Good Idea!
Quote from: Gargantua on July 20, 2012, 08:27:01 pm
Well here’s one for the records folks.
GLOBAL 1940 ALPHA 3.9+ via TRIPLE-A
Gen con (MiamiUmike) -VS- AA.org (Gargantua)
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27887.45
Now, now - let’s be clear on this. You are playing someone who has played this game once with the original OOB rules and zero times under Alpha +3. You are playing someone who missed one key line out of about 30 pages of rules. And, if I recall, given that this was supposed to be a friendly game - you turned down a chance to continue the game by simply allowing me to make a different purchase to put units on Japan and pick up from there….You must not have been too sure of yourself to not want to continue… �
So - just keep that in mind before you crow about your victory too much - �
Regards,
MM
BB,
Seriously, if you are “offended” by my statement then you got serious issues. Being one of “Smorey’s boys”, I see that hypersensitivity is contagious. :roll:
BB is only offended that he just joined on July 15 and has 6 posts so he has to bark loud to draw attention. :mrgreen:
As far as the clock procedures would go, I think it would need some playtesting first
Just bought a chess clock. I’ll see if I can get a timed pick-up game or two in at GenCon, see how it plays and get back to you…
I need someone to explain a bit better how this chess clock idea will work.
Let’s say the tournament round is set for 6 hours (which is what AA50 games are set to currently). This would then mean each team has 3 hours of time? In the middle of round 6, Italy is up and opps - the Axis run out of time - they automatically lose?
If this is correct, then I guess that means we want to have NO new people play the game. Not even people who have played but are not true ‘experts’. The only situation I could see possibly thinking about using this idea would be in a Masters type tournament. That would be it. Otherwise, you will kill any non-hardcore player from ever even attempting a tournament game. For the Masters, it might work.
I’d be willing to give it a try - just to see how it goes - but I cannot see how this helps grow the number of people who would want to play in a tournament.
MM
I need someone to explain a bit better how this chess clock idea will work.
Let’s say the tournament round is set for 6 hours (which is what AA50 games are set to currently). This would then mean each team has 3 hours of time? In the middle of round 6, Italy is up and opps - the Axis run out of time - they automatically lose?
If this is correct, then I guess that means we want to have NO new people play the game. Not even people who have played but are not true ‘experts’. The only situation I could see possibly thinking about using this idea would be in a Masters type tournament. That would be it. Otherwise, you will kill any non-hardcore player from ever even attempting a tournament game. For the Masters, it might work.
I’d be willing to give it a try - just to see how it goes - but I cannot see how this helps grow the number of people who would want to play in a tournament.
MM
Then don’t tell that to WotC since in their magic tournements they have them timed, and at the end of that time whoever is up wins, thats life get over it, in a tourney of say 6 hours if ea. player/team took 15 minutes per turn, that would still allow 12 turns per player/team, which would definately give an idea of who the clear winner is, but then you will find some fault in that hypothesis, since anything that takes away from your style of play is wrong. at least BB is willing to give a try, but your ready to doom it before it starts.
@Scarapis:
Then don’t tell that to WotC since in their magic tournements they have them timed, and at the end of that time whoever is up wins, thats life get over it
WOTC does not treat their A&A tournaments the same way as their Magic tournaments. I used to play in Magic PTQs, so I know. Magic tourneys are multiple qualifier events throughout the year, not just at the cons, and they have cash and invitations to the Pro Tour on the line (Pro Tour winners get $40,000), so that’s a whole different level of seriousness. For A&A, at Origins and GenCon, WOTC is happy if there’s a good turnout and Greg organizes events across the variety of their product line. For their part, players have been thrilled with the fantastic prizes Greg procures within the budget WOTC gives him. I wouldn’t want there to be cash or some other heavy duty prize on the line because I think that has the potential to turn the tourneys ugly in a hurry.
@Scarapis:
…in a tourney of say 6 hours if ea. player/team took 15 minutes per turn, that would still allow 12 turns per player/team, which would definately give an idea of who the clear winner is, but then you will find some fault in that hypothesis, since anything that takes away from your style of play is wrong. at least BB is willing to give a try, but your ready to doom it before it starts.
Mike’s points are valid, and he is not trying to doom anything, merely trying to maintain and increase A&A event attendance at the cons across the board. I think a timed event is worth consideration, but as I mentioned earlier, try it out in a Masters or expert level event first and see what traction it gains. We can disagree on the number of rounds–I think 5-min country turns (15 minutes per side as you say) to fit in 12 rounds in 6 hours is a bit brisk. Seven rounds (8.5-min country turns) or eight rounds (7.5-min country turns on average) seems more doable to me. Also, as I talk about in the separate FTF thread that djensen started, what happens if 6 hours expires in the middle of Germany turn 8, with both sides having used up their 180 minutes exactly? The 12-round target has not been met by either side, neither side has timed out, and the game is not at the end of a US turn. So this format is trickier to figure out than it first seems, but still worth considering–I’m not dooming it by any means.
BB
but the whole idea of the clocks is to prevent people from taking forever to make their turns, thats why chess tourneys came out with the clocks, they would have players who took hours to make a move, and i’m sure there are people who will take forever to decide their moves in this game, when I played A&A (original MB) i’d take a minute to make my move and a couple minutes for combat resolution so a few minutes at the most.
not too mention the idea of a timed game appeals to me because it adds that sense of pressure the commanders felt in the war, have to make quick decisions.
not too mention with a lack of timed rules, what say if a player who is up realises he screwed up and is going to lose, so he decides to stall the game so he does not lose? you need time no matter how you look at it, or the game can be abused.
Scarapis - you really need to stop comparing Magic to A&A - they are two entirely different games and gaming systems, as BB has pointed out. WIth that logic, I can compare Monopoly and Rise and Decline of the Third Reich and try to put the same constraints on both games….
People stalling and messing around is always a possibility - but - in the many years (6+ now) that I have either played or ran Greg’s tournaments we have very rarely ever had problems. If someone is stalling or playing excessively slow, they get warned. If they continue - they forfeit. I am not sure how many years it has been since that happened.
And you need to read my posts a bit closer - I said I would be willing to give it a try and, in fact,
I think in a Masters or ‘expert’ tournament it could work. It will NEVER work, IMHO, for a tournament designed to attract as many people as possible. As BB also stated - that is the goal for Greg and for WotC for the A&A line of games.
MM
Scarapis - you really need to stop comparing Magic to A&A - they are two entirely different games and gaming systems, as BB has pointed out. WIth that logic, I can compare Monopoly and Rise and Decline of the Third Reich and try to put the same constraints on both games….
People stalling and messing around is always a possibility - but - in the many years (6+ now) that I have either played or ran Greg’s tournaments we have very rarely ever had problems. If someone is stalling or playing excessively slow, they get warned. If they continue - they forfeit. I am not sure how many years it has been since that happened.
And you need to read my posts a bit closer - I said I would be willing to give it a try and, in fact,
I think in a Masters or ‘expert’ tournament it could work. It will NEVER work, IMHO, for a tournament designed to attract as many people as possible. As BB also stated - that is the goal for Greg and for WotC for the A&A line of games.MM
therein lies the problem, 1 A&A and Magic are both ran by the same company, and WotC has a habit of form fitting all of their games into one type set, so don’t be surprised if WotC starts installing time frames.
as to getting new players involved, AA50 or even 42 won’t do it, you want to get new players then 41 is where its at, its simple and easy to learn and play, and with A&A 41, most time limits and such are out the window since its a quick easy game.
I need someone to explain a bit better how this chess clock idea will work.
Let’s say the tournament round is set for 6 hours (which is what AA50 games are set to currently). This would then mean each team has 3 hours of time? In the middle of round 6, Italy is up and opps - the Axis run out of time - they automatically lose?
If this is correct, then I guess that means we want to have NO new people play the game. Not even people who have played but are not true ‘experts’. The only situation I could see possibly thinking about using this idea would be in a Masters type tournament. That would be it. Otherwise, you will kill any non-hardcore player from ever even attempting a tournament game. For the Masters, it might work.
I’d be willing to give it a try - just to see how it goes - but I cannot see how this helps grow the number of people who would want to play in a tournament.
MM
I discuss the check clock idea further here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27947.0
