|
|
Post by malkcntent on May 26, 2009 17:01:38 GMT -5
With the poor response to our GenCon tourney, I thought I'd see if folks are even interested in tournament/league rules for AE-WWII. Please post your thoughts/feedback here. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by dboeren on May 26, 2009 17:38:48 GMT -5
I just thought I'd mention that I had my first demo recently and am planning to do SOMETHING at Gencon. I may not have a force ready by then to play in the tournament (and I may have schedule conflicts) but I will at least try to get into the smaller event.
Hmm, checking the Gencon site I do indeed have conflicts with some other tournaments I'm entered in. However, I am planning to sign up for one of the Black Gold sessions on the 13th, probably the 11am one.
|
|
fattdex
Lieutenant
Halt! Hammerzeit!
Posts: 464
|
Post by fattdex on May 26, 2009 21:52:30 GMT -5
I'm most definitely interested in tourney/league rules. We're just getting on 7 players at our club now, and I know of a few other close by (hello Cillione), so as you know we're planning on hosting a tourney around August.
I think it's hard to get enough people together to run a tournament at times, but as you get the ball rolling and people have more players in their area, it will be easier to get players drafted into tourneys.
We're not having any stipulation that models must be correct OR painted personally when we run things at the club (which you can't do at gencon as it needs to look pretty), just to get people into actually playing the game since it's still in its infancy. I'd think we'd have fluff and painting bonus scores though.
We're going to start running a 6 player map-campaign soon which is a bit easier to ease into, then after this run a tournament.
Having said all that, i think tournaments are the cancer that is killing smaller games, and I much prefer campaigns with a good story or chaarcter development, but it's what most people know and it's good for (Andrew to win) bragging rights and trophies.
|
|
|
|
Post by malkcntent on May 26, 2009 22:01:43 GMT -5
Having said all that, i think tournaments are the cancer that is killing smaller games, and I much prefer campaigns with a good story or chaarcter development, but it's what most people know and it's good for (Andrew to win) bragging rights and trophies. I agree that I am not at all a competitive player. Sure, I like to win, but the game itself should be fun rather than the experience of winning. My goal is to create a tournament/league system with a campaign-style that becomes the best of both worlds. I think I have a good starting point down and just need to finalize everything. Good points so far! I look forward to more feedback. |
|
|
|
Post by Cilionelle on May 26, 2009 23:14:49 GMT -5
While I like the idea of a tourney to pull players together and play more games, I don't like the idea of competative gaming for AE-WWII. I think it's too story driven to stand up well to the ardure of tourney gamers, who are a hard bunch. From what I've seen, the people who frequent this forum are genuinely interested in the content as much as the gameplay, the style and the feel of the game rather than just it's win/loss ratio. I think that's a precious (like Sméagol) thing and I'd hate to lose it.
|
|
marcalla
Private
Vault 13 loves ya baby!
Posts: 49
|
Post by marcalla on May 27, 2009 13:16:12 GMT -5
Like most of the other posters, I'm really torn on this.
On the one hand tournaments do tend to bring new player's to the party. And gives them goal's to play for. Its gives a tangible sense of accomplishment to players. Also for myself tournaments are a way to play an expanded group of folks as I live in a small town (nearest game store is 30 min away and they don't really do tabletop much) so generally speaking I have a small player base of about 5-6 people to draw from we've almost all got our own tables/terrain to play on.
On the other hand, I agree that tournaments bring out the worst in players. Tournaments tend to take the "hobby" aspect out of the hobby. Players (outside of tournaments) tend to take their lead from the tourney scene. IE they forget how to resolve an issue with the rules together with their opponent. Opting instead to complain there's no FAQ answer for this situation, and that the designers should have thought ahead to this eventuality etc etc etc. Tournaments will give you a very very good "stress" test of your rules however as players try to find every loophole to give themselves an edge over their competition.
One thing I think would be interesting is to have x number of game scenarios set for each tournament in a linked fashion. IE say 4 games in a tournament. Game 1 is a scouting type scenario, game 2 is perhaps a capture type mission, game 3 is a raid on supplies. and game 4 is drag out brawl. Perhaps another tournament could have a grab the technology theme. I guess what I'm saying is that I suppose I'd like to see "theme' tournaments where the story side isn't lost to a 3-4 game's of "pitched battle".
|
|
|
|
Post by malkcntent on May 27, 2009 13:28:57 GMT -5
One thing I think would be interesting is to have x number of game scenarios set for each tournament in a linked fashion. IE say 4 games in a tournament. Game 1 is a scouting type scenario, game 2 is perhaps a capture type mission, game 3 is a raid on supplies. and game 4 is drag out brawl. Perhaps another tournament could have a grab the technology theme. I guess what I'm saying is that I suppose I'd like to see "theme' tournaments where the story side isn't lost to a 3-4 game's of "pitched battle". This is exactly what I had in mind and a tournament/league rules-set for AE-WWII would look a lot like that. |
|
|
|
Post by dboeren on May 27, 2009 14:31:34 GMT -5
Having thought this through some more, I would prefer storyline battles arranged in a mini-campaign over a tournament. I already play some more tournament oriented games than honestly are more suited to that task. Competitive tournaments are not AE-WWII's strength. Play to your strengths. There can still be a winner and loser in a campaign, but the primary goal should be an enjoyable experience for everyone - not whether someone has figured out a way to break the game by exploiting a rules loophole or overpowered combination of models. There are too few games of the storyline sort out there, and if you look at that from another angle that means that AE-WWII is in a niche where it does not face very much competition. If the game is to flourish, it will be by exploiting this niche.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cilionelle on May 27, 2009 17:42:23 GMT -5
It would be horrible to see something like ChumanSpam™ become the norm for this game.
|
|
|
|
Post by GI Robot on May 27, 2009 18:37:27 GMT -5
I really like the idea of a linked game tournament, and I'd be at Gencon this summer if it was not for the fact I work in automotive  On a side note one of the things that got me interested in this game is the forum. People treat other people w/ respect here. You don't hear things like "This unit sucks!" and "This army is too powerful!". Sorry if that was off topic a bit. |
|
|
|
Post by Darkson on May 27, 2009 18:47:04 GMT -5
That's I think the draw of AE is we have a great set of players. Look at the other Weird games that hit around the same time as us... Where are they?
I think that what Matt has planed for the competitive gaming for AE will retain the feel that players love of AE but add an element that will draw new folks from other systems.
|
|
|
|
Post by mkcontra on May 27, 2009 18:48:18 GMT -5
You could always make them "team" tournaments. "Winners and losers" could be determined based on based on factions. Basically, it'd be like one of the standard AE series of events that DD has been putting on each year, but with more than one game for each scenario. Wins per side could be totaled to determine the winning side for that scenario. You could then maybe have a "best of faction" or something...maybe a "best player" for each scenario or something. Just throwing ideas out, here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cilionelle on May 27, 2009 20:14:23 GMT -5
That oucl work, as long as wins were averaged over the number of players in the tourney. Otherwise, the 30 American players will certainly dominate the 5 German and 5 Soviet players, just by sheer weight of numbers.
The second word in the post is 'could'.
|
|
|
|
Post by dboeren on May 27, 2009 23:22:20 GMT -5
the 30 American players will certainly dominate the 5 German and 5 Soviet players, just by sheer weight of numbers./quote] Is there some reason we suspect that the vast majority of players will be using Americans? |
|
|
|
Post by Darkson on May 28, 2009 1:07:38 GMT -5
Most players will be SS.  |
|
On a side note one of the things that got me interested in this game is the forum. People treat other people w/ respect here. You don't hear things like "This unit sucks!" and "This army is too powerful!". Sorry if that was off topic a bit.
