Las Vegas Planetary Qualifier: Room for Improvement for the Store

A list of feedback

Oct 17, 2024

Table of Contents

After attending both the Pasadena and Las Vegas Planetary Qualifiers, I’ve noticed some significant differences in how the events were run. While I’m grateful for the opportunity to participate, I’d like to share a few observations about the Las Vegas PQ in hopes that they can help improve the experience for future events.

The good: spacious tables, two clean bathrooms, very nice venue, and very good location as there are a lot of food & beverage options in that town square.

List of what happened/weird ruling I’ve witnessed/heard:

Table Confusion in Round 1

As Round 1 began (after a re-pairing), there was confusion regarding the seating arrangement. I was seated at Table 48, but nearby tables (41-46) were missing. We were in a limbo, because we didn’t want to start just to be interrupted to be moved, so we just sat and waited. Event staff had to count and recount seats before confirming everything was in order. It didn’t set the best tone for the event to have uncertainty about seating after the round had already started. Hopefully, future events will ensure table layouts are fully organized before Round 1 begins.

Ruling Discrepancies

Update: It’s brought to my attention that the final judge ruling is partially correct. Regardless if the extra drawn cards can be distinguished or not, the opponent can decide which ones will go back in the deck (shuffled), not removed from the game, based on the policy clarifications here, https://nexus.cascadegames.com/resources/Policy_Clarifications/

But in this case, the player didn't get to look at the extra cards and pick which ones went back.

I heard an unusual ruling during Round 1 that happened to a player I personally know, where the player’s opponent mistakenly drew six cards instead of two cards during the regroup phase. The initial ruling was to put the cards back in the original order, but this was appealed. The final ruling was to put those cards back and shuffle. However, according to Part 2 3.5 Drawing Extra Cards of the Master Event Document, the correct ruling seems to have been that those extra drawn cards should’ve been removed from the game. Accurate and timely rulings are essential to a fair competitive environment, so I hope this can be addressed going forward. But gosh that initial ruling was so wrong (and I couldn’t find this incident mentioned in the Judge’s event report in the Judge Discord).

[Minor feedback] The wooden tables are too tall for the standard chairs

I’m about average height at 5ft 8in and these wooden tables are a bit uncomfortably tall for me. My arms couldn’t comfortably rest on the tables. During the first pairing (before they re-paired us), both my opponent and I made a comment regarding the wooden table’s height. The tables in the back (eg Table 48) are standard height and was fine for me. I ended up sitting on top of my backpack starting at Round 4 to get a height boost.

(Round 4: me sitting on top of my backpack; we also experienced a slight glare issue this round, but we just made do. According to the Judge’s event report, another player was arguing and making a scene with the glare situation [they had floor to ceiling windows with no curtains] despite being offered a different table and they got DQ’d and was asked to leave.)

Top Cut Deck Checks

There was an extensive amount of deck checking during Top Cut. While it’s important to ensure fair play, the process was lengthy and felt a bit overdone. After the Swiss portion ended, the Top 8 players were called up to the front tables for deck checks, which is standard. However, the process became unnecessarily complicated.

(Top Cut deck checks)

As we were waiting, some of us started organizing and laying out the cards. But later, we were told that each player had to have their own 4-person table in the order according to standings. This meant we all had to get up, reorganize ourselves, and lay out the cards all over again, even though there was clearly enough room for multiple players to share a 4-person table for deck checks.

In addition to this, sideboarding became another point of complication. After every match, players who chose to sideboard were required to have their sideboards checked by a judge. Once the game was completed, the winning player had to lay out their deck for another deck check. So the cycle went: Top 8 deck check -> play quarterfinals -> sideboard checks (if sideboarding) -> deck check -> play semifinals -> sideboard checks (if sideboarding) -> deck check -> play finals -> sideboard checks (if sideboarding). While it’s understandable to ensure no errors or cheating occur, the sheer number of checks felt excessive.

Sunglasses

(Semifinals game: Head Judge is the person in the collared blue shirt)

On a related note, a concerning situation involving a player wearing sunglasses in Top 4 was brought to my attention after he was already eliminated in the semifinals. While there’s no proof of foul play, it’s worth considering that such accessories could be used for cheating (e.g., identifying marked cards with UV ink). The head judge spoke with the player, but there wasn’t much the head judge could do at that point given that the round had already been completed.

Prizing Transparency

Lastly, there were issues with prizing details and communication. Prizing seemed unclear up until the event, and follow-up questions about leftover packs and additional prizing support went unanswered, even though event organizers were active in Discord. Transparency in prizing is crucial for players who travel to these events, so I hope this can be improved for future qualifiers. Not to mention the store credit based prizing for this type of regional event where a lot of non-locals participated.

[Final prizing structure as of 10/02. At the event, as far as I’m aware of, there were two raffles: the convention exclusive promos (I think you had to buy something from the store to get more red raffle tickets) and a The Darksaber card (everyone got a free white raffle ticket)]

Discord Timeline (LV PQ was on 10/12; their listing says that refunds have to done a week prior) (this is all on the public Discords):

Knight & Day Games Discord, SWU channel:

9/18: I asked:

“aside from the PQ kit(s?) that was revealed, do we know what else is the prizing support for the PQ on 10/12?”

9/27: a SWU judge posted a weekly standings.

9/30: another Knight and Day employee replied to someone else.

10/01: I was randomly checking the event’s listing and found that they had updated the listing with prizing and asked (with the listing’s link and screenshot):

“Is this basically the final prizing structure for PQ or still subject to change?”

No replies.

10/02: Via their livestream, FFG announced that they’re sending out additional Legal Authority participant promos and sending a case of boxes to bolster prizing.

SWU Las Vegas Locals Discord, knight-and-day-games channel:

10/02: An Knight and Day employee posted:

“PQ new prizing!!
We have 1 spot open”

I asked:

“cool change, now 1 booster pack as entry.
Is the 16 packs leftover (6 boxes = 144 packs - 128 packs entry) going to be raffled out or something?”

They replied:

“Unsure!”

[Hindsight comment: Did we ever find out what they did with the leftover 16 packs meant for prizing (technically 46 leftover packs, because only 98 players registered)? Nope, I don’t know what they did with the leftovers that were sent by FFG that was meant for prizing support.]

10/05: That Knight and Day employee says:

“We have over 2 cases of booster boxes added as prize support”

I replied:

“has this been updated on the site yet or not? Because the prizing still looks the same after the 10/02 prizing update”

Later on the same day, I replied again:

“wait, maybe I misinterpreted, is this just a comment on the current prizing structure that was updated on 10/02 and not a comment of how two cases were added as prizing support in addition to what's listed?”