Friday, March 18, 2011

Haters gonna hate

After last weekend's tournament, I asked on their forums whether they would send the results to Rankings HQ. Oh, the horror!
Haters gonna hate!
Rankings HQ is a website that aggregates tournament results from all over the world and ranks the players of each country. Each country have their own rules for scoring and ranking, adjusted to the size of the tournament scene of said country. For Norway, a player receives 100 points for winning a tournament of 40 people or more. The three best scores the last 12 months count, so the maximum amount of points a player can have is 300. Even if a player wins three big tournaments and finishes last in a fourth, his score is still 300.

The head honchos quickly informed me that they had discussed it, but had decided not to send in any results. They didn't give any reason as to why they had decided this.

Some local guys then protested, saying that they wanted them sent in and arguing that players from afar would have less reason to come if the tournament didn't rank. Also, by sending in the results, the community would get a lot of useful data. For example, the ETC team would have an easier time picking good players for ETC participation. It didn't take long before the protests started.

One guy argued that you'd need written consent from everyone before posting the results on RankingsHQ, which is nonsense. The results for each of these tournaments had been posted on the internet for the last 8 years, so this wasn't any different. Then, we came to the core of the problem.

  • "It will promote powerplay to an even greater scale. Let's be the safe haven everyone can turn to in order to relax and have a nice good tournament."
  • "It is an event, not a tournament. This is something some players haven't understood, as they bring ridiculously boring min/max armies."
  • "Ranking is anathema to what 40k should be."
  • "People shouldn't be completely unimaginative when it comes to army design."

Yeah, I asked them what they meant by "power play" It seems like it is unacceptable to play and win. You should play and only have fun and not win. And if you do happen to win, you'd better not be using an army consisting of more than one identical unit.  If you do, you have no imagination, are boring and an bad person.

One of the guys complaining about "power play" was the guy I played in turn 1. He had a rock hard Daemon list with 2 Great Unclean Ones, 3x3 Bloodcrushers, 2x5 Plaguebearers, 4x5 Horrors w/Bolt and 3 identical Daemon Princes of Nurgle. I liked his list and he was a pleasant guy to play against, but let's not kid ourselves: His list was spammy. So what? Apparently, it doesn't matter if you don't win.

It was only the top armies that got a lot of flak, so it seems like taking a hard army is OK, as long as you don't win.

Even the guy with the Kan Wall of spam accused me of using a boring list. GG guy!

So yeah, haters gonna hate!

PS: This is not a criticism of the tournament itself. It was very well run and I enjoyed the experience. This post is about the illusion some of the players there have, that there is such a thing as "balanced armies" and that you are a better person if you don't bring what you consider best to a tournament.