Wednesday, December 5, 2012

Some Tournament Theorizing for the Arkham Games February Tournaments

I am on a roll! Three blog posts in as many days! Woo!

I have been writing more on my blog, mainly because it is a pleasent escape from my writings concerning The Handmaid's Tale and Confucian Philosophy.

Anyway, I wanted to write a short article on some of the philosophies behind the creation of the missions and tournament rules for the upcoming 40k tournament I am hosting at Arkham Games. By explicating my feelings on the matter, it may help myself in furthering the tournament scene. It may give some greater insight for those unsure of how to handle the tournament.

First of all, I want to point out that the tournament is automatically won by the 3-0 player, assuming only one exists. I genuinely feel that tournaments should be based primarily on winning the games. While this may create a feeling of WAAC or strong competitiveness, I think that is ok. People should want to perform well, and they should want to try and get some bragging rights amongst the store. Friendly competition is overall healthy for the store and community. It generates more lists, more discussion, and more items being purchased. Everybody benefits from some friendly competition.

Next, there are a series of tiebreakers built into the tournament. This is planned in the case of two 3-0s or several 2-1s. Having this series of tiebreakers will allow a definitive placement and ranking. This is important to pairings and final standings.

I also want to point out the simplicity of the missions. They are directly from the main rulebook, with no modifications or changes to them. I allow for fortifications and allies. I utilize mysterious terrain and mysterious objectives. The first is a little bit more rare simply due to the terrain available at the store, but the mysterious objectives can really add some interesting dynamics to the game. They are not game-breaking, but they are useful and should be considered when playing the game. These decisions will allow for those entering the scene to rely on their main rulebook for guidance. There is no additional mission primer or set of FAQs that can entirely change the game being played. It's simple and easy for newcomers to understand.

Finally, I think the addition of painting and sportmanship scores are very important for the community. There is some tangible benefit for painting your army, but it is not entirely necessary. Sportsmanship is encouraged by making it scored, but it will be a lenient system. People cannot simply dock points just because it will hinder their progress in the tournament. While these scores are not competitive, they represent the minority of scores. They can still make a difference, but they won't be the bottom line in placement.

Hopefully, these points explain better my tournament structure. I am always open to criticism and ideas for the tournaments. Please comment if there are any ideas you may have.

No comments:

Post a Comment