Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Joe Censored

Was it a **** move not letting opponent change his dial turn 1?

Recommended Posts

There needs to be a line drawn in the sand between casual and non casual. It's a store championship... If you cant work out your dial, then you're going to have a bad time.  There is too much at stake in a store champs, it isn't just a battle for phat loot, if you do well enough, you get a great end of tournament prize. 

To put it another way, if this guy won because of his net list, then went on to win a few more and put you out of top 8, 4 or what ever. How would you feel then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Archangelspiv said:

There needs to be a line drawn in the sand between casual and non casual. It's a store championship... If you cant work out your dial, then you're going to have a bad time.  There is too much at stake in a store champs, it isn't just a battle for phat loot, if you do well enough, you get a great end of tournament prize. 

To put it another way, if this guy won because of his net list, then went on to win a few more and put you out of top 8, 4 or what ever. How would you feel then?

Completely disagree.  Events should be welcoming and inclusive at all levels.

How would I feel?  Like I didn't win enough games to make the cut and the guy who played better got in instead.  Period.  How would I feel if he was 9th because I screwed him over a clearly accidental dial at a meaningless point?  Pretty *** about myself.

 

Again and again I come back to that it's the more successful players who would let the dial be changed.  That's a clear pattern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP did not screw anyone over. Period. His opponent made a mistake, he took advantage of it. What is the issue with that? 

At no point did I say I would not let them change the dial. What I did say was that he shouldn't feel bad for the outcome that happened. You can win the exact same amount of games, but MoV can be the difference between a top finish and just missing out. The OP's opponent conceded because his net list couldn't take on 3 X Wings.... Fenn could have probably killed all of them with Manaroo feeding tokens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have played a tournament game where my opponent flew a palp shuttle off the board on the first turn.  He didn't ask to take it back and I didn't offer.   I did offer to buy him a beer afterwards though.

I wouldn't have allowed a change had it been asked for.  If I fly off the board I fly off the board and don't ask for a change so I see no reason why my opponent should be any different.  The key, in my opinion, is to treat your opponent the way you would wish to be treated yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Archangelspiv said:

The OP's opponent conceded because his net list couldn't take on 3 X Wings.... Fenn could have probably killed all of them with Manaroo feeding tokens. 

This is my issue with netlisting.

Someone who'd practiced that list would be confident of beating 3 T-65s with just Fenn and Manaroo. I know I would be.

Some people just expect these lists to win them games by themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Stevey86 said:

This is my issue with netlisting.

Someone who'd practiced that list would be confident of beating 3 T-65s with just Fenn and Manaroo. I know I would be.

Some people just expect these lists to win them games by themselves.

You don't necessarily know that player's motivations for taking that list, or conceding the game afterwards. I don't think it's unfair to tar him with that brush. Perhaps the match was just soured a little for him after getting punished so for making a simple mistake, and he didn't feel like playing it through with a disadvantage? Whether you agree with that or not, it's still completely understandable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Again and again I come back to that it's the more successful players who would let the dial be changed.  That's a clear pattern.

I can't speak for anybody else. But I know that people pay attention to what successful players do and, while everyone is free to make up their own minds, I do feel there's a responsibility for those of us who have done well to project a positive attitude towards the competitive environment.

But it's all subjective. As many others have said; there's no right or wrong answer. Every player has their own personal line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, jesper_h said:

You don't necessarily know that player's motivations for taking that list, or conceding the game afterwards. I don't think it's unfair to tar him with that brush. Perhaps the match was just soured a little for him after getting punished so for making a simple mistake, and he didn't feel like playing it through with a disadvantage? Whether you agree with that or not, it's still completely understandable.

Yeah, he was probably not in a good headspace after making a mistake like that. I get conceding; probably needed to take a break, get some air and get it back together. I've mentally kicked myself around for forgetting a activation that could have given me a slight advantage in a single attack. Flying 1/3 of my list off the board on round 1? I'd be a mental case for a few minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok haven read just a partial amount of this thread i am not sure the following was addressed. How would you deal with the opponent being a 10 year kid? The crummy part would be there for sure but would you let them redial then not the second time or let them fly off the board in hopes they learn from the mistake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've encountered this type of situation plenty of times.  People forget to take an action, they dial up a major goof, put their ship facing the board edge on deployment.

First, I give my opponent a warning.  Something to the effect of "be careful.  Not everyone is going to be as lenient".  I'm not trying to be mean, but I want to stress to them that it is within my ability/right to call the judge and force them to fly right off the board.  Then, I'd offer a fair swap.  If it's a hard 3 to the right, I'd say they can go hard 3 to the left.  No substitutions.  If they forget an action, I'll generally let them focus as it is the one to cause the least amount of disturbance to the game state.

Now I'm talking turn 1.  If on turn 6, you pick a hard 3 right off the board, sorry.  That's long into the game and I can't differentiate between you thinking you had the ability to make the maneuver and genuinely making a mistake.

It's totally up to you.  You don't have to feel bad because your opponent made a bad move.  They can concede as well.  Just remember to factor in the whole, "Do unto others" thing because you bet your *** that he will never let you take back a move if you play sloppy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have TO'd many, many events and this comes up more than it should. Fact is, the player picked his maneuverer, placed his dial and now must make the move. As far as your feeling bad about not letting him change it....  I applaud you for feeling bad about it, but it's not on you to make sure your opponent has a great experience. Mistakes happen and some have dire consequences. You called a TO over and they made a ruling, that is the best, most fair thing you could have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Were you technically in the right? Sure. Was it **** move? Yes, absolutely. I don't get all of the relativism going on in this thread. Doing 'right by you' in this case was a **** move. It was turn one and this is a game of plastic spaceships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stevey86 said:

This is my issue with netlisting.

Someone who'd practiced that list would be confident of beating 3 T-65s with just Fenn and Manaroo. I know I would be.

Some people just expect these lists to win them games by themselves.

As it's been said, there can be a variety of reasons to concede, most of them valid. I would assume that, in places that get Regionals and above, Store Championships are at least somewhat casual events. In such circumstances, is the guy who not only decided to fly your ship off the board on a trivial mistake,but called a TO over to do it, somebody you'd find fun to spend your next hour flying against? If he wants to win more than he wants to play, why not simply give it to him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

As it's been said, there can be a variety of reasons to concede, most of them valid. I would assume that, in places that get Regionals and above, Store Championships are at least somewhat casual events. In such circumstances, is the guy who not only decided to fly your ship off the board on a trivial mistake,but called a TO over to do it, somebody you'd find fun to spend your next hour flying against? If he wants to win more than he wants to play, why not simply give it to him?

Personally I'd find it motivating and would take great pleasure in beating him with 2/3 of a list. Which considering the matchup in question, really isn't outside the realms of possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Porkchop Express said:

It's still a mistake at a tournament. If you are going to play competitively you cannot expect to have your hand held, and ask to redo moves when you realise you made a mistake.

But the effect and circumstances of the mistakes are very different. One is so obviously wrong that it has nothing to do with player ability (but with concentration at best) and renders the whole game pointless, while the other is directly a result of player skill and simply a very common occurence of the game.

But then again I go to tournaments to play as many games as possible with people I don't usually play with, so my 'operational parameters' are quite clear. E.g. If I were flying my ship off the board I'd suggest that he gets a 100-0 win and we keep playing with the intended maneuver. If I manage to win then we both know ;), and otherwise there is no problem at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shaunmerritt said:

You called a TO over and they made a ruling, that is the best, most fair thing you could have done.

And the only thing the TO could really do is force the ship off the table.  The rules do not allow for changing a dial in this situation... Technically the OP has no ability to allow him to change the dial.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Joe Censored said:

I felt terrible.


You have answered the question you have posed yourself. You felt terrible. Thats the only pertinent emotion to discuss here. When you put yourself on trial, you have found yourself wanting. The rest of this thread is blustery winds to help drown out your feelings.


You did nothing mechanically wrong. You didn't cheat, but for yourself, that wasn't enough. Because you felt terrible. You did it right, and you felt terrible, and so learn from this and adjust your behavior in the future, knowing how this incident made you feel.

Edited by E Chu Ta
Wonky Formatting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read the whole thread, just the first and last page, but I've seen a lot of good statements made for both sides of the issue. Well done so far everyone! I'm not going to try to step into the debate, nor do I really have anything to say to the OP, but reading a couple of posts in this thread has given me an idea of what I want to do the next time an issue like this crops up in one of my games. 

If my opponent screws up a maneuver, I'll tell them straight up, "No, I am not going to let *you* change the maneuver, but, if you want, *I* will pick a new maneuver for you that doesn't send you off the board." Then I'd pick something like a K-turn that left him pointing the wrong way and stressed, or something that put him on a rock. Then he still gets a bit of a penalty for his mistake, but one that he could recover from. 

Conversely, if I'm the one who screws up and my opponent wants to let me change the maneuver (not that I would ask for it- I try to accept my mistakes) I'm going to offer to let my opponent change my dial to whatever he wants. 

EDIT: in either scenario, whether I won or lost the game, I would feel satisfied with the outcome. No feeling of guilt for punishing someone too hard or bitterness over getting cheated out of a game because I wasn't strict enough following the rules. 

Edited by Herowannabe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Herowannabe said:

I haven't read the whole thread, just the first and last page, but I've seen a lot of good statements made for both sides of the issue. Well done so far everyone! I'm not going to try to step into the debate, nor do I really have anything to say to the OP, but reading a couple of posts in this thread has given me an idea of what I want to do the next time an issue like this crops up in one of my games. 

If my opponent screws up a maneuver, I'll tell them straight up, "No, I am not going to let *you* change the maneuver, but, if you want, *I* will pick a new maneuver for you that doesn't send you off the board." Then I'd pick something like a K-turn that left him pointing the wrong way and stressed, or something that put him on a rock. Then he still gets a bit of a penalty for his mistake, but one that he could recover from. 

Conversely, if I'm the one who screws up and my opponent wants to let me change the maneuver (not that I would ask for it- I try to accept my mistakes) I'm going to offer to let my opponent change my dial to whatever he wants. 

EDIT: in either scenario, whether I won or lost the game, I would feel satisfied with the outcome. No feeling of guilt for punishing someone too hard or bitterness over getting cheated out of a game because I wasn't strict enough following the rules. 

Just for ***** and giggles, if it's a U-Wing, can you please give them a full stop and 180 flip. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flyingbrick said:

Ok haven read just a partial amount of this thread i am not sure the following was addressed. How would you deal with the opponent being a 10 year kid? The crummy part would be there for sure but would you let them redial then not the second time or let them fly off the board in hopes they learn from the mistake?

My daughter is 10 and plays and we have 3 other kids that play locally. If they fly off they learn from it. Same as anyone else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Herowannabe said:

I haven't read the whole thread, just the first and last page, but I've seen a lot of good statements made for both sides of the issue. Well done so far everyone! I'm not going to try to step into the debate, nor do I really have anything to say to the OP, but reading a couple of posts in this thread has given me an idea of what I want to do the next time an issue like this crops up in one of my games. 

If my opponent screws up a maneuver, I'll tell them straight up, "No, I am not going to let *you* change the maneuver, but, if you want, *I* will pick a new maneuver for you that doesn't send you off the board." Then I'd pick something like a K-turn that left him pointing the wrong way and stressed, or something that put him on a rock. Then he still gets a bit of a penalty for his mistake, but one that he could recover from. 

Conversely, if I'm the one who screws up and my opponent wants to let me change the maneuver (not that I would ask for it- I try to accept my mistakes) I'm going to offer to let my opponent change my dial to whatever he wants. 

EDIT: in either scenario, whether I won or lost the game, I would feel satisfied with the outcome. No feeling of guilt for punishing someone too hard or bitterness over getting cheated out of a game because I wasn't strict enough following the rules. 

That's actually in line with the rule where opponent changes your dial if you reveal a red maneuver while already stressed.  Of course, that rule doesn't really state that opponent can't choose to switch to a maneuver that sends you off the board lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Superstrength79 said:

That's actually in line with the rule where opponent changes your dial if you reveal a red maneuver while already stressed.  Of course, that rule doesn't really state that opponent can't choose to switch to a maneuver that sends you off the board lol

If you reveal a red while stressed you do a white 2 straight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...