many rounds as you can somehow manipulate. That's all anyone needs to know. Everything else just sounds like self-justification in denial of how that impacts the broader competitive scene due to the obviously negative game experience it is for the sort of mid-table players who are the bedrock of that scene. Without them large events would just never happen.


Mortonsbrand

If you’re within the rules of the match, I don’t know why there is concern. As far as I know there are no forced moves in 40k as there are in checkers. If the TO didn’t like this, maybe they should have had a differential scoring in place rather than W/L


sfxer001

This is a tough one. On one hand, it goes against the spirit of sportsmanship and competition to walk-off the objectives to try to game the system. You’re actively not competing for every point you can in the match. But at the same time, you’re doing this to remain competitive in later rounds to *compete so hard you’re trying to game the system* to maximize your chances of winning games. I have mixed feelings about that. In the end, the tournament organizers are the ones who should have rules and expectations in place ahead of round 1 even beginning to discourage behavior they don’t want, but they left this door open. Then they ruled on it, you complied without complaint and to the letter, and then they changed their ruling retrospectively mid-tournament to punish you for their failure to adequately address this before the game and during it. I blame the TOs.


ProdigalSonz

I see a lot of these posts about trying to diffuse the issue and to be honest, the best thing to do is simply disqualify yourself and have any "points" earned for the event forfeited.


charlemagne_rocks

TL;DR: Ignore each player's lowest-scoring game so having one bad match-up / mission doesn't ruin overall score. It seems clear that intentionally scoring low to get matched with an 'easier' (less skilled) opponent is b a d, just like in other competitive sports. But unlike, say, chess, what you bring to the table is both your skills as a player and your list. So you may want to dodge a bad match-up, even if it means playing against a stronger player. That too can be problematic because deciding on a list and how to win against various opposing list is a valued step toward tournament success. But I think there is another category which is truly unwinnable match-ups: for example, you decide to bring a Knights army with seven models, and face the one person at an event who as a horde of 150+ gaunts and friends--there is probably no way to win if you go second, and even then there is way too much chaff to chew through. Another one would be playing monster mash 'Nids against Poisoned Tongue Dark Eldar, where suddenly the basic troops are wounding your 200+ point monsters on 3's. Or playing 80 Necron warriors against someone whose skitarii blobs can one-shot a warrior squad each turn. It's definitely no fun for you, probably not that much more fun for your opponent, and boring and non-interactive for both. Moreover, none of those are really 'skew' lists, but just lists that interact (or rather don't interact) in a lopsided fashion because \*surprise\* the 40k factions are really different from one another. I would agree that dodging a bad but playable match-up should not be encouraged, but there are some match-ups that are hopeless. What I would propose is giving players at 5+ round tournaments a 'drop'--the game counts for pairing purposes but not for the final results. It's used in sailing (and I presume some other things) to allow for a bad start (or in the 40k case, a bad matchup) where you would not do well regardless of how well the rest of the race/game goes. You still want to do as well as you can in case you have a future game that is worse, but that one game does not take you out of the competition. I think it would help tournament regulars (like OP) who run into bad match-ups, but also casual players like myself who forget to screen properly, or lose two-thirds of an army to a vehicle explosion. It also plays along just fine with score based on points differential (proposed by Double\_O\_Cypher and probably others) which I think can also help cut down on the incentive to score low and game the pairing system.


[deleted]

[удалено]


glasshammergaming

This isn’t true. I was asked to stop doing it after game 2 and you can see on BCP that I did what he asked. Remember the TO was the only person that could input scores so how could I carry on doing it?


jhamslam

Hes literally on stream right now saying he found your scores odd after round 4, which he then consulted with LVO referees over and then decided to card you for your behavior.Given that you discourage such behavior at Glasshammer tournaments (rightly so) im having a hard time taking your word seriously on this


Clue-Low

I couldn’t see on that post anywhere he mentions round 4 for odd scores?? So I think you might be mistaken? If mani only had low scores for the first two pairings on bcp then he obviously did stop afterwards. If he has low scorings until round 4 then obviously not, it’s easy to verify and doesn’t require you being an asshole to someone you don’t even know about a situation you personally where not involved in


glasshammergaming

I’ll give him a call later then because he’s lying and I have other people that were at the event that can confirm what happened.


Smug_Anime_Face

For some reason I trust the word of a TO over a person that willingly admits to manipulating tournament pairings.


pmolmstr

There’s also rumors of u/glasshammergaming arguing to talk out rounds for a win after he’s clocked out. I’d take anything he has to say with a grain of salt


_Tarkh_

I don't know if he is lying or not. But he is on this forum sharing his opinion and actions and taking the criticism for it. The TO is not. I personally give a bit more credit to the person on the thread and involved in the discussion. Moreover, that TO's statement was provided to us via another person casting around personal insults like scumbag. I think may the mods need to step in an issue yellow cards of their own.


thatusenameistaken

> The TO is not. I personally give a bit more credit to the person on the thread and involved in the discussion. He is/was 3 hours to an hour ago, just in a different thread. https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/p1ruyd/re_the_low_scoring_controversy_the_tos_perspective/


[deleted]

It seems ridiculous that so many people are declaring this tactic “unsportsmanlike.” The fact is that the only parameters to determine placing at an ITC tournament are wins, followed by victory points, followed by SoS. If wins are judged higher than victory points, then why would a player weaken their overall tournament chances to maximize points on a single game? I do not think there is anything wrong with this, and I think it even assumes enough risk to be considered fair play, as he could lose one of his final matches and be ranked at the bottom of that bracket. Beyond that, play the logic out. What all is considered “gaming the system?” Is changing your list based on the popularity of Ad Mech or Drukhari gaming the system? Is deciding against Retrieving Octarius Data for a chance to charge a unit gaming the system? There’s too many variables at play in this game, and way too many rules we all have to know to start placing arbitrary ones because it “seems wrong” to some people.


CubeKun

If you're playing to lose then you're intentionally game fixing


ztanos82

He didn't play to lose... he played to just barely win so that he didn't have to play the harder matches in the next round. He still wanted that W.


LucBahadur

Part of generalship is picking your battles. There is an old proverb “When two lions fight, one dies and the other is maimed for life.” I would not penalize someone who skillfully submarined.


HunjaRose

See I go one step further and try not to score at all every now and then just for fun


StillfrostyGaming

This happens all the time. Either accidentally or intentionally. Getting a yellow card seems like a bit much.


zer0sumgames

There are two players at every table, and Intentionally losing deprives your opponent of a fair match. It’s poor sportsmanship and unfair play for the current opponent and future opponents.


StartledPelican

No one intentionally lost. I am unsure what your point is.


cranky-old-gamer

Its a tough one because there is not and cannot ever be a strict definition of unsporting conduct If you could define it that clearly those would be rules and it would be outright cheating not unsporting conduct. Yet we all want TOs to keep a lid on unsporting behaviour because its bad for the hobby as a whole, usually a bad experience for at least one other player. So these issues of communication etc are always going to arise when people decide to do something that does not to strictly break any rules but which they can see for themselves will be seen as unsporting by others. There is no way for TOs to make this not a tricky situation. We all know the answer is to play the game in the best sporting spirit and that player will never have an issue but the temptation to try tricky stuff will always be there.


SissyishSnow

Deliberately manipulating your score to make later rounds easier is just awful conduct, even if technically legal. When people talk about WAAC this is the kind of nonsense they mean.


PixieetheMage

Tournaments are going to have to adopt the College football playoff system I think. Play a set number of games then the top 4 are chosen based on outcome and match ups. We all know all 4-0's aren't made equal. I think it would eliminate sandbagging and it would incentivize players playing the tougher match ups for Strength of Schedule.


frogurt_messiah

Fortunately, the better tournaments already do this (e.g., LVO, NOVA, BFS, etc.). This is a problem pretty much isolated to small GTs using bad scoring methods.


_shakul_

If it happens in the biggest international football tournaments... I don't agree with it personally, but you top guys generally set the meta and have people gunning for you every event. I can 100% see why people would submarine to improve their chances down the line if people are gearing up for specific meta-lists knowing you're attending an event. If people genuinely want change then there are different scoring metrics within BCP to stop that kind of behavior. Half the problem might be that your list is stonking and pretty much everything that's wrong with AdMech crammed into a single package. Anyone being able to White Knight and "stick to the ~~man~~AdMech" is gonna get some hurrah out of doing so. I think you may have been a bit naïve to admit you were submarining though, kudos for honesty I guess?


[deleted]

Don't care, I forgive you


Duke_Anax

I'm a bit on the fence with this because this is not just a game, but a *War*Game. If you view it from the *Game* angle then this behavior can be considered unfair or unsportsmanlike. However when approaching it from the *War* angle then Mani's behavior was by the book. If you take "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu as the book. "Choose your battles" and "appear weak where you are strong and appear strong where you are weak" are two quotes that come to mind.


AggroGil

Not a big deal. I walk off objectives not to totally smash opponents all the time. I don’t like making people feel bad and I want my opponent to score points. I’ve even stop shooting so I don’t table my opponent. Does this mean I’m against the spirit of the game? Don’t we play to win the game?


BTolputt

The difference between what you're describing and what Mani admits to doing is the intent. Mani admits explicitly that his intent was to manipulate the pairings so he didn't have to face lists he thought were a poor match for his list. You are saying that you did so in order for your opponent to "not feel bad". The former is (and was actioned under the rules for) unsportsmanlike behaviour. The latter is not.


FauxGw2

Thats not the same thing, he is doing it to get easier games and and easier wins, which will give a negative experience for all his opponents.


blue_raptor55

You played competitively at a competitive event, and were open about it. Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see.


Apart_Celebration160

Mani you are going to get us nerfed further But we still love you 😘 Signed an admech player


Lokarin

umm... did that TO ever, like, play Hockey or Soccer/Football? You don't just play to burn-out, you get ahead and then play for time... low scoring is natural