I'm gonna claim a moral victory despite my miserable battle scores. Highest combined sportsmanship and composition. Being fairly new to ACtA makes me feel good that I put together a well balanced fleet. I know it wasn't built to take on the heavy hitters I saw at the tourney, but I had fun playing it.
MavenCon - ACTA Tournament Debut!!!
- Thread starter B_Steele
- Start date
Bubba Ho-Tep
Mongoose
Deth said:
And that is what it's all about.
B_Steele
Mongoose
I was kinda wondering that, too when I was scoring up the sheets. I have a few theories, but I think you might have suffered some from the "ugh, another ISA with a Gaim carrier" syndrome.
To be completely honest, I was more surprised that Kyle did not suffer from Comp more than he did. I'm not saying that I find that particularly fleet broken or anything, but I have noticed here and in the shops that most people roll their eyes at the mention of that fleet pairing.
*shrug*
But, like you said, it was only a 1.47 difference. When taking an average like I do, that could have meant that only one player scored him high or you lower.
On a side note, I just wrote up the tournament article for Signs and Portents and sent it (and the pics) to Charlie; hopefully for next month's issue.
Thanks again all, I had a blast!
-Bry
B_Steele
Mongoose
I disagree. The Sportsmanship and Comp overall reflected much of what I saw throughout the day.
I honestly do not think that anyone go unfairly judged by their peers at MavenCon. Hell, I personally think that some people got higher than what I would have judged them if it was like in a 40k tourney or something that I was in.
Basically, I throw these tourneys for people to have fun and play people that they don't normally play. Kyle (the tourney winner) was repeatedly lauded for how awesome of a guy he was to play, and I was glad to see that his friendly and fair demeanour eked him out the victory. Anyone can rules lawyer and simply throw some dice, in my opinion, but the sign of a truly good player is the guy who can be kickin' your butt and you will be laughing alongside of him about it.
There will always be some dissention about Composition scoring, but having seen what a true "cheese fleet" can do in a tourney without Comp scores in the past - I won't run a tourney without them. Generally speaking, if somebody brings one of the lower-scoring composition fleets, they will make up for the loss of a few points through the overpowering of their fleets during their games.
Basically, I am all for a fair and even playing ground - but the rules do not always lend to that (all Queen Gaim fleets, for instance). To combat that issue, the tournament structure must be adjusted. I hope (please, players - feel free to comment) that the MavenCon players felt that the adjustments were fair.
Cheers all,
-Bry
I honestly do not think that anyone go unfairly judged by their peers at MavenCon. Hell, I personally think that some people got higher than what I would have judged them if it was like in a 40k tourney or something that I was in.
Basically, I throw these tourneys for people to have fun and play people that they don't normally play. Kyle (the tourney winner) was repeatedly lauded for how awesome of a guy he was to play, and I was glad to see that his friendly and fair demeanour eked him out the victory. Anyone can rules lawyer and simply throw some dice, in my opinion, but the sign of a truly good player is the guy who can be kickin' your butt and you will be laughing alongside of him about it.
There will always be some dissention about Composition scoring, but having seen what a true "cheese fleet" can do in a tourney without Comp scores in the past - I won't run a tourney without them. Generally speaking, if somebody brings one of the lower-scoring composition fleets, they will make up for the loss of a few points through the overpowering of their fleets during their games.
Basically, I am all for a fair and even playing ground - but the rules do not always lend to that (all Queen Gaim fleets, for instance). To combat that issue, the tournament structure must be adjusted. I hope (please, players - feel free to comment) that the MavenCon players felt that the adjustments were fair.
Cheers all,
-Bry
greatly enjoyed the tournament and enjoyed meeting everyone who attended.
Overall I think Bryan's tournament pack worked extremely well, but i think a few changes/additions would make it run more smoothly (in order of priority):
1) The tournament pack needs a better rubric for scoring composition and sportsmanship. Some type of objective standard against which to subjectively judge your opponents. Although the published packet included a simple rubric, it needs to be made more explicit and enforced at both ends of the spectrum.
2) I think the games need more time: the 1.5 hours seemed to make everything hurried (and I know that I at least tried to save time in some instances by cutting corners--I know I did this and take responsibility for it). But knowing the time limitation seemed to make me more willing to cut corners and try and speed the game up. I think even making the games 1.75 hours would help, but I think that it should be timed for 2 hour games. If people finish early, then I think most people would enjoy watching the end of close games.
3) I think that cap on 8 ships should be reintroduced.
4) Finally and I expect to take heat for this (I am also not complaining about my final scoring) but I think that Sportsmanship and Composition scores are weighted to heavily. Given that these scores are completely subjective, the fact that combined these carry the weight fo an entire fourth game is to much. Basically, the subjective judgment of others, rather than objective scoring, is responsible for 25% of the total points, which appears to me to be to much. The effect of this scoring weight could be greatly offset by the addition and enforcement of a more stringent rubric
As I stated early, these are not complaints but observations, I would happily play in another tournament under the packet as published, but It think these additions/changes would better the experience for all.
edit--fix some typos
Overall I think Bryan's tournament pack worked extremely well, but i think a few changes/additions would make it run more smoothly (in order of priority):
1) The tournament pack needs a better rubric for scoring composition and sportsmanship. Some type of objective standard against which to subjectively judge your opponents. Although the published packet included a simple rubric, it needs to be made more explicit and enforced at both ends of the spectrum.
2) I think the games need more time: the 1.5 hours seemed to make everything hurried (and I know that I at least tried to save time in some instances by cutting corners--I know I did this and take responsibility for it). But knowing the time limitation seemed to make me more willing to cut corners and try and speed the game up. I think even making the games 1.75 hours would help, but I think that it should be timed for 2 hour games. If people finish early, then I think most people would enjoy watching the end of close games.
3) I think that cap on 8 ships should be reintroduced.
4) Finally and I expect to take heat for this (I am also not complaining about my final scoring) but I think that Sportsmanship and Composition scores are weighted to heavily. Given that these scores are completely subjective, the fact that combined these carry the weight fo an entire fourth game is to much. Basically, the subjective judgment of others, rather than objective scoring, is responsible for 25% of the total points, which appears to me to be to much. The effect of this scoring weight could be greatly offset by the addition and enforcement of a more stringent rubric
As I stated early, these are not complaints but observations, I would happily play in another tournament under the packet as published, but It think these additions/changes would better the experience for all.
edit--fix some typos
Similar threads
