Final Victory Tournament Format

[Greg Smith]

My fleet really wasn't designed to win this battle ... Credit goes to Greg for removing over 200 of its damage points in the previous game!!!

While I thoroughly enjoyed myself, I do think there a couple of problems with the tourney format.

The third game, the scenario is Assassination with 5 raid plus the biggest ship in the fleet. Now if you are facing someone with an Armageddon ship, you are going to lose if you don't have one too, as Burger did. Adiras were very popular in this game, and the lack of a strong opposing fleet made it extremely difficult to do significant damage to it. Did anyone lose an Adira in this game?

On two occasions my damage to enemy ships really helped the enemy out. I killed one of Mark's Dag'kars in the first game, meaning he didn't have it against Ken's Minbari in game 2. And as Burger said, I did a large amount of damage to the Vorlon Heavy Cruiser. Not that I begrudge them the help, but it is a game of attrition and the attrition doesn't actually help you.

On the subject of attrition, I lost a significant portion of my fleet in the first three games, and come the fourth game I had 5 ships (of raid level or lower) vs a huge Centauri war fleet (2 Octurions, 2 Primuses, 3 Prefects and more). It wasn't exactly a fair game. Now I can only blame myself for having lost 2 out of 3 games, however the format of the tourney means anyone who has done well in earlier games is going to have more ships in the final game, thereby increasing their chances of doing well in the last game.

A few claver players figured out that they could use R&R points generated on the Other Duties table. It wasn't clear from the tourney rules, but they asked and it was allowed, so they could recrew their fleet and even buy new ships. Also the Centauri benefited from being able to recrew ships from the Other Duties table.

These are really just small points. As I said, I enjotyed myself and I would certainly play in another similar tournament. Although I would probably chose a different fleet.

 

[H]

on the plus side, it was a different format, and a change to the established ideas, which in itself is cool. Sounds like with some work it will certainly perk up the tourney formats from the usual 5 point raid A Call to arms/space superiority approach which is a tad dull really. Some allocation and managemtn elements make it more tactical and rewarding.

 

[Burger]

Yes I was faced with a choice of putting in a big ship such as a Fireraptor or Stormfalcon, and most likely lose battle 3 to an Adira or Victory or VHC or Shadow Ship anyway, or just give up hope of winning battle 3 and choose a good fleet for the other battles. I chose the latter.

On the subject of attrition, I lost a significant portion of my fleet in the first three games, and come the fourth game I had 5 ships (of raid level or lower) vs a huge Centauri war fleet (2 Octurions, 2 Primuses, 3 Prefects and more). It wasn't exactly a fair game. Now I can only blame myself for having lost 2 out of 3 games, however the format of the tourney means anyone who has done well in earlier games is going to have more ships in the final game, thereby increasing their chances of doing well in the last game.

Yes, this is true. But, due to the Swiss matching system, in the last game you are going to be playing other players who have lost their first games. The players who won, with the large fleets remaining, are going to be playing each other. A lot of the battles was based on how you chose to play the games, and which opponents you got: did you invest a lot into battle 3 by choosing an Armageddon ship, which if destroyed would put you at a major disadvantage for battle 4? Or, save more FAPs for battle 4 but be more likely to lose battle 3? If you got an opponent who went for winning battle 3 and then another opponent who went for winning battle 4, then you are going to be a bit screwed whatever you do.

A few claver players figured out that they could use R&R points generated on the Other Duties table. It wasn't clear from the tourney rules, but they asked and it was allowed, so they could recrew their fleet and even buy new ships.

Err, bad ruling IMO. This tournament was not a campaign, there was no mention of RR points, or buying new ships. Anything RR-related should have been re-rolled.

It was a really good idea overall, although I think maybe the battle 3 "free big ship" makes it biased towards some races, and might need a tweak.

 

[Alexb83]

I see a few problems with the format - in the first two games, I would ideally have liked to shake hands with my opponents and call it a draw. As it was I went for avoiding damage to my ships (unsuccessfully) and lost out Shadows are just better at hiding/attacking, and Minbari were too fast to hide from.

Heck, in game 3 I was tempted to open comms channels and ask the ISA if they wanted a truce - it would've done us both better in the long run, as we would've stood more chance in game 4.

As for recrewing... that's not right. And Vorlons/Shadows got well and truly boned on the ship repair front - 2-4 xp points spent on repair means 3.5 times less to a Vorlon/Shadow player than it does to anyone else... also being denied self repair rolls was a bit annoying.

I would've been allowed the sneaky tactic of putting my ships in hyperspace (where they're not allowed to repair?!) but the moment they open a jump point and hold it open, they are allowed... frankly that would've sucked, so I didn't.

 

[Alexb83]

I dunno, Burger - I think the 'free big ship' in game 3 was the only way that some races would have of winning it. The first two games were a bit of a non-starter for those races without a skirmish choice, whereas those same fleets tend to excel higher up.

It's also a big investment for /any/ fleet to take an Armageddon ship, and I would only think it was really worthwhile for the races that did (Shadows, Vorlons, ISA, Centauri) as the others all suck anyways.

I think it could've done with more escalation - skirmish to raid, raid to battle, battle to war. It would alter the scoring structure and penalise less for losing the big ships in the bigger games (but still favour small ship swarms - I dont think there's any way out of that.)

 

[katadder]

if in game 3 2 people come face to face with armageddon ships most likely one will lose but the other will be heavily damaged as Alex found out. it is a kind of all your eggs in one basket choice and always depends on your game 3 opponent. I was lucky in that facing burgers strikehawk fleet for game 3 my adira wasnt under any threat at all but if I had faced something bigger i would have had problems for game 4, which the Adira won by itself for me.

 

[Alexb83]

Well, it was a tough call in game 3 - I decided that 5 whitestars were as much of a threat to me as 1 Victory, so I went to pop them first - subjecting the heavy cruiser to continued fire from the Victory.

It's swings and roundabouts, really - had I dedicated all my fire from 2 destroyers and 1 heavy cruiser I might've taken down the Victory earlier and saved myself damage there, but I would've then had 5 whitestars behind me doing just as much damage.

I think it was always a given that the Victory would lose (just on crits) unfortunately I didn't pull any great ones out of the bag (in playtesting with TGT I managed to 4/6 and 1/6 the Victory in 2 turns of firing)...

Making it a pseudo-campaign is good in some ways as it adds the element of worrying about your ships' conditions. But it also sort of lacks the element of long-term strategic thinking. It might've served Greg and I better to sit opposite each other and not fire a shot, but we went straight into combat

 

[Triggy]

I think the overall format was good, with the major issues being duties/repairs/etc. and having the "one large ship" in game 3. I really liked the managing of fleet resources, especially trying to keep ships alive if possible. A few tweaks/clarifications to the XP/RR would be all that's needed here.

Escalation of battle size was good (and different) but (at least in 1st ed.) there are too few races with good Armageddon/War choices to make all fleets equal. Certainly something to think about.

 

[Pauly_D]

maybe the problem is that too much of your fleet gets used in battle 3
2/3 of my 10 battle points was used in the assassination scenario so if anyone gets annihilated in that scenario they are badly reduced in points for the final scenario even if they have done well in the first 2 games.

what i would suggest for a future tournament would be
Game 1: 5 Skirmish Points
Game 2: 5 Raid Points
Game 3: 4 Battle Points
Game 4: 1 Armageddeon Point + What survived from battles 1-3

and scrap the xp system because it gave certain fleets a lot more of an advantage than others

good or not?

 

[Da Boss]

Yes I was faced with a choice of putting in a big ship such as a Fireraptor or Stormfalcon, and most likely lose battle 3 to an Adira or Victory or VHC or Shadow Ship anyway, or just give up hope of winning battle 3 and choose a good fleet for the other battles. I chose the latter..

I did the same - had a fleet list that was all the ships I had as I don't have a Adira (too big a model for me) - faced a Octurion and Adira with my Octurion and escorts and got hammered by better player.

On the subject of attrition, I lost a significant portion of my fleet in the first three games, and come the fourth game I had 5 ships (of raid level or lower) vs a huge Centauri war fleet (2 Octurions, 2 Primuses, 3 Prefects and more). It wasn't exactly a fair game. Now I can only blame myself for having lost 2 out of 3 games, however the format of the tourney means anyone who has done well in earlier games is going to have more ships in the final game, thereby increasing their chances of doing well in the last game.

Yes, this is true. But, due to the Swiss matching system, in the last game you are going to be playing other players who have lost their first games. The players who won, with the large fleets remaining, are going to be playing each other. A lot of the battles was based on how you chose to play the games, and which opponents you got: did you invest a lot into battle 3 by choosing an Armageddon ship, which if destroyed would put you at a major disadvantage for battle 4? Or, save more FAPs for battle 4 but be more likely to lose battle 3? If you got an opponent who went for winning battle 3 and then another opponent who went for winning battle 4, then you are going to be a bit screwed whatever you do..

Yes my final game was very one sided as I had plenty of unused ships left over and he had battered and shattered remnants to field

A few claver players figured out that they could use R&R points generated on the Other Duties table. It wasn't clear from the tourney rules, but they asked and it was allowed, so they could recrew their fleet and even buy new ships.

Err, bad ruling IMO. This tournament was not a campaign, there was no mention of RR points, or buying new ships. Anything RR-related should have been re-rolled..

OK that was maybe my fault as I set the precendent, I was all set to re-roll but LBH raised the point with Matt that maybe I could use and perhaps I should have declined but just got carried away........

It was a really good idea overall, although I think maybe the battle 3 "free big ship" makes it biased towards some races, and might need a tweak.

I also really liked the idea and enjoyed it...............

 

[Pauly_D]

Yes I was faced with a choice of putting in a big ship such as a Fireraptor or Stormfalcon, and most likely lose battle 3 to an Adira or Victory or VHC or Shadow Ship anyway, or just give up hope of winning battle 3 and choose a good fleet for the other battles. I chose the latter..

I did the same - had a fleet list that was all the ships I had as I don't have a Adira (too big a model for me) - faced a Octurion and Adira with my Octurion and escorts and got hammered by better player.

it did make a funny site on the table a large balanced fleet vs the 2 biggest ships in the Centauri fleet

 

[katadder]

shows that sometimes numbers isnt always better just depends on the crits you get i guess.

some fleets really did suffer to not having decent war choices (or above) at game 3. although burger you could have used any league war choice as by your use of vaarls you were not a pure drazi fleet.

 

[Da Boss]

Yes I was faced with a choice of putting in a big ship such as a Fireraptor or Stormfalcon, and most likely lose battle 3 to an Adira or Victory or VHC or Shadow Ship anyway, or just give up hope of winning battle 3 and choose a good fleet for the other battles. I chose the latter..

I did the same - had a fleet list that was all the ships I had as I don't have a Adira (too big a model for me) - faced a Octurion and Adira with my Octurion and escorts and got hammered by better player.

it did make a funny site on the table a large balanced fleet vs the 2 biggest ships in the Centauri fleet

yeah too true - I should have thought about what I was doing a bit more- squadroning would maybe of helped ! Anyway at least my Maximus stood up to both ships for a turn! Still it was a very odd game - and pretty qiuck - thanks!

 

[Alexb83]

It's a bit redundant now that we're not having any more 1e tournaments, but the xp-for-repair roll thing for Vorlons/Shadows needs revising in this format (in campaigns they obviously repair for free).

Again they get penalised for having 'more' (actually, less!) damage on their ships in that bought repair rolls give them less back than others.

Also, the issue of self-repair in hyperspace. The ships dont stop existing when they're off the table, but suddenly start existing when they open a jump point even without coming through it (currently as per the rules this is how it is). Ancients with mastery in hyperspace like Shadows and Vorlons (heck, they could make little pockets in hyperspace) ought to at least get a chance to repair whilst they're in it - it's not as if their ships are disrupted in any way like the younger races.

Also, the question as to whether ships not deployed count as strategic withdrawals (my fighters not being on the table cost me points!? - even though I disadvantaged myself by not deploying them).

 

[Triggy]

Also, the question as to whether ships not deployed count as strategic withdrawals (my fighters not being on the table cost me points!? - even though I disadvantaged myself by not deploying them).

I've looked this up and although that ruling is at least debatable, you could just spend 4 FAPs on your fleet (not 5) and be done with it!

 

[Burger]

some fleets really did suffer to not having decent war choices (or above) at game 3. although burger you could have used any league war choice as by your use of vaarls you were not a pure drazi fleet.

Well like I said pretty much every fleet list I tried building would have got hammered to a Centauri fleet containing an Adira. So I sacrificed battle 3 right from the start, and took a fleet that wuld be funny for the other battles.

 

[Burger]

Also, the question as to whether ships not deployed count as strategic withdrawals (my fighters not being on the table cost me points!? - even though I disadvantaged myself by not deploying them).

I've looked this up and although that ruling is at least debatable, you could just spend 4 FAPs on your fleet (not 5) and be done with it!

But they can be used as JP bombs, and as initiative sinks (using IJP! SA every turn to hold the JP open).

 

[tneva82]

Also, the question as to whether ships not deployed count as strategic withdrawals (my fighters not being on the table cost me points!? - even though I disadvantaged myself by not deploying them).

I've looked this up and although that ruling is at least debatable, you could just spend 4 FAPs on your fleet (not 5) and be done with it!

But they can be used as JP bombs, and as initiative sinks (using IJP! SA every turn to hold the JP open).

Wasn't this about fighters costing Alex points? Fighters can't be used as JP bombs.

 

[Burger]

I've looked this up and although that ruling is at least debatable, you could just spend 4 FAPs on your fleet (not 5) and be done with it!

But they can be used as JP bombs, and as initiative sinks (using IJP! SA every turn to hold the JP open).

Wasn't this about fighters costing Alex points? Fighters can't be used as JP bombs.

No, it was about ships left in hyperspace for the entire battle, and whether or not they count as tactical withdrawls at the end. There was a ruling made at the tournament, I don't know which way it went though?

 

[tneva82]

No, it was about ships left in hyperspace for the entire battle, and whether or not they count as tactical withdrawls at the end. There was a ruling made at the tournament, I don't know which way it went though?

Ah. The fighter part in quote confused me. Thanks for the clarification.