EC 2002...the worst tournament I've ever seen...

Hi buddies, I'll make my own report of this "tournament". I am afraid, there are more bad points than good points about these 2 days. On Friday evening : Welcome Party. That was nice, but IMO the first drink should have been free. The little show was great, that was a good idea ! On Saturday, I'll try to qualify with a really nasty weenie deck. The first games seems to be legal, but 2nd et 3rd round seems not... Qualified players of a same country always seating as prey and predator. We were only 7 French players and Stéphane LAVRUT was always with a French guy !!! Big trouble before the final, Stéphane and Jean Noël have wrong decklists and the organisation team want to oust them. IMO, a severe warning have prevent 45 minutes of dealing. My opinion about this day, I'll make only 4 VP (and I'm so sorry for my preys, specially Paolo and Attila...), I'll make so good trades, and I met The Lasombra (at least...). On Sunday, I wasn't qualified so, I played on side event Warzone. About EC, it seems that tables seating was arranged manually with the decklists (!!!). About Warzone Event, the organizer was playing in Team Event so, the referee was the Draft Organizer (sometimes...) and we have no informations about timing...what a mess ! So, I've just played 2 of the 3 rounds, but, in fact, I really don't mind... I think, an Italian girl, with a really powerful Gangrel Deck, wins. I think, it's unacceptable to prevent other players to see the end of the games..."It's unfair !" says Carl...and making table seating with decklists...is that fair ? And the Austrian player in final knowing the decks he is going to face, is that fair too ? And make the visitors pay the access to the event, is it a good thing, for the promotion of the game ??? I really think, that this EC was such a bad event, even if two French players wins on Saturday, and a Belgian guy (yippee !) is the new European Champion. I am just happy to have met LSJ, The Lasombra, Attila and other famous guys. I am happy to have met again, Xavier Abad, Damnans, Marco, Paolo, Belgian Team, German Team... That's all ! I just hope that next year, EC is going to be best organisated and don't take place in Vienna !!!! Franck B. Brujah Archon, Paris VEKN, France

Without wishing to stir things up any more, it sounds to me like there was a big difference between what many players *thought* happened at the EC (based on their observation/perception) and what *actually* happened? Would it be possible for the organisers to pick up on these differences and explain how they came about, in the hope that the minds of the players concerned can be put at ease? And come on guys, please try not to drop unecessary comments in your mails. The last thing we need is for this group to descend into a France vs. Austria flamewar. For what it's worth, kudos Carl and the rest of the EC 2002 team for managing to pull off an event which (as well as taking a lot of time and effort to set up) took place in such an illustrious location. I wish I could have been there, but unfortunately my life (and my wallet) simply wouldn't allow it (and I ended up running a local event the same weekend anyway). Regards, Mike Nudd VEKN Prince of London "Franck" <ber...@tolbiac.inserm.fr> wrote in message news:2126b308.02120...@posting.google.com... [ quoted text not captured ]

Franck wrote: > Hi buddies, > > I'll make my own report of this "tournament". > > I am afraid, there are more bad points than good points about these 2 > days. > > On Friday evening : Welcome Party. That was nice, but IMO the first > drink should have been free. For what purpose? > On Saturday, I'll try to qualify with a really nasty weenie deck. The > first games seems to be legal, but 2nd et 3rd round seems not... > Qualified players of a same country always seating as prey and > predator. We were only 7 French players and Stéphane LAVRUT was always > with a French guy !!! That's because of the way the Archon works. Adding players between rounds is *not* trivial, and the archon kinda switches back to using a seating as if it was the first round. > Big trouble before the final, Stéphane and Jean Noël have wrong > decklists and the organisation team want to oust them. Actually, both decklists were plain wrong, and so both were subject to penalties. Both should have been given a game loss, as per standard VEKN penalty guidelines - this would have been the easiest and most clear-cut option. But Stephane *convinced* me that he made an honest mistake, and did not want to cheat. That alone was the thing that swung the pendulum into his favour. If both had been disqualified, what would you have written here? I can't even imagine... > IMO, a severe > warning have prevent 45 minutes of dealing. Can you please elaborate? What do you mean with this sentence? > My opinion about this day, I'll make only 4 VP (and I'm so sorry for > my preys, specially Paolo and Attila...), I'll make so good trades, > and I met The Lasombra (at least...). > > On Sunday, I wasn't qualified so, I played on side event Warzone. > About EC, it seems that tables seating was arranged manually with the > decklists (!!!). And how do you reach this ridiculous conclusion? > About Warzone Event, the organizer was playing in > Team Event so, the referee was the Draft Organizer (sometimes...) and > we have no informations about timing...what a mess ! The Draft judge played in the Duel and vice versa. We have been using the multi-judge system for the side-events, as they were rather small. Sadly I can't tell anything about those complaints, as nobody approached me with them. > So, I've just > played 2 of the 3 rounds, but, in fact, I really don't mind... Hm, you were the one who left without saying a word, leaving 7 other players behind...? Great move. > I think, it's unacceptable to prevent other players to see the end of > the games..."It's unfair !" says Carl This was done to create an as level as possible playing field for all EC final round participants. Scouting is one of the issues. > ...and making table seating with > decklists...is that fair ? And again, this is not true. Prove it if you can. > And the Austrian player in final knowing > the decks he is going to face, is that fair too ? Please provide proof for this, too. Walter never read the decklists. > And make the > visitors pay the access to the event, is it a good thing, for the > promotion of the game ??? So what do you think? That such a location doesn't have a cost attached? That it's for free? That decoration and equipment doesn't cost money? Honestly, if you believe that, then you have no idea about managing a big event. Would you have preferred to play in some room of a club, having to play on shiny white tables, glaring neon-lights and such? Really. Come on. > I really think, that this EC was such a bad event, even if two French > players wins on Saturday, and a Belgian guy (yippee !) is the new > European Champion. Thanks for having such an opinion. I'm sad that the event was such a failure for you. > I am happy to have met again, Xavier Abad, Damnans, Marco, Paolo, > Belgian Team, German Team... You know what - this just sounds *strange*. > That's all ! I just hope that next year, EC is going to be best > organisated and don't take place in Vienna !!!! Well, have your fingers crossed. Rest assured, it won't be in Vienna next year. I sincerely hope that the organisation finds your personal approval next year. No, really... > Franck B. > Brujah Archon, Paris VEKN, France Carl P. Salubri Inner Circle, VEKN ;)

> That's because of the way the Archon works. Adding players between rounds > is *not* trivial, and the archon kinda switches back to using a seating as > if it was the first round. I think adding players between rounds should be forbidden in the future. It makes no sense at all. Either you play the tournament from the very beginning (even if that means being on time :-)) or you do not play at all. I have two reasons for that : 1. No problems with the Archon 2. Someone entering later in such a big tournament hat usually no chance of entering the final, therefor it is likely that he does stupid things on his tables, because "it doesn't matter anyway". I saw this thing happening too often on Saturday(AC) with all those allready qualified players. greetz, johannes walch v:ekn germany - http://www.vekn.de

Johannes Walch wrote: > > That's because of the way the Archon works. Adding players between rounds > > is *not* trivial, and the archon kinda switches back to using a seating as > > if it was the first round. > > I think adding players between rounds should be forbidden in the future. It > makes no sense at all. Either you play the tournament from the very > beginning (even if that means being on time :-)) or you do not play at all. > I have two reasons for that : > > 1. No problems with the Archon That could be fixed with some kind of Macro. > 2. Someone entering later in such a big tournament hat usually no chance of > entering the final, therefor it is likely that he does stupid things on his > tables, because "it doesn't matter anyway". I saw this thing happening too > often on Saturday(AC) with all those allready qualified players. There are a lot of players who just cannot make it always for the first round. There are players going to school, players having to attending their family, etc. Taking their chance away to take part in tournaments is *not* desireable, they are already penalized by not being able to get the maximum number of tablewins. It's been happening that a player who missed the first round made it into the final and even won the final. Tournaments above 100 players should have seating entirely randomly - at this size things should average out. Not allowing players to take part at all is not fun, and definitely against the spirirt of the game. > > greetz, > > johannes walch > v:ekn germany - http://www.vekn.de Carl

> > 1. No problems with the Archon > > That could be fixed with some kind of Macro. Agreed. But then it should be enforced that this Macro is integrated in the official Archon Sheet and no "homegrown" things are used. > > 2. Someone entering later in such a big tournament hat usually no chance of > > entering the final, therefor it is likely that he does stupid things on his > > tables, because "it doesn't matter anyway". I saw this thing happening too > > often on Saturday(AC) with all those allready qualified players. > > There are a lot of players who just cannot make it always for the first round. > There are players going to school, players having to attending their family, > etc. Taking their chance away to take part in tournaments is *not* desireable, > they are already penalized by not being able to get the maximum number of > tablewins. It's been happening that a player who missed the first round made it > into the final and even won the final. > Tournaments above 100 players should have seating entirely randomly - at this > size things should average out. > > Not allowing players to take part at all is not fun, and definitely against the > spirirt of the game. Correct. Probably we need to distinguish between "bigger" and "smaller" events. I count qualifiers and EC and nationals towards bigger events and the rest is smaller ones. Allow "late-entry" for the smaller ones, deny it for the bigger ones. Everybody who really wants to attend has enough free time to attend 2 big events a year (=2 days). If he does not have 2 free days for V:TES he is not much into it anyway. Most of the players in big events come from abroad anyway so all they have to do is to get up early enough ;-) (and probably drink not too much the evening before). johannnes walch v:ekn germany

Johannes Walch wrote: > > > > 1. No problems with the Archon > > > > That could be fixed with some kind of Macro. > > Agreed. But then it should be enforced that this Macro is integrated in the > official Archon Sheet and no "homegrown" things are used. The Archon is a tool. It is not the organizer. It is up to the organizer to use whatever tools he sees fit to do his job. If that involves the Archon, great - that's what it's there for. It it involves "homegrown" things (like the Archon, for example, or like additional macros written for the Archon, or the ELDB, or polyhedra dice, or an abacus, or whatever), then great. -- LSJ (vte...@white-wolf.com) V:TES Net.Rep for White Wolf, Inc. Links to V:TES news, rules, cards, utilities, and tournament calendar: http://www.white-wolf.com/vtes/

Johannes Walch wrote: [ quoted text not captured ] All well and good, but do you propose that school-pupils skip their lessons just because of VTES? What would their parents say... ;) Carl

"Carl Pilhatsch" <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:3DEF6A59...@chello.at... > Johannes Walch wrote: > > I think adding players between rounds should be forbidden in the future. It > > makes no sense at all. Either you play the tournament from the very > > beginning (even if that means being on time :-)) or you do not play at all. > > I have two reasons for that : > > > > 1. No problems with the Archon > > That could be fixed with some kind of Macro. Are you going to write it? ;-) > Tournaments above 100 players should have seating entirely randomly - at this > size things should average out. They won't average out that well over only three rounds, though. There'll be plenty of clumping in the randomness, and people will have to play against the same opponents more than is (IMO) desirable. There will not-infrequently be same-predator/prey pairs that need to be fixed, too. > Not allowing players to take part at all is not fun, and definitely > against the spirirt of the game. I'm not so sure about this. People who show up in the middle of a round can't normally jump into a game that's already started. Maybe jumping into a tournament that's started is different, but I don't know if it should be? Josh game lost

>And come on guys, please try not to drop unecessary comments in your mails. >The last thing we need is for this group to descend into a France vs. >Austria flamewar. I know. I've kind of been getting sick of all the recent flamewars myself. And when the Europeans (esp. the French and Austrians) are busy arguing amongst themselves, I guess that once again it's going to take an *American* to bring some order to the situation... =P Halcyan 2

>> 2. Someone entering later in such a big tournament hat usually no chance of >> entering the final, therefor it is likely that he does stupid things on his >> tables, because "it doesn't matter anyway". I saw this thing happening too >> often on Saturday(AC) with all those allready qualified players. > >There are a lot of players who just cannot make it always for the first >round. >There are players going to school, players having to attending their family, >etc. Taking their chance away to take part in tournaments is *not* >desireable, >they are already penalized by not being able to get the maximum number of >tablewins. It's been happening that a player who missed the first round made >it >into the final and even won the final. >Tournaments above 100 players should have seating entirely randomly - at this >size things should average out. Agreed. Lots of unforeseen circumstances can happen that make one late. If the players are winning to go in with a disadvantage, what's the problem? In addition, there have been several instances of players making finals even though they only play 2 rounds. If they're good enough for that, I don't see why you should spend too much time worrying about how they'll do "stupid" things. They aren't any more likely to do anything "stupid" as someone who got 0 VP the first round. Halcyan 2

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> a écrit dans le message de news: 20021205132830...@mb-cn.aol.com... [ quoted text not captured ] whahahahahahaha! THAT'S the humour I love to hear =) Miller Delmardigan

On 05 Dec 2002 18:31:23 GMT, halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote: >Agreed. Lots of unforeseen circumstances can happen that make one late. If the >players are winning to go in with a disadvantage, what's the problem? In >addition, there have been several instances of players making finals even >though they only play 2 rounds. If they're good enough for that, I don't see >why you should spend too much time worrying about how they'll do "stupid" >things. They aren't any more likely to do anything "stupid" as someone who got >0 VP the first round. It was not a big tournament at all with only 15 players, but at the november Storyline of Quebec city, the player number 15 was here only at the last game of that 3 preliminary game event. And he was in the final round also ! Since I was aware that he would be late, I asked to the players at the tournament, before the first game start, if it will be ok for them to accept that late player. They all accepted that. The Archon was not a probleme at all. The last player was simply put on the last spot on the table formerly of 4 players. (I had to manipulate the Archon after the tournament to put the last player in correctly, but directly, it was not nessessary. But again it was a very small tournament... Richard Labrecque, aka Khaleph Alendis V:EKN Québec : http://veknquebec.web-page.net Québec city : http://www.oricom.ca/melkor/khaleph/

> And make the > visitors pay the access to the event, is it a good thing, for the > promotion of the game ??? At a first glance I had the same opinion. How can anyone promote the game if it is effectively a closed session? But even in a mid-sized city as Vienna there's not quite an over-abundance of locations plus catering for around 150 people with no time-limit and for a whole weekend. Palais Eschenbach was IMHO perfectly suited for this event. It adds utility to style and atmosphere - and usually costs a nifty ? 2.330,- per day. Including the preps on Friday this makes at least two-and-a-half days of charge. Which alternatives would he have got? Rent a couple of conference rooms at a major hotel? Hold the ECs at a youth hostel? Even with some level of sponsorship from WW money doesn't grow on a tree for Carl. And therefore I - sadly - have to admit that he was correct to charge money from everyone who wants to watch. Best regards, Sascha Neumayr Prince of Wels

> > > 1. No problems with the Archon > > > > That could be fixed with some kind of Macro. > > Are you going to write it? ;-) Walter Paolini did. And from what I have seen it works quite well.

>All well and good, but do you propose that school-pupils skip their lessons >just >because of VTES? What would their parents say... ;) Maybe you could write them a note Carl. ;) Alternatively, since VTES does tend to draw a more...mature crowd, I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find a player who's a doctor who could write a medical note for them. Not that I'd ever advocate anything unethical of course... Halcyan 2

> > > That could be fixed with some kind of Macro. > > > > Are you going to write it? ;-) > > Walter Paolini did. And from what I have seen it works quite well. > > No it does not. In my case : 1st game : 3rd place 2nd game : 3place and guys from my table played together in game 1. had to call judge. i was changed to 2nd. seating was rearranged. Same for 2 other tables in my room. 3rd game : 1st place 1st,2nd,3rd place to start. not possible with normal archon if there are so many players. [ quoted text not captured ]

Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:<3DEF5DBA...@chello.at>... > Franck wrote: > > > Hi buddies, > > > > I'll make my own report of this "tournament". > > > > I am afraid, there are more bad points than good points about these 2 > > days. > > > > On Friday evening : Welcome Party. That was nice, but IMO the first > > drink should have been free. > > For what purpose? ---> I think it will be more 'cool'. > > > On Saturday, I'll try to qualify with a really nasty weenie deck. The > > first games seems to be legal, but 2nd et 3rd round seems not... > > Qualified players of a same country always seating as prey and > > predator. We were only 7 French players and Stéphane LAVRUT was always > > with a French guy !!! > > That's because of the way the Archon works. Adding players between rounds > is *not* trivial, and the archon kinda switches back to using a seating as > if it was the first round. > > > Big trouble before the final, Stéphane and Jean Noël have wrong > > decklists and the organisation team want to oust them. > > Actually, both decklists were plain wrong, and so both were subject to > penalties. Both should have been given a game loss, as per standard VEKN > penalty guidelines - this would have been the easiest and most clear-cut > option. But Stephane *convinced* me that he made an honest mistake, and > did not want to cheat. That alone was the thing that swung the pendulum > into his favour. If both had been disqualified, what would you have > written here? I can't even imagine... --> Oh...please, you gonna make me cry...It was evident that Stephane's mistake wasn't a way of cheating... > > > IMO, a severe > > warning have prevent 45 minutes of dealing. > > Can you please elaborate? What do you mean with this sentence? --> I just mean that, if you or another referee gave a severe warning to Stephane and Jean Noël, the final woul have begin 45 minutes before. > > > My opinion about this day, I'll make only 4 VP (and I'm so sorry for > > my preys, specially Paolo and Attila...), I'll make so good trades, > > and I met The Lasombra (at least...). > > > > On Sunday, I wasn't qualified so, I played on side event Warzone. > > About EC, it seems that tables seating was arranged manually with the > > decklists (!!!). > > And how do you reach this ridiculous conclusion? --> Most players have seen that ! But maybe they're too shy to say it here, I am not afraid, I say it ! Other players and I have sawn the referees with decklists, working on the Archon making table seating. > > > About Warzone Event, the organizer was playing in > > Team Event so, the referee was the Draft Organizer (sometimes...) and > > we have no informations about timing...what a mess ! > > The Draft judge played in the Duel and vice versa. We have been using the > multi-judge system for the side-events, as they were rather small. > Sadly I can't tell anything about those complaints, as nobody approached > me with them. --> Mea Culpa. > > > So, I've just > > played 2 of the 3 rounds, but, in fact, I really don't mind... > > Hm, you were the one who left without saying a word, leaving 7 other > players behind...? Great move. --> In fact, I am the guy who has gone to eat, and because we have no informations about the beginning of the next round, I arrived too late...sorry for being hungry... > > > I think, it's unacceptable to prevent other players to see the end of > > the games..."It's unfair !" says Carl > > This was done to create an as level as possible playing field for all EC > final round participants. Scouting is one of the issues. --> What about players of side events ??? > > > ...and making table seating with > > decklists...is that fair ? > > And again, this is not true. Prove it if you can. --> See above. > > > And the Austrian player in final knowing > > the decks he is going to face, is that fair too ? > > Please provide proof for this, too. Walter never read the decklists. --> Too bad that we haven't a photograph. But it's strange that one of the first card he plays in final round was a Restructure, because in a previous round he hadn't played that card and was about to finish his deck. It's strange isn't it ? > > > And make the > > visitors pay the access to the event, is it a good thing, for the > > promotion of the game ??? > > So what do you think? That such a location doesn't have a cost attached? > That it's for free? That decoration and equipment doesn't cost money? > Honestly, if you believe that, then you have no idea about managing a big > event. > Would you have preferred to play in some room of a club, having to play on > shiny white tables, glaring neon-lights and such? Really. Come on. --> Well, two weeks ago, we organised the French Championship in a big place (probably cheaper) but we don't make the VISITORS pay ! Think about the game ! The players have payed, that's normal, but the VISITORS, they probably came to discover, and you make them pay !!! I don't think they would begin playing a day. > > > I really think, that this EC was such a bad event, even if two French > > players wins on Saturday, and a Belgian guy (yippee !) is the new > > European Champion. > > Thanks for having such an opinion. I'm sad that the event was such a > failure for you. > > > I am happy to have met again, Xavier Abad, Damnans, Marco, Paolo, > > Belgian Team, German Team... > > You know what - this just sounds *strange*. --> No, I'm honest. that's one of the good points of these two days. Meeting stranger players is one of the main interest of VTES. > > > That's all ! I just hope that next year, EC is going to be best > > organisated and don't take place in Vienna !!!! > > Well, have your fingers crossed. Rest assured, it won't be in Vienna next > year. --> Inch'Allah ! >I sincerely hope that the organisation finds your personal approval > next year. No, really... --> I hope too ! See you next year ! > > > Franck B. > > Brujah Archon, Paris VEKN, France > > Carl P. > Salubri Inner Circle, VEKN ;) Franck B.

Franck wrote: > Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:<3DEF5DBA...@chello.at>... > > Franck wrote: > >> > > > > > Big trouble before the final, Stéphane and Jean Noël have wrong > > > decklists and the organisation team want to oust them. > > > > Actually, both decklists were plain wrong, and so both were subject to > > penalties. Both should have been given a game loss, as per standard VEKN > > penalty guidelines - this would have been the easiest and most clear-cut > > option. But Stephane *convinced* me that he made an honest mistake, and > > did not want to cheat. That alone was the thing that swung the pendulum > > into his favour. If both had been disqualified, what would you have > > written here? I can't even imagine... > > --> Oh...please, you gonna make me cry...It was evident that > Stephane's mistake wasn't a way of cheating... Ah, it was evident? Was it written on the decklistst that it was an honest mistake? I don't think so... > > > > > IMO, a severe > > > warning have prevent 45 minutes of dealing. > > > > Can you please elaborate? What do you mean with this sentence? > > --> I just mean that, if you or another referee gave a severe warning > to Stephane and Jean Noël, the final woul have begin 45 minutes > before. We didn't rush our decision - after letting Stephane tell his story we thought about it. The outcome is clear to all. > > > > > My opinion about this day, I'll make only 4 VP (and I'm so sorry for > > > my preys, specially Paolo and Attila...), I'll make so good trades, > > > and I met The Lasombra (at least...). > > > > > > On Sunday, I wasn't qualified so, I played on side event Warzone. > > > About EC, it seems that tables seating was arranged manually with the > > > decklists (!!!). > > > > And how do you reach this ridiculous conclusion? > > --> Most players have seen that ! But maybe they're too shy to say it > here, I am not afraid, I say it ! Other players and I have sawn the > referees with decklists, working on the Archon making table seating. I'm really sorry, but do you know how much time it would have taken to read all the decklists and arrange the tables accordingly, overriding the Archon completely? You know that you are telling not the truth here. Provide proof please that it was done the way you claim it. It wasn't. > > > > > About Warzone Event, the organizer was playing in > > > Team Event so, the referee was the Draft Organizer (sometimes...) and > > > we have no informations about timing...what a mess ! > > > > The Draft judge played in the Duel and vice versa. We have been using the > > multi-judge system for the side-events, as they were rather small. > > Sadly I can't tell anything about those complaints, as nobody approached > > me with them. > > --> Mea Culpa. > > > > > > So, I've just > > > played 2 of the 3 rounds, but, in fact, I really don't mind... > > > > Hm, you were the one who left without saying a word, leaving 7 other > > players behind...? Great move. > > --> In fact, I am the guy who has gone to eat, and because we have no > informations about the beginning of the next round, I arrived too > late...sorry for being hungry... Why didn't you tell anybody that you were out to eat? It was a side-event, therefore players would have waited for you. Again, I don't know the details. > > > > > I think, it's unacceptable to prevent other players to see the end of > > > the games..."It's unfair !" says Carl > > > > This was done to create an as level as possible playing field for all EC > > final round participants. Scouting is one of the issues. > > --> What about players of side events ??? They were also politely asked to leave the room. Players of the EC final rounds were thankful for having a quiet atmosphere where they could concentrate, too. The air in the room also was not that used like the previous day. > > > > > ...and making table seating with > > > decklists...is that fair ? > > > > And again, this is not true. Prove it if you can. > > --> See above. And you still provided no proof. You accuse us of something which has never happened. Fine move, thanks. > > > > > And the Austrian player in final knowing > > > the decks he is going to face, is that fair too ? > > > > Please provide proof for this, too. Walter never read the decklists. > > --> Too bad that we haven't a photograph. But it's strange that one of > the first card he plays in final round was a Restructure, because in a > previous round he hadn't played that card and was about to finish his > deck. It's strange isn't it ? All decklists for the finalists have been thoroughly checked and de-randomized to create a level starting position. Players had to randomize their decks before beginning to play. Are you trying to imply we would have allowed that Walter was adding in cards before the final, or that in fact *we* judges did it??? > > > > > And make the > > > visitors pay the access to the event, is it a good thing, for the > > > promotion of the game ??? > > > > So what do you think? That such a location doesn't have a cost attached? > > That it's for free? That decoration and equipment doesn't cost money? > > Honestly, if you believe that, then you have no idea about managing a big > > event. > > Would you have preferred to play in some room of a club, having to play on > > shiny white tables, glaring neon-lights and such? Really. Come on. > > --> Well, two weeks ago, we organised the French Championship in a big > place (probably cheaper) but we don't make the VISITORS pay ! Think > about the game ! > The players have payed, that's normal, but the VISITORS, they probably > came to discover, and you make them pay !!! I don't think they would > begin playing a day. Strange. The visitors that attended liked the game and will play it in the future. > > > > > I really think, that this EC was such a bad event, even if two French > > > players wins on Saturday, and a Belgian guy (yippee !) is the new > > > European Champion. > > > > Thanks for having such an opinion. I'm sad that the event was such a > > failure for you. > > > > > I am happy to have met again, Xavier Abad, Damnans, Marco, Paolo, > > > Belgian Team, German Team... > > > > You know what - this just sounds *strange*. > > --> No, I'm honest. that's one of the good points of these two days. > Meeting stranger players is one of the main interest of VTES. You didn't get the point. You are happy to have met certain single players and *team* Belgium and *team* Germany. Your expression is strange. > > > > > That's all ! I just hope that next year, EC is going to be best > > > organisated and don't take place in Vienna !!!! > > > > Well, have your fingers crossed. Rest assured, it won't be in Vienna next > > year. > > --> Inch'Allah ! Yeah, Allah be with you. > >I sincerely hope that the organisation finds your personal approval > > next year. No, really... > > --> I hope too ! See you next year ! Quite possible. Carl

"Franck" <ber...@tolbiac.inserm.fr> wrote: > Big trouble before the final, Stéphane and Jean Noël have wrong > decklists and the organisation team want to oust them. IMO, a severe > warning have prevent 45 minutes of dealing. Why is this a big deal? This isn't Magic, with card limits and such. If somebody plays an illegal card it's immediately obvious. Seems a huge waste to have to check decklists - do tourney organizers have too little to do in a 100+ person tourney? Curt Adams (curt...@aol.com) "It is better to be wrong than to be vague" - Freeman Dyson

>Why is this a big deal? This isn't Magic, with card limits and such. If >somebody plays an illegal card it's immediately obvious. Seems a huge waste >to >have to check decklists - do tourney organizers have too little to do in a >100+ >person tourney? Agreed. Just curious, but do the VEKN rules even mention deck lists? As you mentioned earlier, it's not as if the discrepency was that big. I mean, it seems like some people in the camp would want to ban someone who wrote 5 Command instead of 5 Command of the Beast (when they only have copies of the latter). Or heaven forbid if someone accidentally wrote Murder of Crows instead of Carrion Crows or Blood Rage instead of Blood Fury. You know, come to think of it, maybe we should ban someone for listing "Parthenon, The" instead of "The Parthenon." Or someone who lists "2 x Heidelburg Castle, Germany" instead of "1 x Heidelberg Castle, Germany and 1 x Heidelburg Castle, Germany." You know what, that's actually a rather clever idea. If you're not good enough to win on your own merits, you can win by default by making sure everyone else is disqualified one way or another... Halcyan 2

"Halcyan 2" <halc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:20021209022940...@mb-md.aol.com... > >Why is this a big deal? This isn't Magic, with card limits and such. If > >somebody plays an illegal card it's immediately obvious. Seems a huge waste > >to have to check decklists - do tourney organizers have too little to do in a > >100+ person tourney? > > Agreed. Just curious, but do the VEKN rules even mention deck lists? 6.3. Constructed Deck Registration The head judge or tournament organizer may require players to register their decks upon arrival at a tournament. Registration records the original composition of each deck. Once a tournament official receives a player's decklist, the deck may not be altered. Failure to properly register a deck will result in the head judge applying the appropriate provisions of the V:EKN Penalty Guidelines. The V:EKN recommends that organizers check a reasonable number of decks against their decklists each round. > As you mentioned earlier, it's not as if the discrepency was that big. I mean, > it seems like some people in the camp would want to ban someone who wrote 5 > Command instead of 5 Command of the Beast (when they only have copies of the > latter). Or heaven forbid if someone accidentally wrote Murder of Crows instead > of Carrion Crows or Blood Rage instead of Blood Fury. We don't want to BAN them, we just want them assigned a game loss or some other appropriate PENALTY, not just given a stern talking-to. > You know, come to think of it, maybe we should ban someone for listing > "Parthenon, The" instead of "The Parthenon." Or someone who lists "2 x > Heidelburg Castle, Germany" instead of "1 x Heidelberg Castle, Germany and 1 x > Heidelburg Castle, Germany." This is utter crap, Eric. Of course, you knew that. :) > You know what, that's actually a rather clever idea. If you're not good enough > to win on your own merits, you can win by default by making sure everyone else > is disqualified one way or another... This is crap, also. The reason for decklists in such a big, meaningful, fabulous-cash-and-prizes-on-the-line tournament is TO PREVENT CHEATING, since in this kind of tournament IT IS WORTH IT TO CHEAT. Why can't anybody get this through their head? <sigh> > > Halcyan 2 Kevin M. "Know your enemy, and know yourself; in one-thousand battles you shall never be in peril." -- Sun Tzu, *The Art of War* "Contentment... Complacency... Catastrophe!" -- Joseph Chevalier

halc...@aol.com (Halcyan 2) wrote in message news:<20021209022940...@mb-md.aol.com>... [ quoted text not captured ] Think of the following situation: You make your deck (a gun deck) with the thought that there could be many close range bashers using lots of maneuvers in their decks. Thus, you put many Pursuits in your deck. You go to the tournament with the deck. During the Tournament, you find out that there are very few (or none) close range combat decks with lots of maneuvers. Do you really think that it should be allowed to change some cards inthe deck for the final then (in this example, changing some Pursuits for Blurs, for example)? No? Then you just found out why decklists are used.

"Kevin M." <you...@imaspammer.org> wrote in message news:tzYI9.23512$r4.14...@news1.west.cox.net... > The reason for decklists in such a big, meaningful, fabulous- > cash-and-prizes-on-the-line tournament is TO PREVENT CHEATING, > since in this kind of tournament IT IS WORTH IT TO CHEAT. It would be worth it to cheat if you could alter your deck so that it was better against the opposing decks that you're seeing, if the decks you saw in the future turned out to match the ones you made the changes thinking you'd see. Without getting caught. The inaccuracies that actually existed don't seem to me like anyone was cheating. They sound like errors of transcription. For that I don't think a game loss is an appropriate penalty, and it sounds to me like the EC judges did pretty much the right thing. Josh de-scribed

Kevin M. wrote: > The reason for decklists in such a big, meaningful, > fabulous-cash-and-prizes-on-the-line tournament is TO PREVENT CHEATING, since > in this kind of tournament IT IS WORTH IT TO CHEAT. > > Why can't anybody get this through their head? Everyone understands the point of a deck-list, but I think the general consensus is that there is a very large dasparity in the work/effort to benefit ratio. Having every player have a deck list is useless unless you are going to check the decks. Then, you have people wasting time on both making deck lists and then checking deck lists. Then you run into trouble when people have typo's in their deck lists ("Oh--that says Carrion Crows. It is supposed to be Murder of Crows."). And what does all of this effort really get you? You might prevent the one person who might want to illegally switch cards between rounds from doing that? And given how VTES works, does doing this even gain you much of an advantage? Sure, illegally modifiying your deck to include a lot more fortitude when you discover there are a bunch of rush decks at the event might be handy, but you are hardly going to be able to illegally modify your deck after you discover where you are sitting for a particular round--folks will notice. Requiring deck-lists for VTES is, for the most part, unccessary complication and will accomplish very little in the long run, except for providing more opportunities for delay and error. Peter D Bakija PD...@bigplanet.com http://www.myplanet.net/pdb6 "she tore down Paris on the tail of Thom Paine but the left wing's broken and the right's insane" -Bowie

Angus, the Unruled wrote: > You make your deck (a gun deck) with the thought that there could be > many close range bashers using lots of maneuvers in their decks. Thus, > you put many Pursuits in your deck. You go to the tournament with the > deck. During the Tournament, you find out that there are very few (or > none) close range combat decks with lots of maneuvers. > > Do you really think that it should be allowed to change some cards > inthe deck for the final then (in this example, changing some Pursuits > for Blurs, for example)? > No? > Then you just found out why decklists are used. Yeah, we all understand why deck-lists exist. The question really is how many people would actually do this, and is the small number of folks who would do this worth adding a large extra amount of work and time to both the organizers and the players to prevent this sort of thing. What you describe (illegally changing your deck between rounds) is what we like to call cheating. Most folks playing in VTES tournaments can be relied upon to not cheat without the added hassle of deck lists. And those who can't be relied upon to not cheat without deck lists will find other ways to cheat. Do you really think deck lists prevent that much abuse? [ quoted text not captured ]

Peter D Bakija <PD...@bigplanet.com> wrote in message news:<BA1A6B54.AA06%PD...@bigplanet.com>... > Angus, the Unruled wrote: > > > You make your deck (a gun deck) with the thought that there could be > > many close range bashers using lots of maneuvers in their decks. Thus, > > you put many Pursuits in your deck. You go to the tournament with the > > deck. During the Tournament, you find out that there are very few (or > > none) close range combat decks with lots of maneuvers. > > > > Do you really think that it should be allowed to change some cards > > inthe deck for the final then (in this example, changing some Pursuits > > for Blurs, for example)? > > No? > > Then you just found out why decklists are used. > > Yeah, we all understand why deck-lists exist. The question really is how > many people would actually do this, and is the small number of folks who > would do this worth adding a large extra amount of work and time to both the > organizers and the players to prevent this sort of thing. What you describe > (illegally changing your deck between rounds) is what we like to call > cheating. Most folks playing in VTES tournaments can be relied upon to not > cheat without the added hassle of deck lists. And those who can't be relied > upon to not cheat without deck lists will find other ways to cheat. > > Do you really think deck lists prevent that much abuse? I think deck lists prevent from at least one way of cheating, yes.

Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:<3DF08B86...@chello.at>... > Franck wrote: > > > Carl Pilhatsch <carl.pi...@chello.at> wrote in message news:<3DEF5DBA...@chello.at>... > > > Franck wrote: > > >> > > > > > Big trouble before the final, Stéphane and Jean Noël have wrong > > > > decklists and the organisation team want to oust them. > > > > > > Actually, both decklists were plain wrong, and so both were subject to > > > penalties. Both should have been given a game loss, as per standard VEKN > > > penalty guidelines - this would have been the easiest and most clear-cut > > > option. But Stephane *convinced* me that he made an honest mistake, and > > > did not want to cheat. That alone was the thing that swung the pendulum > > > into his favour. If both had been disqualified, what would you have > > > written here? I can't even imagine... > > > > --> Oh...please, you gonna make me cry...It was evident that > > Stephane's mistake wasn't a way of cheating... > > Ah, it was evident? Was it written on the decklistst that it was an honest mistake? I don't think > so... ---> In fact, yes ! It was written, Stephane has just drop a line ! > > > > > > > IMO, a severe > > > > warning have prevent 45 minutes of dealing. > > > > > > Can you please elaborate? What do you mean with this sentence? > > > > --> I just mean that, if you or another referee gave a severe warning > > to Stephane and Jean Noël, the final woul have begin 45 minutes > > before. > > We didn't rush our decision - after letting Stephane tell his story we thought about it. The outcome > is clear to all. ---> And ? You think Stephane and Jean Noel were cheating, because they had wrong decklists ? > > > > > > > > My opinion about this day, I'll make only 4 VP (and I'm so sorry for > > > > my preys, specially Paolo and Attila...), I'll make so good trades, > > > > and I met The Lasombra (at least...). > > > > > > > > On Sunday, I wasn't qualified so, I played on side event Warzone. > > > > About EC, it seems that tables seating was arranged manually with the > > > > decklists (!!!). > > > > > > And how do you reach this ridiculous conclusion? > > > > --> Most players have seen that ! But maybe they're too shy to say it > > here, I am not afraid, I say it ! Other players and I have sawn the > > referees with decklists, working on the Archon making table seating. > > I'm really sorry, but do you know how much time it would have taken to read all the decklists and > arrange the tables accordingly, overriding the Archon completely? You know that you are telling not > the truth here. Provide proof please that it was done the way you claim it. It wasn't. ---> That's not the point, Carl ! I can't provide proof and you knwo that. I just say what I have sawn. I'm not the only one who have sawn the Austrian Finalist seating behind the computer. I'm sorry but that's not the right place for a player ! > > > > > > > > About Warzone Event, the organizer was playing in > > > > Team Event so, the referee was the Draft Organizer (sometimes...) and > > > > we have no informations about timing...what a mess ! > > > > > > The Draft judge played in the Duel and vice versa. We have been using the > > > multi-judge system for the side-events, as they were rather small. > > > Sadly I can't tell anything about those complaints, as nobody approached > > > me with them. > > > > --> Mea Culpa. > > > > > > > > > So, I've just > > > > played 2 of the 3 rounds, but, in fact, I really don't mind... > > > > > > Hm, you were the one who left without saying a word, leaving 7 other > > > players behind...? Great move. > > > > --> In fact, I am the guy who has gone to eat, and because we have no > > informations about the beginning of the next round, I arrived too > > late...sorry for being hungry... > > Why didn't you tell anybody that you were out to eat? It was a side-event, therefore players would > have waited for you. Again, I don't know the details. ---> Mea Culpa. That point is closed. [ quoted text not captured ] ---> You say it ! I just say what many players and I have sawn. I just talk about facts. [ quoted text not captured ] ---> OK, you want me to tell all the names maybe...? So, I was happy to meet Johannes, Andreas, Fabian, Jo, Dave, Luke, Frank, Ethel... [ quoted text not captured ]

Franck wrote: > > > > Ah, it was evident? Was it written on the decklistst that it was an honest mistake? I don't think > > so... > > ---> In fact, yes ! It was written, Stephane has just drop a line ! > A wrong decklist is a wrong decklist. Please see the VEKN penalty *guidelines* on how wrong decklists should be handled. By it's very own nature it's quite impossible to tell if a decklist has a *mistake* in it, because it's up to the player to care what content's a decklist has. There are cases were one can assume that a mistake was made, and others were it's not that plausible. > > > > We didn't rush our decision - after letting Stephane tell his story we thought about it. The outcome > > is clear to all. > > ---> And ? You think Stephane and Jean Noel were cheating, because > they had wrong decklists ? > Please see my other postings. A judgment call was issued and the game commenced. > > > > I'm really sorry, but do you know how much time it would have taken to read all the decklists and > > arrange the tables accordingly, overriding the Archon completely? You know that you are telling not > > the truth here. Provide proof please that it was done the way you claim it. It wasn't. > > ---> That's not the point, Carl ! I can't provide proof and you knwo > that. I just say what I have sawn. I'm not the only one who have sawn > the Austrian Finalist seating behind the computer. I'm sorry but > that's not the right place for a player ! Please read the other thread with LSJ and Kamel Senni, discussing organisators and other things. Walter was helping *handling* the Archon as he had the most knowledge of us all of macros and Excel sheets. > > > > All decklists for the finalists have been thoroughly checked and de-randomized to create a level > > starting position. Players had to randomize their decks before beginning to play. Are you trying to > > imply we would have allowed that Walter was adding in cards before the final, or that in fact *we* > > judges did it??? > > ---> You say it ! I just say what many players and I have sawn. I just > talk about facts. Deckchecks were done by Alex Woisetschläger, Richard Utner, Martin Kasika, Jeff Thompson and myself. It was ensured that no other players were able to take a look at the decks. Telling that we allowed Walter to cheat is ridiculous; this *can't* get any lower. I won't have a discussion with you at this level, no thanks. Carl

Angus, the Unruled wrote: > I think deck lists prevent from at least one way of cheating, yes. Clearly, deck lists theoretically prevent people from illegally modifying their decks between rounds. The point is if it is worth doing. Requiring deck lists requires: A) That players to have enough organizational fortitude to make accurate deck lists. I dunno about you, but most of the VTES players around here have trouble showing up to eventsif I drive totheir house and pick them up. And now you require them to do written homework before they show up? B) That players don't tinker with their decks right before the tournament starts. I also don't know about you, but most players I know tinker with their decks right up until the first round starts (as they are in a room full of VTES players and are trading cards). C) That the organizers can check decks. This requires a great deal of time--people have to unshuffle their cards so that individual numbers can be counted. Then folks have to have their decks checked between rounds--again, decks have to be unshuffled and sorted through. If decks aren't checked, which is a time intensive pain in the ass, what is the point of the deck lists in the first place? And what does doing all of this do, other than piss off the player base? It *might* prevent one or two unscrupulious players from attempting to illegally modify their decks between rounds, which, given the format of VTES, is of questionable benefit anyways. That, and all this considerable work does is prevent one form of questionable cheating. It does nothing about marked cards, illegal play, starting with too much pool, not paying for things "accidentally", whatever. There are plenty of ways to cheat that don't involve illegally modifying decks. I, as a player, would be far more irritated by having to provide deck lists and have my deck checked against said list than I am irritated by the miniscule chance that someone at a VTES tournament is going to attempt to cheat in this fashion. I, as a event organizer, am far more concerned about alienating players by requiring deck lists than I am concerned about people cheating. Yes. I agree. Requiring deck lists and doing random deck checks can prevent one particular type of cheating. This doesn't mean it is worth doing, however. [ quoted text not captured ]

> And what does doing all of this do, other than piss off the player base? It > *might* prevent one or two unscrupulious players from attempting to > illegally modify their decks between rounds, which, given the format of > VTES, is of questionable benefit anyways. Disagree. IMO, it can be of signifant benefit.

Peter D Bakija <PD...@bigplanet.com> wrote in message news:<BA1BD150.AA91%PD...@bigplanet.com>... > Angus, the Unruled wrote: > > > I think deck lists prevent from at least one way of cheating, yes. > > Clearly, deck lists theoretically prevent people from illegally modifying > their decks between rounds. The point is if it is worth doing. > > Requiring deck lists requires: > > A) That players to have enough organizational fortitude to make accurate > deck lists. I dunno about you, but most of the VTES players around here have > trouble showing up to eventsif I drive totheir house and pick them up. And > now you require them to do written homework before they show up? Be careful you don't spark that whole 'some regions are weaker than others' discussion again, Peter. ;) > C) That the organizers can check decks. This requires a great deal of > time--people have to unshuffle their cards so that individual numbers can be > counted. Then folks have to have their decks checked between rounds--again, > decks have to be unshuffled and sorted through. If decks aren't checked, > which is a time intensive pain in the ass, what is the point of the deck > lists in the first place? On a more serious note, I would like to add what we do over here in the netherlands: Everyone needs to bring a decklist, and only if cheating is suspected, or cards get mixed in from previous rounds (Anarch Troublemaker, Haven uncovered, that kind of thing), will the decklist actually be used. And, of course, to post the winning deck list, since most players think that is kind of nifty. But no-one over here cheats, as far as I know, and no-one would be willing to lose their VTES friends over something like this. But you have sparked another thought, which I will save for the new thread: 'Non-winning Decklist Collection'. Tobias Deventer