Author Topic: Is it time for a Standardized Tournament Format?  (Read 3117 times)

Ruckdog

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3066
  • Number of Times Thanked: 189
  • Dive! Dive!
    • View Profile
    • Man Battlestations!
Is it time for a Standardized Tournament Format?
« on: June 11, 2012, 09:34:07 pm »
So, after having attended two of Aaron's awesome events, read about the third one, and having attended a couple of tournaments for 40k, I've gotten to thinking that it might be time to pool our collective knowledge and come up with a set of tournament guidelines that enterprising players could use to host their own events in their local areas. Here was some of the things I was thinking could be included:

-Number Of Rounds
-Table Size
-Mission Parameters
-Point Sizes
-Prize categories and criteria
-Additional fleet restrictions beyond the ones in the rule book.
-Special STAR card rules or a set of single-use cards like the ones Aaron made for the last DWVA event.

So, the goal would be to have a single PDF document that, while not a 100% solution, would maybe be a 80% solution for an event organizer. I don't think we need to actually define the missions, though it might be okay to have a handful of tried and true examples. What do you guys think?

MadDrB

  • Administrator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 504
  • Number of Times Thanked: 2
  • "Beat to Quarters!
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time for a Standardized Tournament Format?
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2012, 10:47:54 pm »
I'm certainly ready to contribute to something like this.  I just posted on the Spartan forum (over on the Uncharted Seas side) that Spartan Games is still a relatively small enough game system while also popular enough and supported by the company to foster a community actually built and developed by the community of players (as opposed to a community developed by the official game designers and simply bought into by the players).  I see a lot of fan-created content on the Spartan forum which is absolutely fantastic, and I see a lot of posts wondering along the lines of "is this okay or is someone going to send me a cease-and-desist letter if I develop my own army building application using Microsoft Excel).  One thing I really like about contributing to a forum like ManBattlestations.Com is the relative freedom of developing fan-created content without worrying about stepping on anyone's IP toes.

After my experience running 3 DW tournaments along with a few campaigns and Uncharted Seas demo games and events, I'm ready to analyze the data and contribute to a document which could be very helpful to new players and tournament organizers.  I have a lot of data from the last DW event I ran, especially since I had each player fill out a score card for each round played which included how much of their opponent's fleet models were painted and how much fun they actually experienced playing the scenario, in addition to the scenarios, time limits compared to actual time spent during rounds played, and the dynamic of communicating with the owners and staff of the local game store where we held the event (and not to mention the list of ingredients used for sandwiches I put together for this most recent event).  But it's not all contained in the data I collected myself; I also received pages of feedback and suggestions from the participants in these events, and I really feel that these players are all at the top of their game and know what their talking about (more than I probably know, realistically).  I would love to work at developing a community PDF project which is open to edits and suggestions from the gaming community at large and, in the end, absolutely free to those looking to download and use the collected material as they see fit for their own DW tournament events.

Ruckdog

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3066
  • Number of Times Thanked: 189
  • Dive! Dive!
    • View Profile
    • Man Battlestations!
Re: Is it time for a Standardized Tournament Format?
« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2012, 09:47:42 pm »
Okay, so without further ado, here are my initial thoughts:

-Number Of Rounds: 3-5. I think that in a competitive event, 3 rounds are really the minimum needed to reach any kind of quantitative decision on placing. That being said, 3 rounds is not nearly enough to cancel out all the variation that can happen due to luck! 5 rounds really isn't enough either, but it does improve things a bit. However, at 5 rounds, I think you would be looking at 2 days for the event, which is probably not doable outside of a convention.

-Table Size: I favor a 4'x3' or 4'x4' size for this, for two main reasons. 1, it allows an organizer to have more players in a given space; using 4x3, you can get two games onto the standard 4x6 table. 2, it limits the distances that players can start from each other, which will speed the rounds since ships will be rapidly within shooting range.

-Mission Parameters: I'm a big fan of what I call the "20 Point" format, in which each mission has a Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary objective, worth 10, 6, and 4 points respectively. An example of a primary mission might be one of the 6 battle orders from the rulebook, like "sink 70% of the enemy's core force." Secondary missions might be one of those 6 as well, like "Sink or capture the model with the enemy's commodore." The tertiary mission is where things can really open up for creativity. For example, the photo recon objective that was used in the first DWVA tournament last year. A key point for this system is that, usually, if both players accomplish an objective, then neither player gets any points for it. That might sound a little harsh, but it does tend to produce clear breakouts among the players, limiting the chances that there will be ties.

-Point Sizes: I think that 800 points is about the best point level for a mixed naval and air game. At this level, it is possible to take the big airships, dreadnoughts, and the like, but it still forces the players to think hard about their list comp. Also, while this points level is a bit more than what comes in the starter box, it is not drastically more, which means that it is not too hard for a beginner to get into; generally, one additional blister will be enough to put them over the top, depending on the faction. 600 points is not a bad option either; it has the benefit of allowing beginners to jump right in with just the contents of the starter box. Interestingly, it seems to me like the amount of time to play a 600 vs. 800 point scenario is about the same. I think this is due to the fact that at 800 points, model counts might actually be less thanks to the tendency to bring more large models like dreadnoughts, carriers, and the like.

-Prize categories and criteria: I think that this one can be pretty flexible, and only a few suggestions need to be made. First place is obviously a good one, as would a painting prize (judged by the participants). I also really like the Garbage Scow award for the last place finisher ;).

-Additional fleet restrictions beyond the ones in the rule book: In general, I think it is best to keep to the base rules whenever possible, as part of the KISS principle. However, I think that it might be appropriate to put additional or different guidelines in place over the ones listed in the official rules. One that immediately springs to mind is to limit players to a maximum of one of each class of large or massive model in their lists. So, for example. I could run a BB, a DN, and a CV in my list, but not 2 DNs. This restriction is specifically designed to prevent spamming large ships like BBs and DNs; even at the 800 point level, it is easy to fit two dreadnoughts into a list! While undoubtedly effective, such lists aren't as fun to play against IMO.

-Special STAR card rules: So, from what I have seen, the STAR cards tend to be met with suspicion and/or dislike among many members of the larger DW community. The reasons why are not so important as recognizing this sentiment exists in certain quarters. So, for those that have local communities that prefer not to use them, I think the small set of limited-use cards is a good solution.

What do you guys think?

Ruckdog

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3066
  • Number of Times Thanked: 189
  • Dive! Dive!
    • View Profile
    • Man Battlestations!
Re: Is it time for a Standardized Tournament Format?
« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2012, 09:31:45 am »
BUMP!

This project kind of fell by the wayside during the summer doldrums, but I'd like to re-invigorate it again. If there are no further comments, I think we might have enough for me to draft a "Version 0.1" of these guidelines.

MadDrB

  • Administrator
  • Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 504
  • Number of Times Thanked: 2
  • "Beat to Quarters!
    • View Profile
Re: Is it time for a Standardized Tournament Format?
« Reply #4 on: October 07, 2012, 10:44:21 am »
I'm a BIG fan of the Campaign Points system for scoring games as detailed in the Hurricane Season campaign book.  I'm using CP to score games for the next tournament, and all objectives will reward players with 1, 3, or 6 CP which are easily added to the CP scores for sinking enemy ships, etc.  With limited time between rounds it should be so much easier to just count up small, medium, and large models in the destroyed corner of the table and figure CP without consulting your opponent's stat cards for specific Point Costs.  And I prefer trying to figure out the percentage difference between numbers in the double digits rather than 3 or even 4 digit Victory Point totals.

Ruckdog

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3066
  • Number of Times Thanked: 189
  • Dive! Dive!
    • View Profile
    • Man Battlestations!
Re: Is it time for a Standardized Tournament Format?
« Reply #5 on: October 07, 2012, 04:13:34 pm »
Yeah, the CP system is pretty good; it strikes me as a variation of the battle points system that I described above. OK! I'll incorporate that into the draft package.