Kingfig
newb
Mantic Points: +1/-0
 Offline
Posts: 21
|
 |
« on: February 26, 2012, 08:09:02 pm » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Faulkes
M
Mantic Points: +8/-0
Offline
Posts: 88
Painting Dwarfs and Orcs
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2012, 10:29:53 am » |
|
I'd love to come and play, but I can't justify traveling to Edinburgh for a single days gaming. BTW, you might want to look at the scoring for the Pillage scenario. The way I read it you can't ever get the maximum "20-0" score as the maximum VP score is 500 (control all 5 objectives).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kingfig
newb
Mantic Points: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 21
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 27, 2012, 10:48:12 pm » |
|
Well we have a big day planed and it our first so maybe next time we will have a 2day tournament and you can come  On the scoring, this is very deliberate the best score for the winner is 15points (control all 5 objectives), the loser would get 10points (control all 0 objectives) in short 1 point pre objective. Both side are forced to fight if they what to win! |
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Faulkes
M
Mantic Points: +8/-0
Offline
Posts: 88
Painting Dwarfs and Orcs
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2012, 12:56:33 pm » |
|
Mmm
But if I don't get any objectives (for example, by being tabled) I still get 10 points; whilst my ultra-aggressive opponent gets only 15 points. In the other games, being tabled gets 0 and being aggressive gets 20.
My suggestion (take it as you will) is that the objectives count towards winning the game and then work out VPs to add (or subtract) a bonus score. For example, 2 points for every objective held (0 to 10 points) then add/subtract up to another 10 points for damage caused.
The invitational used Tournament Points (TPs) to define who won each battle; 3 for win, 1 for draw, 0 for loss. In addition, "attrition points" (which are the same as VPs as best as I can see) were calculated and used to separate people on the same TPs.
|
|
|
|
|
Kingfig
newb
Mantic Points: +1/-0
Offline
Posts: 21
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 29, 2012, 01:17:56 am » |
|
Again, its set up is deliberate this is the middle game of a set of only 3 games, the low score here is a deliberate attempt to keep gamers level for the last game, while it seems odd we feel it will help to keep things more on edge rather than having absolute clear winners at the end of game 2.
Things would have been a lot different if we were running things over 2 days with more games, as there would have been more chance for players to make up for bad games and so on.
Right now we like the way we think it will play out, but we may well be proven wrong on the day and find it was pants… if we are we will look back on things like your advice and what happened on the day and take what’s learned and make changes to the next tournament.
Thanks for you feedback.
kennyk
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 01:30:14 am by Kingfig »
|
Report Spam
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
