plr
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by plr on Jun 20, 2011 22:56:20 GMT -7
That's easy to say when you play mech BA. I'll admit that it's nicer to have painting armies, but I wouldn't say that using non-painted armies is "disrespectful." I'm mostly speaking from a Fantasy reference frame, where my army has 300+ models and not 30. Well I have four armies all painted to a very high standard (I think anyways). I'll put money down that my Mech BA list has more time spent on it than 95% of armies that are 3 times the size. And while this obviously doesn't apply to EVERYONE, most people that show up with unpainted armies to events aren't in it for the "hobby", and generally are only playing with power gamer lists. And that I do believe is disrespectful to the other players that want a "full hobby" experience. This is of course just my own personal opinion. But this is completely off topic and we should take it to another thread where we can disagree on the value of painted armies. :-)
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy Crack Corn on Jun 21, 2011 6:44:56 GMT -7
Jonah, I don't think that anyone is saying that it should depend on your last game only. The things that I have seen suggested are:
~ Fewest points scored against in ALL games, and ~ Relative points scored between the players when they played against eachother.
|
|
|
Post by mcmurraymaniac on Jun 21, 2011 8:47:24 GMT -7
What Jonah is talking about is for example his game against Paul.
Him and Paul had tied and had faced each other in their last game. Now it was suggested that if one person had beaten the other than that would be a tie breaker (so only Paul would win).
The way things are matched up the people with the most points should me matched up in the final game so really if you lose that you aren't going to win, so that's why he's saying if you lose the last game then that's it.
Maybe Jonah misunderstood and thought I was saying it would be based on the last game no matter what.
I have to say though that it doesn't seem that unfair to me. I think if there is a tie but one person had beaten the other then it's pretty clear.
|
|
plr
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by plr on Jun 21, 2011 12:41:52 GMT -7
This doesn't apply to the Tie-breaker (as that would still need to be worked out), but what about dropping prizes all together?
I know the reason I come out is for weird and fun missions, and to play people I don't regularly play. Obviously without the prizes, maybe there is a slight drop in entry fee (got to make sure everything is still covered for Brian though!).
Or if everyone wants prizes, maybe something simple like a $20 GW Gift Certificate or a random 40K Fine Cast model (they can always be exchanged it needed). Basically something just as a token prize... With the off-beat missions it would be fun to see more people taking off-beat lists and trying new things, instead of just going out to win...
|
|
|
Post by mcmurraymaniac on Jun 21, 2011 13:21:30 GMT -7
The idea in the beginning was to basically replace the mini-tournaments that GW were running in their stores, and there they had the cash prize.
Sadly so far I have no pulled in that crowd (Paul and Tim are really the only ones).
For my part I'm happy to change the tournament to be however you guys want (I'm doing it for you after all) as long as it stays relatively fun and different.
Nick has been really great about it. If he was being a jerk about it some of the tournaments would see no prize at all (first fantasy one had only people so prize of -$40, and second fantasy had 6 so a prize of -$10), but he has said that he isn't in this to hurt the hobby and as long as each of us chip in $5 he's happy. In fact he has even offered extra prizes that will be available at the larger events.
I still have to develope the prizes (best overall, best painted, best sportsmen) for the major 40k tournament (Veterans of Vengeance: 4 games at 2500), because for the fantasy one (Battle of the Beasts) it is a functional trophy with a removable gold painted minotaur model that you can actually use in your games. Not really sure what to use for the 40k one... maybe dreads... myabe grey knight termie... we'll see...
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 21, 2011 16:12:32 GMT -7
Yea 1000 point game as a tie breaker could work, but again, its another 2 hours to the evening, so not really an option.
You could also put a "super hard" objective in each game, whoever scores more of those overall can be the winner.
But i think scored against is easy, fair and adds to the game in the sense that you not only have to worry about your objectives, but you have to deny your opponent objectives too.
Edit: well, it seems a few posts somehow popped up after i clicked on the link. so...
I do agree, if you played against a person that is tied for 1st, you should win. You played a game, you won, you win overall. Thats easy. But with your objectives its fairly easy to both score 3 points for example, then another tie breaker method would kick in. I still like the least amount of objectives scored against you as the final tie breaker.
As to the prizes, i am good with removing prizes from the small tournys to promote different lists. But that will take my motivation away for paniced painting the night before. At least till the major tourney....
|
|
|
Post by mcmurraymaniac on Jun 21, 2011 18:10:16 GMT -7
That's a good point about the painting Chris.
|
|
|
Post by sanguinius (Jonah) on Jun 21, 2011 20:27:59 GMT -7
Im with chris on the super hard objective, it could be used as a tie breaker and not count towards the total points of 15
|
|
|
Post by sanguinius (Jonah) on Jun 21, 2011 20:29:31 GMT -7
oh for got to add, only 1 of the 2 players can get the hard objective ?
|
|
|
Post by mcmurraymaniac on Jun 21, 2011 20:51:05 GMT -7
What would you call a super hard objective?
I already include objectives that only 1 person could get, and have some that are easier than others.
Something I would worry about is that no one gets this super hard objective then we are just in the same place.
|
|
|
Post by mcmurraymaniac on Jun 22, 2011 7:22:45 GMT -7
Ok, after giving it more thought I'm pretty solid on the idea of it first being based on if one player beat the other and then going to objectives against. If it doesn't work we can look at it again. Now lets get back to spreading the word of the Battle Barn and getting more people signed up
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 22, 2011 9:27:00 GMT -7
Good choice brian, let us go forth and celebrate
|
|