Are 7 Hour Warhammer Games the Future of Competitive Age of Sigmar 4?

Summary

The video is abnormal, and we are working hard to fix it.
Please replace the link and try again.

Takeaways

• 😀 The speaker criticizes the decision not to use a clock in Warhammer tournaments, calling it impractical and unnecessary for ensuring fair gameplay.
• 😀 The lack of a clock is seen as a frustrating decision, especially when clocks are widely used in other competitive games like chess and War Machine.
• 😀 The decision to avoid clocks negatively affects players who have traveled or taken time off work to compete, creating a real-world cost.
• 😀 The speaker humorously reflects on the absurdity of the decision, calling it 'the dumbest thing' they’ve read but acknowledging the meme potential.
• 😀 They argue that using a clock would make gameplay fairer, ensuring that both players have equal time to make decisions, rather than relying on individual preferences.
• 😀 The speaker discusses how chess clocks, a commonly used tool, can create a more structured and fair experience in competitive games.
• 😀 The decision to avoid clocks is criticized as indicative of corporate interference, with personal opinions affecting the broader community’s practices.
• 😀 The speaker expresses concern about the potential long-term consequences if this decision becomes a precedent for future tournaments.
• 😀 Despite the frustration, the speaker acknowledges the social aspects of tournaments and empathizes with players who may not be overly affected by the situation.
• 😀 The speaker concludes with humor, referring to memes and inside jokes created by the situation, but emphasizes the real-world impact on players and the tournament community.

Q & A

What is the main issue discussed in the video?

The main issue discussed is the controversy surrounding the decision to not use clocks during a competitive gaming event, which the speaker believes would ensure fairness. The decision is seen as illogical and could cause problems for participants who have made significant personal and financial investments to attend the event.

Why does the speaker think using clocks would be a fair solution?

The speaker believes that using clocks would allow each player to have an equal amount of time to make decisions, ensuring fairness in the game. They highlight that clocks are widely used in other competitive games like chess and War Machine, where time limits are part of the standard rules.

What real-world consequences does the speaker mention for the participants affected by the decision?

The speaker points out that some participants might have booked holidays, taken time off work, or saved money to attend the event, and now face the uncertainty that their games might not be fair due to the lack of clocks. This could be frustrating for those who have invested time and resources.

How does the speaker feel about the decision made by the organizers regarding the use of clocks?

The speaker is frustrated and considers the decision to be one of the 'dumbest things' they've read. They believe that the situation could have been easily resolved by using chess clocks, and they feel it is an unnecessary complication introduced by personal biases of some individuals.

What does the speaker say about the general consensus within the gaming community?

The speaker mentions that the decision could have a larger impact on the community, as it might influence how future events are organized. They are concerned that the personal feelings of a few individuals could dictate how the entire community operates, potentially leading to a less fair experience for participants.

What does the speaker think about the idea of using a 'split time device'?

The speaker finds the idea of using a 'split time device' absurd and ridiculous. They humorously point out that this concept is being treated as a joke, and the speaker does not see any real benefit in using such a device instead of a simple and widely accepted chess clock.

How does the speaker feel about the potential long-term effects of this decision?

The speaker worries that the decision could set a dangerous precedent for future events, where personal biases could override the community's established norms. They fear that it could lead to the rejection of chess clocks, which they believe is an essential tool for fairness in competitive gaming.

What is the speaker's perspective on the social aspect of the event?

The speaker acknowledges that for some participants, the social aspect of the event may be more important than the competitiveness. These people might not be as bothered by the lack of clocks, but the speaker is concerned about the players who are there to compete at the highest level and want a fair game.

How does the speaker view the role of personal biases in this decision?

The speaker believes that personal biases have played a significant role in the decision to not use clocks. They argue that the decision seems to reflect the personal opinions of a few individuals, which could negatively impact the broader community and its approach to competitive gaming.

What does the speaker mean by the phrase 'classic Games Workshop'?

The phrase 'classic Games Workshop' is used to express the speaker's frustration with the organization's decision-making process. The speaker suggests that the decision is an example of a corporate entity imposing rules based on personal preferences, which is a common critique of Games Workshop's management style.