Tournament Preferences

[KennyBoy]

Just thought i'd get people's feelings on this... Would people prefer "smaller" tounaments - like the recent Aldershot and Kettering tourneys - which restrict time and ship numbers, but allow for 4 games (5pt Skirmish, 3pt Raid, 2pt Battle, 3pt War).

Or, do you prefer 3 games that involve more time and occasionally have "special" rules - like the last Warlords of Walsall tourney?

(Now, I appreciate that not many people came to the last Walsall tourney, but the three games (5pt Raid, 5pt Battle, 5pt War) all involved additional scoring conditions that were fun and thought-provoking... )

Another option would be the "Classic" tourney - 4 games at a standard PL(usually 5pt Raid) and time scale?

Thoughts?

 

[Burger]

Personally I prefer a mix. I really like the current format of 3 small games then a 3pt War to finish. Enforcing at least one ship of at least the game's PL games fleets smaller, therefore quicker.

 

[Diesel]

I'd plump for Da Boss Format every time, with the proviso that the tourny organisers mix up the scenarios every now and then to keep the players on our collective toes.

 

[TGT]

I like Da Boss Format but next year i'll mix up the scenarios or impose date range limits

 

[AdrianH]

I've played two tournaments. One was fixed PL's throughout (Mongoose's B5 Open Day, three games at 5 points Skirmish plus a free-for-all where everyone put in one ship). The other was escalating PL's (Kettering).

For me the escalating PL's was more fun because it meant I could (and indeed, had to) play different ships in each game. In fact, I almost managed to play an entirely different fleet in each game! This may not be an option for people with a smaller collection, but at least they would have the chance to play different ships from their chosen fleet.

Imposed date limits might be a problem for players with only one or two fleets. A player with only EA Crusade will be in trouble in any game before about 2265, while a player with only Shadows (e.g. me at the time of the B5 Open Day) won't be able to compete after 2261.

Oddball scenarios should make things more interesting as long as they don't put certain fleets at a disadvantage to others, or out of the game entirely. Anything requiring fighters is bad news for Drakh, for example.

 

[H]

I generally like an escalating fleet size tourney, but i would like to see some restrictions on fleet types and scenario types. Just to prevent thwe obvious issues certain fleets have with certain scenario's.

 

[Clanger]

The teiring and escalation of fleets is my favourite. Also having smaller games is quick and fun. That is dependent on time frame.

Also the idea of not being stuck with the same fleet for every game. Trying out different fleets is fun .

 

[Burger]

I liked the idea that Hash had a long while ago. By default every game is on an empty table with no hyperspace. At the start of the day, each player has one hyperspace and one scenery token. The hyperspace token allows 1 FAP of your ships to be kept in hyperspace, the scenery token generates random scenery on the table. You play cards at the start of the game when you see who you're up against. You can also play cards in response to each other if you like, so if your opponent plays hyperspace, you can too. But each player is limited to one of each token for the entire tournament.

 

[No. 1 Bear]

I liked the idea that Hash had a long while ago. By default every game is on an empty table with no hyperspace. At the start of the day, each player has one hyperspace and one scenery token. The hyperspace token allows 1 FAP of your ships to be kept in hyperspace, the scenery token generates random scenery on the table. You play cards at the start of the game when you see who you're up against. You can also play cards in response to each other if you like, so if your opponent plays hyperspace, you can too. But each player is limited to one of each token for the entire tournament.

To further this i reckon having random event cards which aren't to random or ridiculas or crippling would be interesting, each player given one in the tournament they can play at any time. Something like save that critical or pass the CQ check etc.

 

[H]

or a card to replace your opponents cheese fleet with something you stand a chance against

 

[Clanger]

How about pre done non cheese fleets for each game and proxies can be used. Every one uses 1 of 2 fleets for each game.

How about a "crap" ship tourney lol. With a consensus of rubbish ships and every one can only use them

 

[Burger]

Haha, it would be funny to see a table full of Fireraptor, Orestes, Neroons and G'Quans!!

 

[AdrianH]

How about pre done non cheese fleets for each game and proxies can be used. Every one uses 1 of 2 fleets for each game.

Cheese is in the eye of the beholder. Shadows against Narn is cheesy, Minbari against Earth is cheesy; but Shadows against Minbari or Earth against Narn would be interesting. So, without restricting what people are allowed to use, how about letting players bring two fleets to each battle, from which they select one? Even if only one player brings a choice of two, given that a recent poll indicated that most people are more interested in fun than in winning, this ought to reduce the number of cheesy games...

How about a "crap" ship tourney lol. With a consensus of rubbish ships and every one can only use them

Haha, it would be funny to see a table full of Fireraptor, Orestes, Neroons and G'Quans!!

I'll take the G'Quans. I've had some successes with them as part of my Army of Light fleet and if it's a fleet of them versus an equivalent fleet of the others, I suspect they may do well...