Tournaments are broken?

The place to discuss all that was! Visit the AdeptiCon website (www.adepticon.org) for past coverage, event results and photos!

Are Tournaments Broken?

Yes--Curse you Flying Circus and Nidzilla! Something must be done!
15
35%
Yes--But you can't fix it, so don't even try.
5
12%
No--Weep Additional Tears, Novice
23
53%
 
Total votes : 43

Postby Matthias » Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:52 am

I agree. Until we all have 5th edition in our hands, have digested the changes and have seen in action over a series of games - I don't think we can really speculate too far into the future about the state of tournaments.

The giant pause button is about to be pushed until sometime in the late summer at which point things will need a serious looking at.
User avatar
Matthias
Techpriest
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby biztheclown » Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:58 pm

On other threads people are talking about the Astronomi-con comp rules, but I had not seen them. Here they are:

http://www.mts.net/~xian/astronomi-con/ ... sition.htm

This has the disadvantage of not being nearly as pithy as mkerr's proposal, but has a lot of advantages, one of the best being that the people who claim to go to tournaments with not a care about winning in the world will have nothing to complain about.
User avatar
biztheclown
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:05 pm

Postby Papa_Nurgle » Thu Apr 24, 2008 2:28 pm

Meh.

Those rules can be broken as easily as anything else. So I don't see exactly what it does to improve a tournament other than adding additional restrictions.
Team TnA Founding Member.
WHABSAB!
Every Time you use the word "fluff," a kitten dies.

Purple ticket owner.
Papa_Nurgle
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:38 am

Postby muwhe » Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:28 pm

Army lists must be submitted for composition judging no later than one month prior to the event.


Keep in mind that this is the other aspect of Astro's comp system. That it takes a while to judge the lists. Personally I've never been a fan of having to turn army lists in before hand as it eliminates folks that can not committ for work or personal reason from taking part if they get the opportunity.
muwhe
AdeptiCon Oracle
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:15 pm

Postby Redbeard » Thu Apr 24, 2008 6:00 pm

I agree with Papa Nurgle (again).

The game is complex enough that no matter what set of rules you use, there will always be optimal and sub-optimal lists made that fit those rules.

They might not be mech-eldar and nidzilla, but there will be optimal builds. You want to put composition checklists in place - then the army that will be 'optimal' changes to one that maxxes the comp points while remaining dangerous. You want to limit the number of heavies/elite - same thing - you change which army is optimal, but not the fact that there will be optimal lists and sub-optimal lists.

Stick with the printed rules. It may not be perfect - but nothing else will be perfect either, and at least we're all playing the same game this way.
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Postby Anaxagoras » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:16 am

Redbeard wrote:I agree with Papa Nurgle (again).

The game is complex enough that no matter what set of rules you use, there will always be optimal and sub-optimal lists made that fit those rules.

They might not be mech-eldar and nidzilla, but there will be optimal builds. You want to put composition checklists in place - then the army that will be 'optimal' changes to one that maxxes the comp points while remaining dangerous. You want to limit the number of heavies/elite - same thing - you change which army is optimal, but not the fact that there will be optimal lists and sub-optimal lists.

Stick with the printed rules. It may not be perfect - but nothing else will be perfect either, and at least we're all playing the same game this way.


Scenarios are one of the best ways to shake up the prevailance of certain optimal builds...but have those scenario's known ahead of time.

The only rule change I see being somehwat impotant for the post-5th edition future is the treatment of terrain and LoS...but that's also how it is now.
Anaxagoras
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:39 am
Location: Macomb, Il.

Postby warprat13 » Fri Apr 25, 2008 1:44 pm

My 2 cents
I lose with sum really hard lists. I play Solid ravenwing a lot Lots of bikes somthing like 8 or 9 mm attack bikes and speeders
+a14 speeder or sam on the bike. The list either works or it doesn't. The biggest factor is me though. That is one of the reasons I like playing 40k. The lists are way harder to break than in say fantasy ( I love the game just not in a competitve setting). If your playing in gladiator there are a wide variety of lists and yes they all intereact differently. The LASH KILLS BIKES. My bikes after a scout move can get close enough to eat armored companys by turn two if I get first turn. Is the lash broke ? no . Are my bikes broke? NO! It is all about how you use what you have.
Leave the rules alone let people play what they want.
After all in a gladiators world there were no rules except Kill or be killed.
Lets stay with the spirit of the event!
With the rules the way they are we have to be like gladators!
Crafty, Agressive and Somtimes you just have to try and win against overwhelming odds! War isn't always fair. And I know it feels really good to blow up one of those super indestructable skimmers of death. So Why NOT TRY!
after all everything in these games is chance. dice rolling, Table pairings,
if you draw the armys you excell against and win great. If you draw a Rock. Well you better try and make gravel. If you win that game though you know you acomplished somthing.

Warprat13
Chris McNay
User avatar
warprat13
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:50 am

Postby xNickBaranx » Mon Apr 28, 2008 5:19 pm

I think a lot of people are missing Mkerrs intent. One of the things that he's repeated many times is that what he wants to see is more variety at tournaments. He even owns a Nidzilla army himself.

The problem stems from the fact that in the upper brackets of most tournaments, they are littered with the same army lists - all taken from the internet.

His logic is that by eliminating duplicates you can still build incredibly hard lists, but at least for a while, it will turn things upside down and force people to rethink things.

The internet is really the problem. People love discussing successful builds and then they duplicate them. You walk into a national tournament and you've got a couple dozen people running around with internet power lists - some who know how to use them and some you don't, but he feels it creates a broken and stale enviroment. At least that's the gist I've gotten.

I know there are a few diehard bikers on here yelling, "helmet laws suck" and throwing up their finger at "the man" and letting their freedom flag fly, but even Adepticon has restrictions in every tournament - that's part of tournament play.

The solution that I offered up was more varied enviroments like City Fight and Jungle games, or doing tournaments based around alternate FOC's.

A SIEGE Tournament would limit Fast Attack, an ASSAULT Tournament would limit Heavy Support, etc, much like how the specialist missions in the back of the book have unique FOC's.

The key lies, in my opinion, in eliminating the standardization of the tournament enviroment. Standardized tournaments result in standardized lists. You vary the parameters and you ultimately vary the lists being brought. Which is ultimately what he wants and I can't front on that.
User avatar
xNickBaranx
 
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:57 pm
Location: Humboldt Park/Chicago

Postby Redbeard » Mon Apr 28, 2008 5:32 pm

Yup, curse that internet thing.

Magic has that problem too. Within 5 minutes of a new set coming out, the decks are all over the internets. They kind of address it with sealed-deck play. Kinda hard to do that when you have to paint models though.

That's also the problem with doing alt. org tournaments. I might have 2k for my army, but if i'm suddenly unable to use my heavies, I struggle to get to 1250. (I dunno, maybe i got three land raiders). I don't know whose going to buy and paint units for use in one RTT that they may not use regularly, nor do I think any of the major national events could run alternate org chart tournaments easily. But, maybe give it a try :)
"All very successful commanders are prima donnas and must be so treated."

George S. Patton
User avatar
Redbeard
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:55 am
Location: Homewood, IL

Postby Xian » Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:40 pm

biztheclown wrote:On other threads people are talking about the Astronomi-con comp rules, but I had not seen them. Here they are:

http://www.mts.net/~xian/astronomi-con/ ... sition.htm

This has the disadvantage of not being nearly as pithy as mkerr's proposal, but has a lot of advantages, one of the best being that the people who claim to go to tournaments with not a care about winning in the world will have nothing to complain about.


Hey, thanks for the honourable mention here in this thread.

Tournaments are a really tough nut to crack.

Everyone has their own philosophy on what a tournament should be.

We've been wrestling with that since the Chicago GT back in 2000 when Jeremy Vetock and 'Go-Go' Gohlinghorst gave us the vote of confidence to run our own tournament, and Astronomi-con was born.


We've put a lot of work into refining the tournament over the years and the format we've settled on has served us very well.

There are a great many factors into how the tournament fits together, and composition is only one component.

First and foremost, Astronomi-con is a hobby tournament.

The Best Overall award is presented to the player that exemplifies all that is great about the hobby. They don't have to necessarily be the best at any one thing, but if they're scoring high in all of the categories, then they've got a shot at Best Overall.

1500 points.
This is a good number for a lot of reasons. The game is playtested and built to the idea of 1 force org chart and 1500 points.
At 1500 points players need to make some tough decisions about what goes into their force, so all armies have some weaknesses.


The tournament is divided into three major sections.

1. Gameplay
2. Sportsmanship
3. Hobby

Each of these sections is roughly worth the same number of points.

Astronomi-con is scored out of a possible 200 points.
Let me break things down a bit further for you all...


[78 points or 39%] Gameplay
6 games. 10 points for a win, 7 for a draw, and 3 for a loss.
Each game also has a +/- 3 Battle Point modifer for things you managed to accomplish or have happen to you in the game. If you get those bonus points, you can score anywhere from 13 for an all-out victory all the way down to 0 points if everything goes horribly wrong. ;)

Margin of victory is 150 VPs or 1 extra objective/table quarter etc.
There's no real point of trying to score more VP than you need to win, so armies don't need that killer instinct built into them. This keeps games more friendly and sporting.


[60 points or 30%] Sportsmanship
Up to 10 points each game, scored by your opponent. 0-5 points for the player, and 0-5 points for their army.

Very similar to the original RTT format.


[30 points or 15%] Appearance

How your army looks and is presented.
We've got a complete scoring system for appearance that is comprehensive and simple enough that players should have a really good idea of their score before they even arrive at the event.


[20 points or 10%] Composition

All armies are not created equal.
We encourage players to bring whatever army they want to.
Seeding by Battle Points and then a second sort by composition each round ensures that players will face a winning army that is of similar composition. Lower comp armies will tend to play each other more, so all players will have a similar challenge level each round)

Players will know their score here before they arrive at the event.


[10 points or 5%] Army List

Putting together a nice list is a small part of the hobby.


[2 points or 1%] Bonus
Points for submitting your army for composition scoring in advance of the event. This gives us a chance to score composition and have that info ready before the tournament starts as players are ranked by composition for the first game.


+++


We seed players by battle points and then by composition as a tie break. This really puts those more powerful armies head to head much more often.

Best General is scored as Total Battle Points + Composition.

+++

Scenarios

Each table has its own unique scenario. This does a lot of interesting things in a tournament setting.

Players never know what kind of scenario they're going to run into.
This encourages balanced armies.
Certainly 1-trick pony armies will have their way in a game now and again, but more often than not, they're going to have a tough time.

This also brings the best generals to the top of the heap. Finding a way to win a scenario where your army isn't well suited is a sign of a great general.

Ideally players should encounter a game at the tournament where things will be in their favor, one where they're the underdog, and hopefully four where they've got an even match.

Players rarely win all of their games at our events. In fact, I think we've only had 4 players manage to do it in 8 years of Astronomi-con.

One other nice aspect of the scenarios is that every player has their own set of war stories to tell. It's not like everyone will compare notes on how their cleanse battle went the round before lunch. ;)

+++

So very many factors, and I've only really scratched the surface.

I encourage you all to visit our site and read a bit more for yourselves.

If there is enough interest, I'd be happy to expand on tournament philosophy and what 5th edition will do to the tournament landscape.

I hope to one day make it back down to Chicago and take in Adepti-con. Certainly it has made quite a name for itself over the years. :)

Cheers,
Last edited by Xian on Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Christian Augst
Astronomi-con Co-Organizer
www.Astronomi-con.com
User avatar
Xian
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 2:47 pm

Postby biztheclown » Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:47 pm

Nice post Xian. Please do come back and let us know your thoughts on 5th ed!
User avatar
biztheclown
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 7:05 pm

Previous

Return to AdeptiCon 2008

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron