PDA

View Full Version : Will GW ever pay prize money at tournaments?



Brandir
06-06-2005, 07:24
Will GW ever pay prize money at tournaments?

I ask this as I have just looked at the latest Magic pro tour details. For example, the winner received $21,725 (approx 12,000). Some players will receive $2,000 for appearance fees for entering Pro Tours and $500 for Grand Prix events as well as free travel and cccommodation.

It would be interesting to see a Pro Tour for WHFB/WH40K/LOTR.

Griefbringer
06-06-2005, 09:16
Hopefully not - I am afraid that putting money as prize would make such tournaments way too competitive, and bring in people who would be there just for the money and not really for the sake of gaming.

Karhedron
06-06-2005, 09:58
I agree, official tournements are pretty competative affairs as it is. If you start putting up cash prizes then things would only get worse. Besides, most tournements and events I have been to sell out pretty quickly. There doesn't seem to be any need to offer cash incentives to people.

Brandir
06-06-2005, 10:20
I am neither for or against a Pro Tour.

But I wonder why Magic does have one. Is this because it is a US-centric game? Does the US tournament system mean that companies need to offer prize money? Perhaps GW would do better in the US market if they did implement a Pro Tour there?

Olith
06-06-2005, 10:37
Magic can support a monetary prize system. The nature of it's game play supports competative play, GW games do not. Magic, chess, poker etc are games with strict rules. Warhammer and 40k aren't. This mainly derives from having measuring and points systems. Points systems are not perfectly balanced and are not the best way to do things. ok I know there are plenty of magic card combinations that aren't balanced and such but it is still different. If competative play for money became adopted as a common method to play tournaments then too much would have to change. The designers job would be a lot harder, we'd have strict rules for rolling dice, measuring (can you imagine the arguments and uproar of 0.1 of an inch costing someone thousands of dollars? I'd let that go everytime in normal play.) and painting, modeling etc. These games are meant to be fun and are designed in such a way for relative balanced play. The hobby has already taken the wrong direction in overly competative play as far as I am concerned and bringing large cash prizes into it will not benifit the hobby in anyway.

Brandir
06-06-2005, 10:42
I think you make some excellent points Olith. I no longer enter tournaments as they are too competitive for me - even though I have won a few in my time as well as the odd best xxx in tournaments. I can see that a $/ prize could take even more of the fun away from tournaments.

Griefbringer
06-06-2005, 11:36
Also, those money MTG tournaments are probably of the type where the cards are provided by the organisers (so the players don't get to customise their decks beforehand).

TyranidTim
06-06-2005, 12:56
Personally I hope not. Fame & Glory, not Cash & Prizes :)

-Tim

Sojourner
06-06-2005, 13:38
No.

No. There should be a law specifically to prevent it because it's so obviously against everything the hobby stands for.

Brandir
06-06-2005, 13:43
I am interested in whether this mood against prize money is due to our country/culture? I'm English and am now probably persauded against proze money. But what do our US based colleagues think? Are the posters so far from the UK/US/New Zealand/France/Sweden/Whereever?

Sojourner
06-06-2005, 13:44
Damn capitalists.

Lordmonkey
06-06-2005, 14:29
No.

No. There should be a law specifically to prevent it because it's so obviously against everything the hobby stands for.

Damn right.

Rykion
06-06-2005, 14:45
I've avoided some games simply because the only format most people play them in is tournaments. I prefer friendly games to ruthless games where winning is all that matters. I suspect the tournament/prize attitude of some games comes from having very little to draw in players to the game itself. These games don't involve painting or modeling and usually have very little or no background story. I don't think it really has much to do with where the companies or players are located.

x-esiv-4c
06-06-2005, 15:48
Introducing money into the game will lead to the most cheddar armies ever. Nothing but iron warriors tricked out and min maxing, it will take the spirit out of the game totally.

Griefbringer
06-06-2005, 15:56
There should be a law specifically to prevent it because it's so obviously against everything the hobby stands for.

Actually, in some countries the laws regarding gambling and lottery might put some restrictions on activities like this.

Edit: and as for my location, look that <- direction.

Cloudscape_online
06-06-2005, 17:06
However... If GW were to offer monetary payouts for tournaments, what would happen?

Would the cost of gaming materials drop? If so, would casual players reap the benefits?

Brandir
06-06-2005, 17:13
I very much doubt thatthe cost of gaming materials would drop if GW introduced /$ prozes into tournaments.

Personally I think GW should give tournament winners a free ticket to the next tournament to defend their title (I had to buy my own to defend my title!) and pay for the travel costs to/from Nottingham and accommodation costs (which were negligible in my case, merely a few miles in the old jalopy).

Cpl. Calvin
06-06-2005, 19:14
With regard to your question about nationality/culture effecting folks opinion on this Brandir I would say you hit on something from the other side so to speak. I think that we are seeing here that nationality/culture have little to do with peoples opinion on this.

In fact that is one of the best things about this hobby, that it gets past those sorts of superficial issues and gets to people, or a certain type of people. That is the ones who just like to have a fun, fair game with other people equally laid back. Cheesy players aside of course.

Just look at how diverse the "Portent/Whatever it's called now" community is. Lots of different people who are at least in some ways very similar!

Misfratz
06-06-2005, 20:12
However... If GW were to offer monetary payouts for tournaments, what would happen?

Would the cost of gaming materials drop? If so, would casual players reap the benefits?I dislike the labelling of non-tournament players as being 'casual'. My wife-to-be certainly thinks I take it waaaaay too seriously. I imagine the way I would characterise the divide could well be offensive to some tournament-goers so I'll refrain from defining it...

I don't know how cash prizes at other tournaments makes sense but normally it is because they can raise even more money due to advertising, etc. I don't see how this could happen with GW. It's still far too niche for that. Even paid tournaments for computer games are still very fringe and the computer games industry is huge compared to GW.

THerefore, were GW to offer cash prizes they would most likely pay for it by increasing the cost of gaming materials, reasoning that the incentive of a cash proze would lead to more people buying more new armies to try to win, etc, etc.

Thankfully I can't ever see this happening.

Ideally games should be more about story-telling than full-blooded competition.

In fact I'd like to see a series in WD where they followed a narrative/map/tree campaign. [*Er, I guess they're doing this now with the Tale of Four Gamers battling in Lustria... Yay!] They did this a bit ages ago with a series of Orc and Empire battles in WHFB and touched upon it with a one-off IG/Tyranid match-up recently. I also foundly remember tales from Chambers of the Horned Rat about his campaign involving the Harbingers, Orks and Dark Angels. It would be nice to see people to do thingsin such a way because of the story that had its own internal logic so it made sense rather than simply because they regard it as being points-efficient or "uber"...

Rik Valdis
06-06-2005, 21:05
I dunno about travel costs but I think automatic qualification, without having to go through the heats would be a fair prize for winning a GT. If you really wanta cash prize then go play the lottery or something, we call this a hobby for a reason.

Delicious Soy
07-06-2005, 05:21
I doubt you would because it seems that the GW tourney system differs from the magic one, though this might be wrong :p

Does the magice tournament measure anything in the way of sportsmanship or the like? Remeber that GW tournaments have scores relating not only to genralship but behaviour, modelling and theming abilities and in some cases, composition scores. Now we can debate on the effectiveness of these but they exist to put brakes on the competitive nature expected in tournament play, which is something that GW systems have had to adapt to, unlike Magic which was designed for more competitive play in the first place, something also aiding by the fact that it is a card game and not played with a hundred or so hand pained models. You can 'theme' a deck, but not to the same extent that you can 'theme' a warhammer army.

Basically what this means is that there is a lot more going on in the background of warhammer (please don't take that as a shot at Magic players). The exended amount of creativity (which takes time and money) means that cash prizes would have to be large. Personally I'd rather a 'GT winners' only model. THAT would be a cool prize, which you could then hock on E-Bay for cash :evilgrin:

mostholycerebus
07-06-2005, 08:07
If money was on the line GW would be required to provide a balanced and stable games system that let each general begin on even footing. Thus skill and luck alone would determine the winner. However, GW has proven that they are in NO way committed to providing us with such a bulletproof system. They would rather knock out some mediocre rules and sell the miniatures. This is, of course, the most profitable (capitalistic) option for them. You sell rules once (ok, twice, after GW corrects the first codex) but you buy minis every month. It's clear where they should focus their resources to make money.

Sojourner
07-06-2005, 09:08
Purely tournament play utterly misses the point.

And, dare I say it, its rise did seem to coincide with the rapid US expansion of the hobby.

Free tickets to the winners does sound like a good idea, though.

The judges should have the right to eject anyone from the competition for taking it too seriously. It is understood that you play GW tournaments for fun - which playing a competitive *cough*hole is not. Other people's enjoyment should take precedence over your desire for both personal glory and reward.

lord_fenric
07-06-2005, 12:07
Whilst the idead of playing for money misses the whole point of the hooby it would be possible *if* the tournament was set for fixed armies, i.e. each general used exactly the same troops. Whilst boring it would level the playing field to see which was a better general.

Lordmonkey
07-06-2005, 12:32
Whilst the idead of playing for money misses the whole point of the hooby it would be possible *if* the tournament was set for fixed armies, i.e. each general used exactly the same troops. Whilst boring it would level the playing field to see which was a better general.

Yet this is still against the game, and the hobby in general. It wouldn't be "Grand Tournament", it would be "Gimp Tournament" and the game would be Moneyhammer.

Delicious Soy
07-06-2005, 12:33
If money was on the line GW would be required to provide a balanced and stable games system that let each general begin on even footing. Thus skill and luck alone would determine the winner. However, GW has proven that they are in NO way committed to providing us with such a bulletproof system. They would rather knock out some mediocre rules and sell the miniatures. This is, of course, the most profitable (capitalistic) option for them. You sell rules once (ok, twice, after GW corrects the first codex) but you buy minis every month. It's clear where they should focus their resources to make money.
Yes because the Magic rules set is such a prime example of fairness and equality :rolleyes:

alterion
07-06-2005, 21:24
hmm gw givng money to gamers.. just THINK about what you are asking for a moment.. not going to happen... buut seriously it would be the wrost thing that ever happened to the hobby and would ruin it for me.. totaly against everything gw and gaming should stand for.. there are enough iron warriors and the like out there all ready thank you very much- thogh perhaps free tickets to winners or winners being commisioned to write tatics articles for wd ( cause some of the "tatics in there are often laughable) could be arranged.. i.e things that you would not go to win.. but would be a nice surprise on the quiet

blitz589
07-06-2005, 22:00
hmm gw givng money to gamers.. just THINK about what you are asking for a moment.. not going to happen... buut seriously it would be the wrost thing that ever happened to the hobby and would ruin it for me.. totaly against everything gw and gaming should stand for.. there are enough iron warriors and the like out there all ready thank you very much- thogh perhaps free tickets to winners or winners being commisioned to write tatics articles for wd ( cause some of the "tatics in there are often laughable) could be arranged.. i.e things that you would not go to win.. but would be a nice surprise on the quiet

Gw doesnt give money they take money) it woulde be nice if they gave out minis though, or cards.

Cloudscape_online
08-06-2005, 00:58
to Rik Fricis: Magic the Gathering was a hobby ccg. Now look at it. The DCI has enabled it to become huge.

to Misfratz: the Computer games industry isn't one company, it's many. Generic labels are how the human mind operates. You are a 'gamer' as am I.

to Delicious Soy: Do you actually play Magic? The 'Core Set' as it is, is very balanced in terms of power and efficiency. No one colour overpowers another, only in constructed blocks are there themes which make your own personal card collection more or less powerful.

A tournament where large volumes of money are involved will force GW to actually put some effort into balancing all the armies and properly writing the rules and codecies the first time around (it would make a change), instead of all this stupid 'FAQ updates' because they missed yet another detail in the first incarnation. Why don't they start working on the next rulebook now so that by the time it comes to being released it'll be done properly?

Griefbringer
08-06-2005, 07:29
Why don't they start working on the next rulebook now so that by the time it comes to being released it'll be done properly?

For WHFB they might already be working on it.

Cloudscape_online
08-06-2005, 11:07
Yay!! :D :D

Olith
08-06-2005, 18:54
Yes because the Magic rules set is such a prime example of fairness and equality :rolleyes:

Magic however is a game built around a rulesystem where as Warhammer and Warhammer 40k are games that have a rules system to support models. They are approached in a very different way. Games workshop rulesystems are far looser than those of CCGs. Perhaps I haven't explained what I mean well but it isn't easy to say.

Imus
08-06-2005, 19:38
plus they would have to crack down on the rules as their are at the grand tounerments quite abit of cheating going on. Plus the judges let it, i talking about the italian guy and his eldar army who changed something in his army from one game to the next and got away with it! They knew but didn't kick him out! Hmmm i don't think your allowed to give prize money in this country at the moment which is why the wiiner of the for the pro tour or whatever it is in this country gets his ticket paid for to the next roun i believe!

Karhedron
08-06-2005, 19:43
A tournament where large volumes of money are involved will force GW to actually put some effort into balancing all the armies and properly writing the rules and codecies the first time around (it would make a change), instead of all this stupid 'FAQ updates' because they missed yet another detail in the first incarnation.
This is probably the greatest reason why GW won't ever do it. The Games designers know that the system is not marvellously balanced in spite of their best efforts.

In magic, anyone can field any card (providing they can buy or swap for it). If a player chooses to restrict themselves to particular colours then there are still thousands of cards available for each colour. Each has slightly different casting costs and rules. In Warhammer and 40K, most armies have only a dozen or so different units and may only have a single unit in a particular category.

This means that if a single unit is over or underpowered, then the whole performance of the army will be skewed in that area. I don't think that all magic cards are perfectly balanced (I remember the infamous Black Lotus/Channel/Fireball combo for a first turn win) but the shear quantity of them available means most players have access to equally effective cards.

Eversor
08-06-2005, 21:37
This is probably the greatest reason why GW won't ever do it. The Games designers know that the system is not marvellously balanced in spite of their best efforts.
I agree totally with you Karhedron. Personally - and I know I'm not alone - I don't think that any asymmetric game (game where the two sides have different premises/pieces/whatever - chess on the other hand is a symmetric game) can be balanced. The traditional approach to this type of game is to switch sides and play best out of a set number of matches. Even the old vikings did this ;)

Indeed, I am of the opinion that a table top game should not strive towards an absolute balance, since it is impossible. As long as it is fun and I am able to tell a narrative (while drinking a couple of beers), i'm more than happy.

That aside, Magic is an interesting example, since it is an "externally symmetric" game (players all have the same card base to choose from), but the matches themselves are asymmetric (players seldom have the exact same decks). Because of this "internal asymmetry", the meta game is an incredibly important part of the tournaments.

As Karhedron says, in 40k the external symmetry is much more limited, since the number of options in each army is limited. It is not a game designed for competitive play.

The point I'm making is that no amount of money put into a tournament scene will ever make 40k balanced. It simply isn't possible to balance it in the way that Chess or - in its own way - Magic are.

Delicious Soy
09-06-2005, 04:42
Magic however is a game built around a rulesystem where as Warhammer and Warhammer 40k are games that have a rules system to support models. They are approached in a very different way. Games workshop rulesystems are far looser than those of CCGs. Perhaps I haven't explained what I mean well but it isn't easy to say.Somehow I think we're on the same team :p. The loose nature of GW rules is basically why a cash incentive style of tournament should not and hopefully, will not, be introduced. Magic can get away with it because creativity is limited by the nature of the game while craziness is not only a potential in GW games, it's often welcomed.

I don't think perfect balance can be achieved in 40k, unless every army had the same choices. The lack of balance arises out of the differences between armies which are critical to the game. I'd rather have the see-sawing balance than the static of chess, because if I want chess, I'll play it.

Griefbringer
09-06-2005, 08:28
[QUOTE=Delicious Soy]I don't think perfect balance can be achieved in 40k, unless every army had the same choices. [QUOTE]

At some moments in the history of 40K, a case of "everybody plays space marines" has not been very far from happening... :cool:

Praetorian
26-07-2005, 10:57
There is money at tournaments- except its in the painting contests. ;) Do you know what a golden demon mini fetches on EBAY- even if its a third. I saw "Alexis" get like 600 bucks for one of her pieces- wow! Then there is the spinoff...