I-5 Beatdown Format & Date - Tournament Registration

[Detrimentalman]

I say kill points only so we won't be tempted to turtle. Maybe we can have a bonus 25pts for a flawless victory. Also a player that takes some casualties and wipes out his opponent's entire team shouldn't get the same points as someone who kills one figure but hides well enough to rack it up in survival points.

They wouldn't:

Game 1 w/ turtle

Kills raeylin and then runs and hide (somehow) avoiding taking any damage.

His total points 480

Game 2

Kills entire other team and loses half of his forces.

His total points 600 or even two thirds of his forces for a total of 525.

Game 2 player easily beats out the turtle in 1.


And again I think the odds of the turtle getting away free and clear for the rest of the game is not very likely or for that matter someone actually trying to play that way.

[allskulls]

Those examples can really go either way, but it's a moot point that doesn't need debate.

Kill+survive would be cool but it would be best to do just 1 for the sake of time and simplicity. And if picking 1, kill is better.

[Satyr]

My thought was to total everyone’s kill points (winners and losers). If you lose a close game it does not knock you out of contention. By keeping your army intact you deny kill points to you opponent and keep them from advancing. It also makes gambits / sacrifices a bit more painful.

The same argument can be made for combining defeated and survival points.

Lets use the K.I.S.S concept

[Detrimentalman]

I know it doesn't need to be debated and I have no real reason to even argue other then the fact that sometimes I enjoy doing exactly that.

I don't see how they can go either way and I don't see how getting two numbers instead of 1 is much more complicated. After all both people have to figure out how much they destroyed...give that number to the other person subtract from 400 add to your destroyed and presto the total.

I'm just saying it's not as accurate and I can't think of a plausible scenario where what you are citing as a reason for not doing it could happen. If you want killing points because that's what you like then fine, that is all you have to say; there doesn't have to be a negative reason for doing a combined point system. If there was a problem of "turtling" then why do we bother doing it at our own tournaments and why have we never run into it?

If picking, kill is simpler. I'll give you that.

[allskulls]

Originally Posted by Satyr

My thought was to total everyone’s kill points (winners and losers). If you lose a close game it does not knock you out of contention. By keeping your army intact you deny kill points to you opponent and keep them from advancing. It also makes gambits / sacrifices a bit more painful.

The same argument can be made for combining defeated and survival points.

Lets use the K.I.S.S concept

Ditto!

[CupidsArt]

Originally Posted by allskulls

Are you going to use brackets for your tourney too? I like that part too but we are not looking to have a full day of tournament play. We may have to consider Truth's format (with a little tweaking) for one of our local events.

No brackets until the Final 4 (which you may not even consider brackets). My tourny will be a lot like Truth's but not exactly.

You will be assinged to a table if you don't have an opponent (missing/dropped) you will recieve a 240 point buy.

You will play your 400py army for 30 miuntes at the end of that time all players will finish their current round and points will be determined.

There will be a 10 minute break for everyone to get to their table (get a drink/snack/smoke) and the next round will begin. At the begining of a round all players have 10 minutes to get to their table or they give a buy to the opponent.

After 4 rounds the 4 high point players will draw from a hat to determine their next opponent. Both winner from that game will go on to battle for 1st place and both not-winners will go on to battle for 3rd place.

After the tourny is over and prizes are given out there will be (only if I have castles by then) a map that will be up for a large team battle (just for fun).

It's along the same lines but has a few changes to what Truth did.



PS for every win you have an additional 20 pts will be added to your final score,

[allskulls]

This is just like our tourney cards.
There are some descrepencies but those are fixed (I just haven't posted them since there wasn't a lot of response to the idea).

I like this...

Originally Posted by CupidsArt

After 4 rounds the 4 high point players will draw from a hat to determine their next opponent. Both winner from that game will go on to battle for 1st place and both not-winners will go on to battle for 3rd place.

PS for every win you have an additional 20 pts will be added to your final score,

A mini-playoff would be cool (for our mothly tournies too) but I would get rid of the hat and just pair off 1st and 4th then 2nd and 3rd.

Extra points for win is cool too, but we usually count wins first then points. But for this it should work. How about...

Extra Points

50pts for win

25pts for slaughter (kill all opponent's figs)

25pts for survival (lose no figs)

[CupidsArt]

Originally Posted by allskulls

This is just like our tourney cards.
There are some descrepencies but those are fixed (I just haven't posted them since there wasn't a lot of response to the idea).

I like this...

A mini-playoff would be cool (for our mothly tournies too) but I would get rid of the hat and just pair off 1st and 4th then 2nd and 3rd.

Extra points for win is cool too, but we usually count wins first then points. But for this it should work. How about...

Extra Points

50pts for win

25pts for slaughter (kill all opponent's figs)

25pts for survival (lose no figs)

Not bad, I really like that idea. The draw from a hat type thing was to help avoid any whining about pairing, but at the same time it can't all be luck,

I didn't even think about Slaughter or Survival points and on the win I decided on 1/20 of the total but 1/8 really isn't bad, dunno,

Maybe a Tourny Format stickie should be made. With maybe 4-6 different tourney formats?

I know not everyone likes doing the same thing (tourny style) but I am certainly glad I popped into this thread when I did,

[Alastair MacDirk]

I want to throw a monkey wrench into the discussion and say that it should be a double elim. tourney without the 3 game championship. After all those rounds the 2 best and most deserving players are left to vie in the (singular) final game.

The 3 game point accumulation concept is a bad idea and does not guarantee the best players will be in the final. WHY???? Because it assumes that everyone plays on a level playing field of equally competetive opponents. All it takes is one or 2 players to face one or 2 patsies and the whole thing is skewed. The first NOCAL gameday we did a points/scenario tourney and I thought it made things simple enough, but I don't feel it is the best way to divine the best, most worthy finalists. If we are going to drive all this way and do this thing, let's do it right. Points ain't the answer. Another point to consider is supposing you have inflicted 5 wounds on Jotun (who would be over half of your opponents armies point total) and your 30 min. time limit expires. You couple points and the artificial end of a game (time) it forces people to use some bizarre strategies to try and finish off huge heroes before the whistle blows. Instead, let's play heroscape!!!!!!!!

[Detrimentalman]

My thought was to total everyone’s kill points (winners and losers). If you lose a close game it does not knock you out of contention. By keeping your army intact you deny kill points to you opponent and keep them from advancing. It also makes gambits / sacrifices a bit more painful.

The same argument can be made for combining defeated and survival points.

Lets use the K.I.S.S concept

At the end of 3 rounds the top 2 will be selected based on points, is what I understand. Now I see a real problem and reason to argue it.

So how are we going to decide the top two people based on points if several people all have 1200pts from defeating their opponents entire army in all three battles? This is where i'm fuzzy on how the system is going to pan out very well. And what happens if a good player runs against a player who plays slowly and ends up not being able to defeat 400pts worth even though he doesn't lose any figures and does a good deal of damage to his opponent, the system isn't treating his game very fairly.

He's penalized for his opponent's slow play and/or hiding strategy?
So if someone on the north or south side want to ensure they make it to the end, they just have everyone else on their side dick around in their games to make sure they have a spot in the championship?

Am I totally off base? If so give me an example of a round victory or explain how these problems aren't a factor because i'm at a loss.

[Alastair MacDirk]

Originally Posted by Detrimentalman

At the end of 3 rounds the top 2 will be selected based on points, is what I understand. Now I see a real problem and reason to argue it.

So how are we going to decide the top two people based on points if several people all have 1200pts from defeating their opponents entire army in all three battles? This is where i'm fuzzy on how the system is going to pan out very well. And what happens if a good player runs against a player who plays slowly and ends up not being able to defeat 400pts worth even though he doesn't lose any figures and does a good deal of damage to his opponent, the system isn't treating his game very fairly.

He's penalized for his opponent's slow play and/or hiding strategy?
So if someone on the north or south side want to ensure they make it to the end, they just have everyone else on their side dick around in their games to make sure they have a spot in the championship?

Am I totally off base? If so give me an example of a round victory or explain how these problems aren't a factor because i'm at a loss.

Yes, I agree obviously. Points is a bad system and does not take into account strength of schedule (opponents). Double elimination gets rid of the weaklings quickly and the cream rises to the top.

[Detrimentalman]

How'd you decide on 240pts for the bye?

Pretty cool system. 30 minutes for a game seems fairly rushed though. How small are your maps? I would think you'd shrink them so sides collide faster. Would weaken the power of range too if you shortened the map which isn't a bad thing really.

Definately something to think about. I still think adding your remaining points and opponents defeated points is the most accurate way to measure a game though.