"Tournament space already cut for Historicon" Topic

Quoted from Fanaticus list:

"I have been told by Scott Holder who has organized the Lampeter Room at Historicon for as long as I can remeber that the Historicon Events Organizer has reduced the table space allotted for tournament games in that room by at least 25%. We with DBA do not take up a lot of space but this could impact on even our small area. It will have a huge impact on our bigger game brothers. We were told last spring that there would be no reduction in the needed space for tournament games in the Lampeter Room but that does not seem to be the case now.

Scott asked for 32 tables of 5 by 8 size (which we use for DBA games) but he was given only 15. He asked for 46 tables that are 5 x 6 and was allotted 48. We had been assigned the larger tables so we could fit in our Doubles Tournament and 25mm games.

This is not yet over. We will play our games some place. Evening games are not a problem because the flea market space that was also taken from our gaming area is not used then." <Snipped>

Any comments from the "tournaments will not be affected crowd"??

I urge all members to vote in the HMGS-E elections. This is a pivotal vote for the future of tournament gaming. I will not recommend any candidtea..vote how you see fit.

For the record, I am member number 13, still have my green plastic ID card, and have attended HMGS cons since the first days of HMGS. I am also a DBA tournament player whose primary reason to attend Historicon and the other conventions is to play in tournaments with my friends…

Rich Baier

Sorry, but I don't care. Don't play tournaments, will probably never play tournaments. I do hope some sort of common sense will emerge in this sad affair. Some gamers do like this format. I always enjoy walking through to see the figures/armies. It is a part of miniature gaming, and because of that, it should find a place at the National Con. I don't think any one group should have a priority on space. I think all this fighting in public is a shame. A lot of hoo-haa over nothing. Fight AIDS, help the homeless, look for some real-world tragedy to get upset over. Games should be fun and easy for us over-fed softies. Get over yourselves!

The gaming should be easy and fun. the problem is that the current board has certain prejudices that they are pushing. They are attampting to push the tournaments into a back room and they seem to be very anti-dealer. They have raised dealer rates on their tables repeatedly.

While this may seem to be unimportant consider what will happen is the dealers can't afford to come. Attendence will fall off even more than it has under this board. If the tournament players decide to take their gaming somewhere else, how much farther will the attendence fall off? If that happens the hotel won't be booked, the rates charged to the con will go up, and our admission prices will go up, again.

So far I'm not impressed with this board. Rates have gone up, attendence has fallen, the financial books have been kept closed, money has been paid to an outside consultant with no results. And a board member friendly to the tournaments was removed from the board with no explaination given. An act whcih violates the rules of the BOD.

I agree with dicemanrik. Vote early, and vote often! :)

Well, what exactly IS the agenda of the BOD?
Huge shin-scraping aisle blocking games, run by cranky old guys with megaphones?

I haven't played in a tourament in years, but back in The Day, that was what I did.
To me, that whole area is the heart and soul of convention gaming. These guys are the Hard Core.
Next are the guys who come in, wither alone, orwith their Club, and organize a game that can be set up, played and taken down within a 5 hour time slot.
Both groups are the ones who matter to me.

I could not care less for the mega-blockbuster games that last all weekend.
If HMGS games go that route, and the dealers get pushed out, where is the incentive for me to attend?

Oh my goodness, not the "tournement conspiracy" again!

While I freely admit that I'm new to the whole "convention experience", whenever I go through the Lampeter room, it's typically 25% (or more) empty.

The real scary thing mentioned above is the fear that dealer attendence attendance may be curtailed.

I go to conventions to play games (and drink/socialize) with friends…but the dealer area is a huge factor for me. It lets me see what's out and what things look like in person.

- Jim

"I could not care less for the mega-blockbuster games that last all weekend. If HMGS games go that route, and the dealers get pushed out, where is the incentive for me to attend?"

The food?? Just kidding.

I'm not much of a tournament player, but I have friends who are and I want them to have the same fun time I want to have at the convention. What is done is probably? done for Historicon so let's see whether any changes are good, bad, or negligible.

My current observation is that a lot of people feel decisions are being made from only a single point of view. Moving forward I would hope that all stakeholders (attendees, dealers, BoD, convention staff, tourney organizers) can discuss issues opening and reach some kind of mutual middle ground that everyone feels they had a hand in.

Dealer Space / Cost – This is finally being run on a market dynamic. Yearly, the dealer area has to turn down dealers for lack of space. That means resources (i.e. tables) are "scarce". That means they are worth more. The rates are raised, some dealers decide it's not worth it to pay those rates, they don't go to the show and others who want to pay the rate get in.

The dealer area is not what it used to be… To use OFM's analogy… Back in the Day the dealer area was the only place/time you could see some of this stuff much less buy it. Today, most things can be bought online or from LGS at a discount even. Also, the influx of non-historical stuff just doesn't make it as appealing to me.

BTW, I'm not impressed by the current organization's leadership either. :)

The part that really ticks me off about the tournament guys is this. They come every show, they pay to get into the con, they have to pay additional money to the con for each tournament they are involved, (I just found out about that), and the show is trying to push them away and hide them in that rotten room upstairs. They pay extra to be there! I have never played, and will probably never play a tournament, but they don't deserve to be treated like this. Additionally, if they leave, that money is going to have to be made up elsewhere, which means fromn us. The shows are already losing too much as it is.

Losing what, exactly? The attendance numbers have been the same or better than usual, the same numbers of Dealers are there, there are the same number of games being run, and profits look to me to be the same as well. Is this more Henny Penny stuff?

The same as past years would be good but the plan is now to cut back tournament space by 25%. What's next to reduce, the flea market, certain rules the organizers do not like, periods the BOD think inappropriate. Once one segment of an organization is unduely put upon, then no segment is safe.

I can see VSF games next on the list of what the BOD does not approve.
"I'm sorry. That's far too silly. And, this *is* a HISTORICAL convention after all." DOOM and Necromunda would have been banned long before that.

Actually, thatis probably why they have such a bug up their ass about tournaments. The whole idea of a Macedonian-Norman matchup just offends them terribly. Let alone Sumerians vs Samurai. You can see the lip curl in a sneer at 30 paces…

All must make way for the 40 player demonstration games. Sorry, you can't touch the figures. The club members are on hand to move them fot you. No need to stray from the script, either. That would upset the scenario.

John most DBA tournaments now tend to use matched pairs of historical opponents. What you are refering to by players fighting outside their era in Ancients is still called Ahistorical since the basic armies are based on historical parameters.

It is a long way from Necromunda or Doom or 40K or any other fantasy or SciFi genre. They have their conventions where mistorical or ahistorical event are not encouraged or welcome.

Even most historical games in other non-tournament eras and systems are actually ahistorical. Most scenarios are not based on exact OBs from a battle.

What's historical? What's a-historical? Does a game of Waterloo have to come out the same way as history did to be historical? What's fun about that?

I'm tired of these shibboleths getting trotted out all the time. I prefer to stay with "original", tried and true shibboleths, such as sneering at the Origins awards about System 7.

One of you guys start a Rant thread, please. That's where most of this stuff belongs. Or call the ACLU on behalf of the tournaments, since they're being unfairly discriminated against. I'd call the JDL, but they're busy with more important things. Maybe the NRA would be interested.

And another thing: why not get up in arms about more health and safety issues at the cons? Surely all those drink and food containers around the tables are incipient biohazard or tripping risks.

I don't see anyone getting up in arms about how the Strategicon shows out here have inflicted lower back pain (from the short tables) and eye strain (from the low light level) for years and years. I attribute all my current ailments from trying to play "Patrols in the Sudan", leaning over and squinting at the tiny figures in a dark corner of the room, dammit.

DBA historical? Bwahaha! What's cuneiform for "Pk"? Where's my tinfoil hat?!?!

Allen

DJ,
Please get your facts straight. Your two posting are so full of inaccuracies. I will address a few directly.

Dn Jackson 03 Jun 2006 5:44 a.m. PST Wrote:
The gaming should be easy and fun. the problem is that the current board has certain prejudices that they are pushing.

Urban legend. Show me one place were any of this current board have said they are against tournament. We can have issues with layout of the convention overall and have directed the three convention director to address several concerns. I am on record as addressing this issue going back to 2001.

They are attampting to push the tournaments into a back room and they seem to be very anti-dealer. They have raised dealer rates on their tables repeatedly.

Attempting to push tournaments to back room? All three points above are just flat wrong and really make you look silly.

While this may seem to be unimportant consider what will happen is the dealers can't afford to come. Attendence will fall off even more than it has under this board.

Totally false again. Do you have any idea what the yearly attendance has been the past several years. We are up 20% or so in the past two years. Each year we have had an increase since I started keeping numbers with the exception of 2000 (down 4) and 2001 (down 299). The attendance has grown from 2000 about 4850 to over 7100 last year.

Rates have gone up, attendence has fallen, the financial books have been kept closed, money has been paid to an outside consultant with no results. And a board member friendly to the tournaments was removed from the board with no explaination given. An act whcih violates the rules of the BOD.

Yes rates have gone up especially for the vendors. Attendance has NOT fallen. Finanical record are available but ONLY to members. Not sure I follow you on outside consultant? If you are talking about a paid accountant yes we have one several boards ago did a five year contract with an accounting firm. It is a good idea but I am also concerned about bang for the buck. The last two sentences I can not at this time address wish I could and hope to soon.

VR
James Mattes

Dn Jackson 03 Jun 2006 1:12 p.m. PST wrote:
The part that really ticks me off about the tournament guys is this. They come every show, they pay to get into the con, they have to pay ""additional"" money to the con for each tournament they are involved, (I just found out about that), and the show is trying to push them away and hide them in that rotten room upstairs. They pay extra to be there! I have never played, and will probably never play a tournament, but they don't deserve to be treated like this. Additionally, if they leave, that money is going to have to be made up elsewhere, which means fromn us. The shows are already losing too much as it is.

For the record as you clearly do not know what you are talking about here, HMGS-East has nothing to do with tournament fees. We do not collect them. We do not account for them and they never come through HMGS. They are fees paid to the tournament GM and most if not all is used for prizes for the tournaments. HMGS has nothing to do with that. I see several of the tournament folks here on this thread and am surprised they did not correct this misconception. But then again it might serve their agenda to foster this misconception. Maybe we can get Bob's dog to weigh in…

VR
James Mattes

>>>>>They are fees paid to the tournament GM and most if not all is used for prizes for the tournaments. HMGS has nothing to do with that. I see several of the tournament folks here on this thread and am surprised they did not correct this misconception. But then again it might serve their agenda to foster this misconception.<<<

James, it was not directly stated by the original poster that the additional tournament costs were assessed by HMGS-E. If you read into it that the nefarious cabal of tournament players was scheming again, then I'm glad you corrected any implied HMGS-E involvement. Many of the tournament players are also members of NASAMW. There is also dues money assessed for membership to that group which is also not paid to HMGS-E. Bob's dog doesn't weigh that much, but I had an Irish Wolfhound that was pretty big….
and Bob's dog lost his email privileges recently from what I hear. Maybe with the BOD elections, some of the dogs there will also lose some privileges <G>

Rich Baier, HMGS-E #13

Glad you cleared that up. There are some who think we do collect those fees. I know some other chapters do and control the awards for tournaments but East does not.

VR
James Mattes

Oh Rich, as to your original post I will post some information when I get some answers to a few questions I have. I know many do not believe it but the board generally does not get into space allocation for an individual convention. That is the events managers jobs and he works for the Convention Director.
VR
James Mattes

James, thanks for being the voice of reason in this whole affair of third-hand disinformation! I, for one, am sick of the whole issue and wish people would just GAME.

As a person who attends quite a few conventions per year, it must be pointed out that the extra fees for playing in a tournament is not something (as far as I know) that HMGS-east does as a policy.

Additional fees other than general admission to a general convention is normal practice. These are fees mainly for the prizes and other costs by the prganizers. The extra fees do not go into the coffers of the group running a general convention.

James, I stand corrected on the fees. I was misinformed. However, I must protest the rest. Attendance has been down, the increase comes from counting free badges to family members and counting all the badges that a dealer is entitled to, whether he takes them or not. Another board member described this to me.

Was a board member removed on a trumped up BS charge?

The tournament was stuck where they are now years ago whaen that room really sucked. I remember A/C leaks and part of the roof falling on a game in progress. Now that it's been fixed up and is quite pleasent the BOD is trying to move them upstairs into the theater. I've gamed up there and the lighting is terrible and the tiered effect of the floor very disconcerting.

Well, I have gamed up there too, and found it to be quiet, cool, well lit, and VERY pleasant in every way. In fact I thought the tiered effect was the best part. You didn't have huge gamers bumping into you all the time, and one could stand on a tier above and watch a game without intruding on the player's space. I have been amazed at all the whining about possibly being put up there— if you are left downsatirs then fire codes apparently demand more space between the tables, hence less tables. When faced with a choice like that I would take the upstairs room even if it WAS as bad as several tournament gamers claim. But no, they'd rather cause a tempest in a teacup.

There is one major question to be answered. Are the number of tables and space for tournament playing being reduced in size from previous years?

A secondary question is, if so, where are the games that are scheduled supposed to be played?

I am glad Nazrat finds the theater to be well lit. I didn't see it that way…it isn't totally horrible, but the lighting is poor. I don't mind the stepped floor layout, but the lighting would have to be fixed to make it adequate for gaming. It feels like a dungeon in there.

My solution to the gaming problem at Historicon this year was to buy my tickets for Origins instead….still lots of DBA gaming and mostly in the evening….freeing me up for playing other games too!

Bob and his dog 04 Jun 2006 9:28 a.m. PST
"There is one major question to be answered. Are the number of tables and space for tournament playing being reduced in size from previous years?"

Answer: Yes. And game tables throughout the venue have been reduced to eliminate overcrowding, and provide a safer, more cumfortable convention for everyone.

"A secondary question is, if so, where are the games that are scheduled supposed to be played?"

Answer: Scott Holder has done a nice job of trading time for space to do more with less. Scott's proposed layout uses about 70% of last year's table space and yet he can accomodate growth in tournament participation. He deserves a lot of credit for this. Now as soon as we can sort out how to make his layout fit the room (and we will), we can put an end to all this needless hysteria.

Duncan Adams
HISTORICON 2006 Events Manager

Dn Jackson 03 Jun 2006 5:44 a.m. PST
"The problem is that the current board has certain prejudices that they are pushing. They are attampting to push the tournaments into a back room …"

This old hobb-gobblin has more lives that Jason, Freddy and Michael Meyers combined.

A plan to move the tournaments to the Showroom was formulated in August of last year. It was, from the beginning, contingent on the feasibility of appropriate lighting being installed. The tournament coordinator is on record as agreeing that lighting was the only showstopper. When a quote was obtained from a lighting contractor for a temproary installation to light the whole Showroom to the level needed for tournament play, it was clear that the convention budget could not support it.

So, with that, all thought of moving the tournamnets there ended — that was mid September. Now, only one tournament group will be in the Showroom — voluntarily — in a part of the room that could be affordably lighted.

Duncan Adams
HISTORICON 2006 Events Manager

Greetings Mr. Adams,

Please pardon my minor rant… I am not pointing any fingers, as I do not know all of the facts (and few do, as a lot of stuff has been passing via private email). :)

The message that I received from Scott on the 2nd (and today, the 4th) indicates that his plan approved by both the hotel AND ADA (meeting all codes) was REJECTED, and that a plan was given to him by Staff as the ONLY option. This was a VERY quick turn around, which leads some to believe that this Staff plan was ready all along, regardless of Scott's official floorplan. The Staff plan reduces table space by anywhere from 20-25%. Obviously, safety is not an issue, as Scott's plan was vetted by BOTH the hotel and Dr. Vargas (ADA and Cornell) – it met local, state, and federal regulations. Comfort? Few complaints — and 5 feet between tables/chairs is enough for us who are wide-of-girth… :)

Yes, according to the current Staff plan, only one small group will be moved to the Showroom, but about 20%+ of the rest of the tourney gamers will be out of luck! This will be unfortunate, as people will be coming from all over the country – some players will even be coming from Europe and Austalia!

Unfortunately, misinformation and silence just perpetuates a lot of rumours. I am glad to see James' and Duncan's post on these boards, which in some ways can only help. A lot of nonsense has been flying back and forth between the BoD/Staff camps and player/tourney camps, some of which is a little… acrimonious. Most of which has been via private email, which does not help matters as this whole issue needs to be above-board and for all to see. We are all in the same boat.

I had previously heard that this Staff plan was the ONLY option, but now I am hearing that the tourney floorspace plan is still not finalized. I would urge The Powers That Be to approve a plan that does NOT limit paying gamers and one can accomodate some growth (however modest). It is in the common good to see the hobby as a whole grow.

Any plan that REDUCES the number of paying gamers is NOT good, especially one that does so for no discernable reason. Tourney turn-out has been on the rise in recent years, and discouraging attendence is just bad business.

Although I am for the most part a tourney gamer, I have played in demo/event games in the past. If there was a plan reducing 20% plus event/demo games in the convention, I would still be bewildered and angry. GROWTH can only help the hobby.

Ken

Allen,

Origins? System 7 ?!? You just SO dated yourself! :)

Ken

Ken Winland
"If there was a plan reducing 20% plus event/demo games in the convention, I would still be bewildered and angry. GROWTH can only help the hobby."

For the record, as Historicon Events Manager, I have reduced the number of tables (and in some cases the size of tables) in most of the Host to eliminate the notorious rat traps that have evolved in HMGS East conventions.

The net loss, by table count, is in the 15% neighborhood. To date, with 525 games by 260 GMs scheduled, no GM has been turned away. This count compares favorably with Historicon 2006 where at mid June we finalized the Program content at 536 games.

I continue to accept games, and hope to be able to accomodate all GMs up to the June 23rd closing date. I think that once we get through this, and get to the convention everyone will be happy and it will be viewed as one of the best Historicos ever.

Duncan Adams
HISTORICON 2006 Events Manager

To Duncan Adams,

Thanks for the upfront confirmation of dicemanricks assertion that tournament room is being reduced by 25%. It's too bad that Mr. Mattes in his four entries chose not to address this.

Can you or Mr. Mattes confirm as to the underlying need for the 25% reduction. Is it the ADA or Fire restrictions? Or something else?

Can you also confirm that the Flea Market space is going to be reduced by 25% also. IMHO it is the most crowded and least accessible place in the entire convention.

To Sir James who stated:

"While I freely admit that I'm new to the whole "convention experience", whenever I go through the Lampeter room, it's typically 25% (or more) empty.

Since you are new, I will invite you to come see me at the WAB tournament on Saturday at Historicon and feel free to point out the empty tables in the Lampeter room.

To Artslave:

"Sorry, but I don't care. Don't play tournaments, will probably never play tournaments."

Thank you so much for the consideration and help. I can guess that as long as Artslave isn't inconvenienced everything is fine.

Ralph

crhkrebs 04 Jun 2006 1:29 p.m. PST
To Duncan Adams,

Thanks for the upfront confirmation of dicemanricks assertion that tournament room is being reduced by 25%. It's too bad that Mr. Mattes in his four entries chose not to address this.

Please check my posting as of 6:10 PST! And look back in the TMP archives where I addressed an overall reduction in tables across the board in the convention area. (They have found a few rooms that we have not use in the past that we can try out this year.)

Ralph what Bunk! I said above I would not address it until I had some questions back from Bob and Duncan and crew. You and several other do not realize that the board generally does not get into who does what, where, when, and why with regards to events.

I was the events guy for Fall In! 05 and no board member (but me) said anything. I did communicate often with the convention director and staff and tournament folks on what we needed.

Ask Duncan for yourself we generally do not get into his nickers. Back when I was doing promotions I did ask for periodic updates on numbers and type of games so I could use the data for promotional emails.

Ralph when I first came to the board back in 2004 One of my first issues was to address the flow and layout of our conventions. We have crammed too many tables in too little space. I and others in the organization have been pushing to open up the gaming, exhibitor and flea market areas to better isle space and flow in order to improve the convention experience for all attendees and gamers and better facilitarte GMs moving around gaming equipment. I work the GM desk every convention for at least a few hours and know about moving around carts full of kit. I know I expressed this to many of the tournament groups back in Aug last year. Check the archives of the WABlist and other tournament groups. ADA and fire codes are part of that as well. But that is not the only factors. Some have tried to make these requirement the Siegfried line but simply is not the case.

One of my discussion factors in supporting Bob's vision for Historicon was that he understood that we have crowed the conventions. He demonstrated a good vision for the future of the convention with a focus on those areas that would improve the overall experience for all gamers.

VR
James Mattes

crhkrebs 04 Jun 2006 1:29 p.m. PST
To Duncan Adams,

"Thanks for the upfront confirmation of dicemanricks assertion that tournament room is being reduced by 25%. It's too bad that Mr. Mattes in his four entries chose not to address this."

I confirmed no such thing. The number of tables everywhere have been reduced. The percentage of tournament table reduction is unknown at this stage and is largely irrelevant if 100% of the tournaments get played, which is the goal.

"Can you or Mr. Mattes confirm as to the underlying need for the 25% reduction. Is it the ADA or Fire restrictions? Or something else?"

It is as I said previously:
"… game tables throughout the venue have been reduced to eliminate overcrowding, and provide a safer, more comfortable convention for everyone."

"Can you also confirm that the Flea Market space is going to be reduced by 25% also. IMHO it is the most crowded and least accessible place in the entire convention."

The flea market space has been reworked to improve access while minimizing table loss. Reduction from last year will probalby be inthe 5 to 10% range. Preregister early and sign up a table.

Duncan Adams
HISTORICON 2006 Events Manager

Greetings,

I do not understand why 15-25% of the tables had to be reduced because of " notorious" rat traps – I have only been attending HCon and CW since '00 and have not seen problems that would require such drastic cutting. The previously submitted table plan for the tourney areas dealt nicely with spacing, and was approved by both the hotel and ADA reps. It met all appropriate codes, and should meet the needs of attendees. It was certainly safer and more comfortable, without further hatchet work of more limiting spacing plans.

Whilst no GM for the event tables has been turned away, what about the drastic table cuts for the tourneys? Organizing so many players & tourneys over a long period of time (some tourneys run 6-12 hours) makes table cuts VERY problematic, especially when trying to accomodate GROWTH.

Ken

Ken wrote:

"Origins? System 7 ?!? You just SO dated yourself! :)"

No more than a whole lot of other Oldtimers, or the society itself! I still have Baggies (tm) with the System 7 counters broken down and neatly organized. In a closet.

Geez, you know, if more games were played using System 7 -sized bases, it would ease space requirements considerably. You could fit a load more card tables in the same area—like if all the WAB players had to bring individually-based 6mm armies instead of those great honking 28mm types…

Allen (ducking)

Allen,

Hehehehe… Forget any figures for WAB – imagine if they would only use pre-made counters! Imagine the space and monetary savings!

Ken (digging own grave as he writes)

To James Mattes,

I asked a simple question to Mr. Adams and bemoaned that I didn't get a simple answer from your postings (the 6:10PST one included). I don't know that it warrented your 2:29PST posting. Thanks anyways.

To Duncan Adams,

No you didn't mention the 25% and I'm sorry you took offence to my thanking you. However, it seems that both Scott Holder and Don Effinger are under the impression that their tournaments are being reduced by 25%. Are they mistaken?

Would you also explain what you mean by:
"The percentage of tournament table reduction is unknown at this stage and is largely irrelevant if 100% of the tournaments get played, which is the goal."

Thanks

Ralph

Howdy,

I think that things are still up in the air at the moment. Although Scotts' code-approved plan was refused, the strange plan that was proposed by the Staff (with the 155-25% table loss) may not yet be forced on the tourney players.

Or it may. :) Still not too sure. Any info would be cool.

Ken

Ralph, you are correct.
"Thank you so much for the consideration and help. I can guess that as long as Artslave isn't inconvenienced everything is fine."
I see you only chose to read the part of my post that upsets you. I was trying to make a supporting comment, even though, as you have correctly pointed out, everything is fine for me. The tournament room can slide into a black hole for all I care, if this represents the attitude of all tourney players. Don't want a hand from a fellow gamer? Then I'm still fine!

crhkrebs 04 Jun 2006 7:31 p.m. PST

"To Duncan Adams,
No you didn't mention the 25% and I'm sorry you took offence to my thanking you."

I expressed no offense. I simply found the need to clarify the facts. Clarity of facts has been lacking more than usual this year, true?

"However, it seems that both Scott Holder and Don Effinger are under the impression that their tournaments are being reduced by 25%. Are they mistaken?"

They are premature. While the oft stated notion of "member participation" gives us all a nice warm fuzzy feeling, this thread illustrates the problem in having large group involved in the process. Every turn as the plan evolves can become the catalyst of a fresh flame war.

Would you also explain what you mean by:
"The percentage of tournament table reduction is unknown at this stage and is largely irrelevant if 100% of the tournaments get played, which is the goal."

I mean what I said. As event manager, I have 15% fewer tables than my predecessor. Yet, with a little more work, a lot of flexibility on the part of the GMs and a little luck, I have been able to schedule about the same number of games and accomodate every GM to date.

If, then, Scott Holder can — as it appears — schedule every tournament at full capacity (with a growth allowance) using fewer tables than last year, what possible difference does the table count make?

Duncan Adams
HISTORICON 2006 Events Manager

Mr. Adams – I have also heard from my tourney guys about this reduction. If you have a plan to accomodate the same number of gamers for each event, that's cool, but it hasn't been co-ordinated with the guys in charge of the events very well. However, if you're just saying that the events get to happen with less players in them, that's a bit more troubling. Which is it?

Raymond K. Crum

Rkajdi 05 Jun 2006 3:38 a.m. PST
"Mr. Adams – I have also heard from my tourney guys about this reduction. If you have a plan to accomodate the same number of gamers for each event, that's cool, but it hasn't been co-ordinated with the guys in charge of the events very well."

Then you need to talk to the Tournament Coordinator who is in charge of such communication."

"However, if you're just saying that the events get to happen with less players in them, that's a bit more troubling. Which is it?"

It is the former. But at this stage, it just a plan — it ain't over 'til it's over. Stay tuned.

Duncan Adams
HISTORICON 2006 Events Manager

Ken Winland 04 Jun 2006 3:40 p.m. PST
"I do not understand why 15-25% of the tables had to be reduced because of " notorious" rat traps – I have only been attending HCon and CW since '00 and have not seen problems that would require such drastic cutting."

Well, I didn't want to hurt the feelings of the offending rooms, but if I must name names …

The Distlefink, the Cornwall Room, the Ballroom Foyer and last but not least, th Flea Market have drawn complaints after every East convention that I can remember. Other smaller rooms have been as cramped, but less "notorious."

All have been reworked. I think the changes will be well received.

Duncan Adams
HISTORICON 2006 Events Manager

Maybe it really is time to find a larger venue for Historicon.

The shows are already losing too much as it is.

Losing WHAT? I can confirm that COLD WARS did better in both attendance AND profit than CW05, and CW05 did better than CW04! That wasn't wishful thinking and number manipulation, either!

Maybe it really is time to find a larger venue for Historicon.

Ahhh.. but to where, that is the real question, isn't it?

And are you willing to pay for it? Because everywhere we go won't be for the amount we've negotiated with the Host over the years. So if we move.. are you ready to see your cheap convention become a 45, 50 dollar convention?

These places (and by that, I mean a major meeting center with hotel attached, near affordable hotels and several eating establishments) are not so common as you might think.

Walt

Thanks for the answers Duncan.

Unfortunately for Ray Crum and I, the reality will be that we will have to scale back. Mr. Holders tournaments run all weekend and therefore he may have a greater degree of flexibility with his schedule. We have an 8 hour window with the majority of our games lasting about 2-3 times longer. Maybe it's time to paint that DBA army.

Ralph

No Brian no where near 7,000. Different cons count people different ways. Some conventions count a person a different for each day that you attend. So if you are there Thurs-Sun you actually count as 4 people. Also do not forget the 500+ dealers ( who are sometimes and sometimes not counted as well.

Walt,if it came down to paying 50 bucks for Historicon for the weekend,yeah,I would. I wish that the Host could mutate into a grand convention center,but obviously that isnt going to happen. As to where,I couldnt tell you,I'm not even from the East coast. Just so long as it isnt the Cow Palace.

Hey look –

50 bucks ain't that much for what I have gotten in the past. I'll pay what it costs to get in, no matter where it is, provided that WHAT I WANT is provided.

That's the crux.

I expect the dealer hall to look pretty much as it has, and that's good. I collect 25-28mm and 15mmm WW2 and I want as good a selection as possible in those areas.

But, I am also a WAB tournament player, and I don't expect that to look as it did last year, and that's not good. The tournament is why I attend. It's how I've met everyone I've ever gamed with outside my own club, and every year, I meet new friends that I've only known over the internet before. For me, the WAB tournament is the most important part of the weekend (and I finished dead last in it last year, so go and figure), along with any pick-up games I can schedule around it.

I have seen posts in this thread and e-mails off the thread from Mr. Adams and other Historicon organizers that talk about dropping the number of tables available for the WAB tourney to a number that is significantly lower than the number of tables we have had in previous years. Since – as a player – space has never been a concern (I've never been bumped into or had my access to the Lampeter room restricted by a press of people in the years that I have attended), that would not only be a shame, but inexplicable as well.

Mr. Adams says that everyone should be accommodated though some new juggling of venues – "I think the changes will be well received," he says. I haven't met Duncan, so I have no reason to doubt his best efforts, and I'm rooting for him that that's how it plays out.

Because, alternatively, if the number of tables is cut, and registration closes for my event, I simply won't be able to come. So that's me and my three clubmates not getting hotel rooms, not buying gas, not buying a couple of hundred worth of models each in the dealer hall, not paying the entry fee and not buying food.

I'm sure you don't want me and others like me going away because there's no room at the inn. Especially if the lack of room is a situation created by HMGS, resulting in a self-inflicted wound.

Smarten up, HMGS. The customer is always right.

RudyNelson 05 Jun 2006 10:21 a.m. PST
No Brian no where near 7,000. Different cons count people different ways. Some conventions count a person a different for each day that you attend. So if you are there Thurs-Sun you actually count as 4 people. Also do not forget the 500+ dealers ( who are sometimes and sometimes not counted as well.

Rudy I took you to task over this last year. You are wrong that is the count of all attendees. Period. We DO NOT COUNT CONVENTIONS DAYS there is no way to tell if a person buys a weekend pass and stays one, two, three or four days. YOU are incorrect again on this. Some Alt gaming venues I am told count daily attendance NOT HMGS-East
VR
James Mattes