Colorado Events: Past Present and Future

[Elginb]

I'm not opposed to that, but why favor the kill 'em all scenarios so much? Why do 5, 3, 2, 1, 1 instead of 3, 3, 2, 2, 2?

[dok]

I guess I just see the kill 'em all scenario as the core game, and everything else as a variant of that. Since I'm not playing a ton of competitive 'scape, my inclination is to play not much less than 50% kill 'em all.

I'm also showing my preferences among the other scenarios, I guess. HoB has a pretty strong following and I'm looking forward to playing it more. Capture the flag is really not so different from regular play, although it's a bit more positional, which I think is kind of neat. "There can be only one" seems like it would play sort of like capture the flag, only a bit swingier. "Escape" seems like it would play really, really, really differently from a normal scenario, and I'm not sure I like the idea of it when combined with Marvel heroes that can take 300+ points off the board almost immediately.

So, I've got a pretty set Kill>HoB>CTF>TCBOO>Escape preference order. I can probably be convinced to push things more toward balance, though.

We're really getting ahead of ourselves here, though. We agree on a basic concept for how we will structure things, and the rest can get hammered out in map selection. While I freely admit that it's more fun to talk about points, maps, and formats, we should probably focus on getting a date, time, and location.

[Cyborgs Gaming]

one thing to keep in mind is that for other events there won't be prize support, so the style of play and a definitive winner is not so important. It isn't even important to have balanced maps or a schedual, start time or end time, keeping everyone playing, or anything. It can be truely all about having fun.

[Stryker]

Im good with any date you guys come up with and as for location no preference. As for game type I really dont care I just want to play and have fun.

[Elginb]

Originally Posted by lafleurhero

one thing to keep in mind is that for other events there won't be prize support, so the style of play and a definitive winner is not so important. It isn't even important to have balanced maps or a schedual, start time or end time, keeping everyone playing, or anything. It can be truely all about having fun.

I think that's good to keep in mind. I noticed that one of the tournaments played "Scaperdy"... a Heroscape Trivia game! That sounded fun. You had also suggested a map building contest; I was thinking about that last night, and it wouldn't have to take that long: we could say that each participant would have 15 minutes to build a free-hand map out of 1 Master Set and 1 Terrain Set, then have everybody vote at the end. I'm totally open to fun things like that.

Originally posted by dok
While I freely admit that it's more fun to talk about points, maps, and formats, we should probably focus on getting a date, time, and location.

I'll call the library when it opens today, just to see if I can reserve the room in January. I don't think getting a room will be a problem, though getting a 6 or 7 hour block might take a little maneuvering, but I'll get it worked out (and, of course, it's an easy to cancel reservation, if someone wants to use another location). Anyway, I don't think it's too early to talk about points, maps and formats-- why delay the fun part?

Here's a suggested set-up, assuming we'll have the room from 10 to 6:00 (which I believe are the Library's Hours on Saturdays):

10:00 to 10:10 - Get in and arrange tables, chairs, etc.
10:10 to 10:40 - Map Building Contest: each contestant has 15 minutes to build a map from 1 Master Set and 1 Terrain Expansion; all game day attendees vote for best map.
10:40 to 11:00 - Complete rest of maps for tournament.
11:00 to 5:00 - Rolling Rumble Tournament - 520 pt Armies (drafted from a 750 pt pool); Maps: 3 Kill 'em all, 3 HOB, 3 Capture the Flag, 2 There Can Be Only One, and 1 Escape!
5:00 to 5:30 - Scaper Trivia Bowl, Tournament Results, and prizes (if any) handed out for Map Winners, Trivia Winners, Tournament Winners, and maybe some miscellaneous prizes for, say, person who drove the furthest, player who smelled the least bad, etc.
5:30 to 6:00 - Clean-up

[Elginb]

Just throwing this out there: what if we had a single-elimination tournament? That would allow those who come to be competitive to be competitive, but allow some flexibility for those who are more just getting together. Once you're eliminated from the tournament, you can play any variety of side-games (including 4-player games or whatever).

Obviously, there are downsides-- if you're interested in the competition, but you lose in the first round, you might be disappointed. Still, it might be a good trade off between a serious tournament and a casual game day...

[Elginb]

Okay, just called the library-- we have the Community Room reserved from 10 to 6 on Saturday, January 16th. Unless somebody comes up with a better place or day, let's shoot for that...

[dok]

Originally Posted by Elginb

Okay, just called the library-- we have the Community Room reserved from 10 to 6 on Saturday, January 16th. Unless somebody comes up with a better place or day, let's shoot for that...

Sweet. Great work, that sounds perfect to me.

Originally Posted by Elginb

Here's a suggested set-up, assuming we'll have the room from 10 to 6:00 (which I believe are the Library's Hours on Saturdays):

10:00 to 10:10 - Get in and arrange tables, chairs, etc.
10:10 to 10:40 - Map Building Contest: each contestant has 15 minutes to build a map from 1 Master Set and 1 Terrain Expansion; all game day attendees vote for best map.
10:40 to 11:00 - Complete rest of maps for tournament.
11:00 to 5:00 - Rolling Rumble Tournament - 520 pt Armies (drafted from a 750 pt pool); Maps: 3 Kill 'em all, 3 HOB, 3 Capture the Flag, 2 There Can Be Only One, and 1 Escape!
5:00 to 5:30 - Scaper Trivia Bowl, Tournament Results, and prizes (if any) handed out for Map Winners, Trivia Winners, Tournament Winners, and maybe some miscellaneous prizes for, say, person who drove the furthest, player who smelled the least bad, etc.
5:30 to 6:00 - Clean-up

Pretty much fine by me. I'm not particularly into the impromptu map-building contest (My map building is done almost exclusively in virtualscape, and it's more science than art, for me), but with that much time to work with, far be it for me to stand in the way of others' fun. We could even use the winner as a HoB map.

As for the tournament itself - the 3/3/2/2/1 HoB/CTF/TCBOO/Escape breakdown sounds fine, but I'd still like a little more kill 'em all. If I'm the only one, though, we can set that aside. And of course, exactly how many maps are needed is really a function of how many players we have... so while we can and should start this discussion at this point, the final breakdown is necessarily going to be up in the air for a while.

As long as we're running with our "tie scenarios to maps" concept (which I really like), then, if we are also going to use drafting pools, then how about using different point totals for different maps? I'm not saying we have to do this, but it would further encourage diversity in army builds.

Originally Posted by Elginb

Just throwing this out there: what if we had a single-elimination tournament? That would allow those who come to be competitive to be competitive, but allow some flexibility for those who are more just getting together. Once you're eliminated from the tournament, you can play any variety of side-games (including 4-player games or whatever).

Obviously, there are downsides-- if you're interested in the competition, but you lose in the first round, you might be disappointed. Still, it might be a good trade off between a serious tournament and a casual game day...

I don't like the "start with single-elim" structure, as part of a longer day. You don't really have any seeding data to work with, so you could end up with the strongest players playing round 1. Secondly, it makes the remainder of the day after the elim rounds a bit anticlimactic from a competitive standpoint. It also gets away from some of the beauty of the rumble format.

I have two alternative ideas for ways to build something more competitive into the rumble structure, if people are interested in that:

1. Have the normal rumble format run from, say, 11-3. At that point, the top four play single elimination for the last two hours to crown a champion. The rest of the players just keep going with the rumble (or break out into team games, or whatever they like). This way, we're using the rumble to set up the single-elimination brackets.
   
   
2. Simply add a rule to the rumble format that you can't play anyone who is more than 2 wins away from you in win difference. So, if you get to 4-1, you can only play someone with a winning record. This will slightly increase wait times later in the day, but it keeps the games more balanced, which is both more competitive and more fun.

[Elginb]

Originally Posted by dok

Pretty much fine by me. I'm not particularly into the impromptu map-building contest (My map building is done almost exclusively in virtualscape, and it's more science than art, for me), but with that much time to work with, far be it for me to stand in the way of others' fun. We could even use the winner as a HoB map.

Well, the beauty of it is that those who aren't interested in participating could help build the official maps for the tournament while the contestents built their entries! Abra-cadabra! I'm a genius!

I like the idea of using the winner as an HOB map...

Originally Posted by dok

As for the tournament itself - the 3/3/2/2/1 HoB/CTF/TCBOO/Escape breakdown sounds fine, but I'd still like a little more kill 'em all. If I'm the only one, though, we can set that aside. And of course, exactly how many maps are needed is really a function of how many players we have... so while we can and should start this discussion at this point, the final breakdown is necessarily going to be up in the air for a while.

I really like Capture the Flag, so I'd like that to be substantially represented. My least favorites are HOB and Escape... maybe we could swap one HOB for a Kill 'em all? But you're right... it's impossible to know how many maps we'll actually need in January...

Originally Posted by dok

As long as we're running with our "tie scenarios to maps" concept (which I really like), then, if we are also going to use drafting pools, then how about using different point totals for different maps? I'm not saying we have to do this, but it would further encourage diversity in army builds.

I was thinking about that, too. We could have some quick 300 point games or full-on 750 point games. I'll be interested to see how much these varying set-ups speed up game-play-- Kill 'em all is one of the slowest variants, IMO.

Originally Posted by dok

I have two alternative ideas for ways to build something more competitive into the rumble structure, if people are interested in that:

Actually, I didn't mean to increase the competitiveness, but rather to decrease it-- single elimination allows for more casual games and flexibility of format for those who are eliminated early. There are a lot of problems with it, though, and seeding is a major one...

[Elginb]

Originally Posted by dok

I have two alternative ideas for ways to build something more competitive into the rumble structure, if people are interested in that:

1. Have the normal rumble format run from, say, 11-3. At that point, the top four play single elimination for the last two hours to crown a champion. The rest of the players just keep going with the rumble (or break out into team games, or whatever they like). This way, we're using the rumble to set up the single-elimination brackets.
   
   
2. Simply add a rule to the rumble format that you can't play anyone who is more than 2 wins away from you in win difference. So, if you get to 4-1, you can only play someone with a winning record. This will slightly increase wait times later in the day, but it keeps the games more balanced, which is both more competitive and more fun.

Actually, I kind of like option number 1-- that way we could avoid the situation we had this time, with two undefeated players and no clear victor.

[dok]

Originally Posted by Elginb

Actually, I didn't mean to increase the competitiveness, but rather to decrease it-- single elimination allows for more casual games and flexibility of format for those who are eliminated early.

I understand that. However, I also don't feel there's a clear divide between "play for fun" and competitive play. To me, competitive army selection is fun. I also much prefer close, highly tactical games (including losses) to blowout wins against mismatched armies. I think some stratification where the stronger players/armies gradually end up facing off towards the end of the event leads to more fun for everyone.

Originally Posted by Elginb

Actually, I kind of like option number 1-- that way we could avoid the situation we had this time, with two undefeated players and no clear victor.

No clear victor? Watchutalkinaboutwillis? Q9 would have sent all those heroes to the grave, and The blade gruts would have been nothing but tasty snacks in zombieland.

Seriously, though - yeah, the idea of using the rumble to set up the semis and finals seems to make more sense than starting with an elimination draw.

Setting that aside, though, I still like the second idea in general. This gets to my earlier argument that close games are more fun than blowouts. (Of course, you had your most fun game playing a 2-1 army against a 1-3 army, so maybe I'm off-base here.)

[Cyborgs Gaming]

[quote=dok;942621}No clear victor? Watchutalkinaboutwillis? Q9 would have sent all those heroes to the grave, and The blade gruts would have been nothing but tasty snacks in zombieland. [/quote]

MBS would of made Q10's armor worthless. Granted the Zombies would beat the blade gruts, but I'd of used them to take down railen, and quite quickly at that. With all my disengage nothing could save her. finally the _ak brothers would have nor problem eating or otherwise tearing apart all those zombies.

Seriously though there was a clear winner, it order for it to had been a tie I would have had to of won one more game. Or for me to be the winner, actually have played Dok. He did win the tournament fair and square and there is nothing about it to debate. Still it would be nice to see someday who could win that fight. Over at my house some day if we can work it, on a map we can both agree on perhaps?