Let's look at it like this. You have:

53 Darth Vader, Imperial Commander
52 Evo Trooper x4
37 Thrawn
27 Lobot
20 Admiral Piett
11 Admiral Ozzel

Reinforcements - Mouse Droid x3, Ugnaught x2, Camaasi Noble

for a total of 15 activations.

I have:
62 Boba Fett, BH
61 Cade Skywalker, BH
50 Han Solo, Galactic Hero
23 Jarael
03 Ugnaught Demolitionist


We play on Train Station and I spend the first half of the game moving very carefully, checking various lines of sight to be sure you can't completely pummel me because I only have 3 phases and you have 15. You spend a fair amount of time in the same portion of the game deciding how to best position your Ugs/Mice for greatest benefit. We end up playing 3 rounds in an hour and the score is 18-10 in your favor. Did someone play slow? Which player?






The answer, the correct answer, is that you as a judge cannot tell from the information above if the game was played slowly, or who was at fault if it was. The player with only 3 activations could have put Han or Boba in front and rolled a ton of successful Evade saves. The Ozzel player could have spun Ugs quickly.

To me, based on my own experiences as a judge at GenCon, the problem lies with the players' ability or desire to alert a judge early in the game about a problem. Once time is called, that is not the time to raise a stink about it. But that is exactly what happens usually. Someone loses, and they feel they should have had more time. But reverse the situation where the player wins and it's no big deal.

I'm not referring to any specific individual with this example or with the statement about when a player cares about slow play/stalling, because I have seen it happen almost universally up and down the field of players. I can't tell you how many times last year people came up to me after a game was completely over to raise their first complaint about slow play. I asked them why they didn't call me over when it was happening, and I never got a real answer. But I didn't need them to answer, I already knew. It's because they thought they were going to win anyway, or that they didn't want to make a scene.

I'm very nervous about the road Bill's suggestion is taking us down. It's paved with great intentions.

I agree with Boris 100%.

This is going to be really, really hard on judges.

You want to stop slow play issues? I'll tell you exactly how to do it, and it will be so unpopular that there may be a lynching for saying it.

Activation limits.

No more than 6 characters in 100.
No more than 10 characters in 150.
No more than 12 characters in 200.

Characters with Swarm ignore this restriction.
Characters that enter the game through abilities such as Reserves or Reinforcements ignore this restriction.

Watch what happens.

Edited out Endor from the list, and inserted a line about giving Local TO's the power to control their local game under the Open format with special rules as they deem necessary. So, for maps like Endor, if it becomes a problem locally, the TO has the power to fix it. They can also restrict figures as well, so that formats like, "Melee Only" or "No Uniques" are allowed to be played as well.

Well I can see where you are coming from but it is really only 3 phases to 4. After I have activated Ozzel, Piett, and Thrawn and you are out I get to come out with the rest of my stuff all at once. If you have been taking a while to position carefully by measuring alot I should have paid attention to where those line went and I should have been planning my next move. I have been on both sides of the activation control and I really don't see why it slows it down. You are either left with a choice between a rock and a hard place, or you spend a minute and a half (at most) spinning figs after you opponent has activated.

Jason and I talked about this at GC. The problem with this, as he explained to me, is that if a visitor comes to the store to play, only to discover Endor is allowed.

#1 I really like this idea. I think it will work and Bill brings up good points.
#2 200-150-100 I really don't care. I just hate having a tournament take from about 12 hours to play even thought it is seven rounds and a 1 1/2 hour break.
#3 Slow play needs to be addressed. Stalling will happen and it is hard to stop (an ugg can always blow a door and override can always be used even if unnecessary). Slow play is the real problem. Many of you know about GC 2006 when I had words with a certain slow player. I really want to find a good way to stop it. Making games go to two-thirds of the format points scored could be a way to help that (minimums of 67 in 100, 100 in 150, and 134 in 200) might be a better way to go than 8 rounds. just an idea.
#4 Great idea, I was trying (and failed) to abuse this idea at GenCon this year. I was hoping to use it as an example of why to get rid of it.
#5 I would perfer dropping Mettle and keeping MotF2. I think that either way it needs to stop all of the damage. (maybe make it only usable once per activation).
#6 I want to see some playtesting on this first. I wouldn't mind waiting another update to see if this can be abused or not.
#7 Fine. It makes sense.
#8 No time limit. They have the head judge watching only their game and I am confident that that person could make a call on slow play.

Both. Give both a warning. 3 Rounds is not an acceptable play speed by either player, doesn't matter how many evades were made. But if the judge is trying to decide after the game is over, and has never talked to either player, there are other issues at stake, as you mention later. If done right, both players would likely get a friendly warning long before the conclusion of the game. But honestly, I would have no problem as the judge giving both of them one at the end either. And when I have judged, I did not require my players to call me over to issue one either. But I only had 26 players at that event, so it was one person watching 13 games.

Sure it does. And that problem stems from three things. 1) that players think slow play = cheating and stalling. Most people do not want to call anyone for doing something illegal unless they are absolutely sure. 2) Further, our community reaction to it has been negative. When people do call for a judge, the automatic response has been that the person calling them is a jerk. 3) That our judges have not been equipped through the DCI Floor Rules with how to deal with it properly. Guidelines give players an expectation of what they need to be doing, and judges a guide by which to make their decisions. Guidelines are not binding, and as always, the judge still has final say for enforcement.

As far as the insinuation that players only care when they lose, I find that to be untrue. What is going on, is that players tolerate it when they think they are going to win anyway, to avoid making a scene. But I think it's been well established that this community by and large does not want to play timed games. And further, judges have also been the cause of this trend as well, by only acting when the outcome of a game has been affected. Judges need to be issuing warnings earlier in games, and not holding out until the end to see if it matters. The idea of the guidelines is to give them the tools in the floor rules to do so.

Not sure what that means. Perhaps I have not been clear about what a "Guideline" is. These actually change nothing about what a judge can or cannot do actually. All they do is explain what judges should already be doing.

I will submit this example, Dean Miller. I will ask that anyone with a contradictory experience of Dean as a Judge to speak up if what I say has not been your experience. The way Dean judges, is exactly what I have laid out here. The belief that games should not by and large be going to time is his. He gave out warnings at Gencon for it, and added as many rounds as necessary in a couple of cases. The players could have been reporting more slow play issues than they did, which I believe having guidelines will enduce, but when asked, Dean acted pretty much exactly as I have laid out. So unless you are prepared to say that the way Dean judges is unfair, or is not the most fair way that it can be done in dealing with slow play, then I fail to understand your concerns.

If it's advertised as "Open Play" they already know. The bigger issue is when a visitor who has not bothered to call at all before attending, is hit with the TO restrictions for that week.

Cincinnati already uses a good method to deal with this, of always being ready to switch to standard play, or to allow the visitor to violate the TO set restrictions for that week as needed.

They've been doing it for years, with 0 issues. In the final wording of the "optional rules" should WotC agree to it for Open Format, I would probably include how to deal with this issue just as Cincy does it currently with their fun formats.

The problem is the length of tournaments. I can't have my 4 round/5 round tournament (which pushes 5-6 hours, basically an hour + 10 minutes for that last round usually) go any longer. People don't want to come and spend an entire day to get 4-5 games in.
I've been doing the adding rounds at the end of games, and it seems to be working ok. Overall tournament time is turning into an issue, though.

I miss the days of kill 'em all. (or, first one to get to VPs needed).

I'm debating whether adding the potential for a draw will fix this, or just allow abuse to not lose a game. <sigh>

Yea but i can see people using it the other way in a cat and mouse game. I am thinking why engage if i know i cannot fully kill a piece. It is going to be peices like cunning and opportunist that will have the greatest effect. I go and have the opportunity to kill lobot but their is a twilike bsv ready to attack me if i move forward and with opportunist he can drop my heath below half. If it was not for the points would not be to worried about it becasue if he wins init he cannot due his full damage and I have no problem taking him out if i do win init.

Like I said maybe i am thinking to much into this but this is something i would consider if i am playing a major tournament. making sure I can hit him and him not able to hit me and you can still run and not engage.

actually the 2 hours time limit for the Championship was my idea and I presented to Jim.

While it may take some hashing out I think it has merit. Maybe only 90 minutes.

But the thing is this year you had the pressure of it being a championship, the crowd watching, playing for decent prize (the laptop) and to pile on we basically televised the event. All that added together meant some pressure to our two players. They handled it quite well but I think adding say 30 minutes to the time limit would be acceptable. I cannot see where the hotel room would be an issue as I had to be out by 9 am to ge tthe thing started.

To be clear, I'm 100% for an "open" map list and not interested at all in official support within the DCI rules for "do whatever you want" rules, restrictions, etc. If a player goes to a DCI game, they should need the floor rules and nothing else and get the type of game it lays out without having to worry about whether venue A plays Melee only and venue B bans boba and venue C uses 2 acts at the start of the round and no gambit. The game should be the same everywhere. I know you've been working on that kind of idea for the future, but that's way too ambitious in my view for January.

I know the Cinci stuff happens all the time and I fully support people making it fun despite the official framework but I think it goes a bit far to officially sanction that DCI is basically meaningless as a standard. We have WPN casual for that.

I don't know what the Mariott's policy is, or rather I don't remember as it's been a couple of years since I had my own room there, but let's take the Omni for example, where I did stay. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the final round started around noon local time, and wrapped up just before 1:00. Then there were prizes to be given out, and then the judges had to get their compensation. This was with a 1-hour time limit in effect.

Check-out at the Omni was at noon and I was told that if my car was still in the valet parking lot after 3 p.m., I would be charged an additional $25. Add 30-45 minutes to the Championship finals for someone like that, and that is really pushing it.

Every year I have worked for Pasttimes I have had my own room, and this is my personal choice. I have done so for several reasons, and I will never NEVER book a room through Pasttimes.

I suppose if this becomes the standard, that going forward, only people who accept the free hotel room through Pasttimes and all the conditions that are attached to it will be able to judge a Championship.

check out time at the marriot is 11 am.

But still I dont know why that would effect anything you dont have to move your vehicle out of the parking lot. So just take your stuff to the vehicle and then load up go judge and you are good to go.

I mean you are free to disagree with me. But whether playing on sunday or judging it has never effected when Ihad my stuff out of the room.

I'm sorry. I just don't see it as a black and white issue, based on personal experiences. Some people simply don't have the mental prowess to play at the same speed as others, and these guidelines seem to, IMO, discriminate against people in that category. (I know it is not intentional, but nevertheless.)



This is a more accurate way to describe it, thank you.



I just think its going to have unintended consequences. For example:



These guidelines will have people coming out of the woodwork, looking to blame their bad games - losses - on the fact that they didn't play the recommended number of rounds. I don't really want to have another knock-down drag-out over this, but I just think you are opening a door that we may never be able to close, one that introduces a lot of unnecessary headache for judges.



I thought Dean handled the Championship just fine, and at no point did I ever observe him asking people how many rounds they had played. I thought - as a player observing games going to time - that it was obvious without asking how many rounds were played who was playing slow.

I just said why Dean. The Omni was valet parking ONLY, and any car in the lot was charged another $25 after 3:00. The OMNI is not the only hotel where this is the case.

Oh I am not arguing just giving you the how's and what's for me over the past few years.

Aye. This is a game. I have 12 year olds and 8 year olds playing against 35+ year olds. They are trying their hardest, but it takes them a long time to play. These kids are pretty smart by all measures, they're still just, well, kids. This game needs to be more inviting, not less. Even in Magic, they don't have a set time per turn. To do so breaks too many things. (I'm aware that MtG has its own issues, but the principle at this high of a level is still the same).



This will also be true, especially if we're trying to make the game competitive at a high level. I think the way Dean handled it by walking by, and seeing if a game had not reached full tilt engagement, decided whether to add rounds or not, is a good way to start approaching such things. In the end, the key is to create incentives for those who engage quickly, and dis-incentives for those who play back and take their time.

Actually, the entire slow play problem can be really blamed on the proliferation of damage per activation versus how slowly HP seems to rise. People play slow because its not that a piece takes a bit of damage if he's left out in the wrong spot, the piece will flat out die, almost regardless of how big it is.

If you want to fix slow play, fix *that*, and see how many games go to time afterward?

And some people prefer to play the game and determine if they won or lost based on actually winning or losing the game, not on how they're doing at some arbitrary stopping point with arbitrary tiebreakers and the rules as they are discrimate against people in that category. I think we've gotten too complacent about considering those people. Extenuating circumstances will occur, but the the general idea should be to finish games and judges and players need some incentive to move the game in that direction. The game is intended to by played in 60 minutes not just played for 60 minutes, and right now I think we still need a bit more focus on that--obviously without becoming fascists about it which is Bill's whole point about these being guidelines.

On another topic, parking in the adjoining mall lot Sunday ran me $5. Move your car if your hotel is an issue. I'll pick it up for any Gencon judge who's in this pickle. It really seems like a non-issue. I think a bit of extra time in this one case might be worth the slight inconvenience. (But I don't think it needs to be in the rules at all. Time limits are TO discretion already and we don't need to "waste" space in the document for this lone item. Jim says it once and done i he wants to do it.)