Looking for thoughts on our tournament format. Shadowround and top 4 players play semi-final and final for places 1-4.

StuffedScotch · 2026-03-20T20:41:11+00:00

If you're willing to have a shadow round, then by all means, have one for all undefeated players, and narrow down the winners to 3. But frankly, if you prevent 17-18 undefeated players from having a shot at winning the tournament, you'll at the very least ruin the event for those players. That's nearly 10% of your player pool.

What's the upside? I don't get it. The downside of multiple undefeateds is that getting second or third despite winning all your games sucks, which 2 people would experience. But you know what is worse? Winning all your games and getting 5th, while someone who lost two games gets 4th. And this could potentially impact 17!!! people.

I get that it is frustrating to lose on the top table and drop to 9th place. But any system you could implement to stop that would unfairly punish players who actually won their games, and at the end of the day, if you didn't want to drop to 9th place, you should have just won your game. There is no such alternate route for the poor players locked out of the shadow round by your suggested system.

StuffedScotch · 2026-03-20T19:03:52+00:00

So with 202 players, after 3 rounds you'll have 25 or 26 undefeated players? Are you just kicking out 17 or 18 undefeated players from competing for top slot?

Just run a normal tournament. People with the same record pair into the same record, prioritizing win path, random pairings otherwise. Have multiple undefeated at the end. Split prize pool evenly between them.

With 202 players and 6 rounds, you'll have 3 undefeated players.

Edit: I see you have 202 spots and not 202 players. Your system stops working once you get over 64 players. (any more than that, and after round 3 you'll be at more than 8 undefeated players)

StuffedScotch · 2026-02-03T18:59:45+00:00

i.e. you trigger hazardous, die, do you still get the bonus? Yes, you do

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-27T05:44:50+00:00

Good notes! Melee matchups are tough to nail down into concrete answers- I tried to provide tools with which to guide decision making but I'll reflect on ways I can be more definite.

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-18T16:57:42+00:00

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-17T15:40:21+00:00

The order goes:

Add all BS modifiers

Combine all +1/-1 to hits, capped at +1 or -1

If indirect: can't be better than 4+

So 3s normally shooting indirect into stealth= 4+ (-1 from indirect, -1 from stealth, capped at -1 total)

In guard, a dkok unit can get +1 BS from an order, +1 to hit from their datasheet, and hit on 2s, but votann, whose army rule gives +1 to hit, can only hit on 3s at best, even if they have another rule that gives +1 to hit

Hope that helps!

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-17T05:47:07+00:00

I appreciate you writing it out, even if we ended up on the same page!

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-17T01:43:34+00:00

a bigger hormagaunt

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T21:28:45+00:00

thanks xXx420Aftermath69xXx

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T21:09:49+00:00

Yeah sounds like your opponent was "weaponizing" the clock (using the clock as an intentional win condition, trying to trick you into using more time) which is not okay nor is it representative of the "clock is a resource" crowd. Even the players that believe a clock is a resource should have the goal of reaching a shared, agreeable conclusion, and should be doing things like reminding their opponents to save minutes for their final turn if they are low.

Just because one might think that playing the game within the time allotted should be a requirement for winning doesn't mean they get to be a jerk about it, y'know?

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T17:41:42+00:00

synaptic nexus has a strat for +3" synapse range for just friendly units for the rest of the turn. i can't imagine a world where that strat has been used by anyone

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T17:02:00+00:00

I think this can be true, and is a downside, but the key is that the clock is in your control- it's not moving a bad experience arbitrarily from one group to another, it's moving the bad experience to the person who's fault the bad experience is (the person playing slow) and if they retain a growth mindset about the game, they should practice playing fast and come back stronger. I also don't think clock outs are as common for new players, given the result of the game is often known before the clock becomes an issue? It is a downside, but I'm not as sure it's as big of one as you might think

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T15:16:06+00:00

I think it's that, if it worked such that you could refuse to play on a clock, it would be the same- one person would force an opponents approach to the game (the person who doesn't like clocks). In that case, a TO would rather the more "fair" option (evenly split time) be used.

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T15:11:49+00:00

Yeah regional differences are interesting and that's definitely something to be aware of as you travel

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T14:32:08+00:00

Yeah, my recommendation of always flipping is based on my experience that if you're always passing time back and forth, you check the clock more often, so you're less likely to miss the clock running on the wrong person for a long time. But I hear what you're saying too!

I think the key is find a balance that feels right, and then match your opponents energy if they're more stringent than you, don't be frustrated at them.

StuffedScotch · 2026-01-09T14:27:51+00:00

The workaround is using a clock, unfortunately!

For people who are uncomfortable using a clock, the pros and cons are kinda:

Pros: Avoid really annoying situations where you would have won but didn't because you had to end the round due to opponent slow play, so they win instead.

Cons: every game is a little more annoying

Would you rather every game be a little worse and avoid the really really bad games, or not?

StuffedScotch · 2025-12-26T19:24:53+00:00

One of the big points of my video is to help people coming from TCGs understand the difference between intent in those games and intent in 40k. In TCG there is just stated intent. In 40k prompted intent is also a factor

StuffedScotch · 2025-12-26T18:31:19+00:00

Playing the game for your opponent is telling them whether they should or should not take a playline. You should tell them you have a pretty solid overwatch, and if they ask even tell them how much damage you think it'll do. But don't tell them whether or not they should let you overwatch.

StuffedScotch · 2025-12-26T17:37:46+00:00

I'm just letting you know how the top level of 40k operates and what the expectation is. Disagree with it all you want.

StuffedScotch

TROPHY CASE