GenCon Indy 2012

@djensen:

The time sync isn’t thinking about NOs, it’s counting and explaining to beginner users.

I also disagree and I think this reaction is too strong. It’s one thing to have an online tournament but it’s completely different to do it in person with a time limit. Sure, maybe AA50 isn’t quite as interesting without NOs but it’s still Axis & Allies.

If complexity and # of rules are what you crave, then stick to global. AA50 is just as intense a tournament experience with NO’s or without. The fact that its a limited time with specific win conditions make the game pretty interesting.

I say try it before you knock it.

Oh for sure.

If you guys want to play golf with a soccer ball, that’s none of my business. You’re tournament, and I shouldn’t knock it until I try it. :P

@Gargantua:

Oh for sure.

If you guys want to play golf with a soccer ball, that’s none of my business. You’re tournament, and I shouldn’t knock it until I try it. :P

And the troll bait dump continues…

Oh you’ve got it all wrong, I’m drinking your kool-aid now.  I’ve seen the light! It’s time to transition to the next plain!

So far, I’ve played 6 PBEM games of AA50-41 in my life, and here are the results:

One non-league game:  11 rounds, opponent resigned when Germany fell

League game 1:  12 rounds, opponent resigned when Russia fell
League game 2:  6 rounds (opponent resigned early)
League game 3:  currently in the 17th round
League game 4:  currently in the 23rd round
League game 5:  currently in the 20th round

Quite frankly, I don’t see how a quality game of AA50 (at least the 1941 setup) could end consistently in 7 rounds.  The game is too full of possibilities.  Therefore, it must be very difficult to come up with tourney rules to shorten the game.

That being said, here is a suggestion from my tournament chess days.  Put a clock on the players – a chess clock if you will.  Games should EASILY be able to go 10-15 rounds in 6 hours.  12 rounds would be 1 round every 30 minutes.  The clock would make players who play too slow for tournament settings speed up.  By rounds 12 the outcome is at least more certain than by round 7, when the game should just be getting started.

Just a thought…

@DizzKneeLand33:

So far, I’ve played 6 PBEM games of AA50-41 in my life, and here are the results:

One non-league game:  11 rounds, opponent resigned when Germany fell

League game 1:  12 rounds, opponent resigned when Russia fell
League game 2:  6 rounds (opponent resigned early)
League game 3:  currently in the 17th round
League game 4:  currently in the 23rd round
League game 5:  currently in the 20th round

Quite frankly, I don’t see how a quality game of AA50 (at least the 1941 setup) could end consistently in 7 rounds.  The game is too full of possibilities.  Therefore, it must be very difficult to come up with tourney rules to shorten the game.

That being said, here is a suggestion from my tournament chess days.  Put a clock on the players – a chess clock if you will.  Games should EASILY be able to go 10-15 rounds in 6 hours.  12 rounds would be 1 round every 30 minutes.  The clock would make players who play too slow for tournament settings speed up.  By rounds 12 the outcome is at least more certain than by round 7, when the game should just be getting started.

Just a thought…

Suggested the chess clock idea to Smorey ages ago…again he wouldn’t listen to reason.

@questioneer:

@DizzKneeLand33:

So far, I’ve played 6 PBEM games of AA50-41 in my life, and here are the results:

One non-league game:�  11 rounds, opponent resigned when Germany fell

League game 1:�  12 rounds, opponent resigned when Russia fell
League game 2:�  6 rounds (opponent resigned early)
League game 3:�  currently in the 17th round
League game 4:�  currently in the 23rd round
League game 5:�  currently in the 20th round

Quite frankly, I don’t see how a quality game of AA50 (at least the 1941 setup) could end consistently in 7 rounds.�  The game is too full of possibilities.�  Therefore, it must be very difficult to come up with tourney rules to shorten the game.

That being said, here is a suggestion from my tournament chess days.�  Put a clock on the players – a chess clock if you will.�  Games should EASILY be able to go 10-15 rounds in 6 hours.�  12 rounds would be 1 round every 30 minutes.�  The clock would make players who play too slow for tournament settings speed up.�  By rounds 12 the outcome is at least more certain than by round 7, when the game should just be getting started.

Just a thought…

Suggested the chess clock idea to Smorey ages ago…again he wouldn’t listen to reason.

Will you write a check for the clocks? Who do you expect to pay for all those?

@squirecam:

@questioneer:

@DizzKneeLand33:

So far, I’ve played 6 PBEM games of AA50-41 in my life, and here are the results:

One non-league game:��  11 rounds, opponent resigned when Germany fell

League game 1:��  12 rounds, opponent resigned when Russia fell
League game 2:��  6 rounds (opponent resigned early)
League game 3:��  currently in the 17th round
League game 4:��  currently in the 23rd round
League game 5:��  currently in the 20th round

Quite frankly, I don’t see how a quality game of AA50 (at least the 1941 setup) could end consistently in 7 rounds.��  The game is too full of possibilities.��  Therefore, it must be very difficult to come up with tourney rules to shorten the game.

That being said, here is a suggestion from my tournament chess days.��  Put a clock on the players – a chess clock if you will.��  Games should EASILY be able to go 10-15 rounds in 6 hours.��  12 rounds would be 1 round every 30 minutes.��  The clock would make players who play too slow for tournament settings speed up.��  By rounds 12 the outcome is at least more certain than by round 7, when the game should just be getting started.

Just a thought…

Suggested the chess clock idea to Smorey ages ago…again he wouldn’t listen to reason.

Will you write a check for the clocks? Who do you expect to pay for all those?

yeah those $1 stopwatches from the dollar store can get expensive.

I know right,

Can’t even afford to pay attention.

What’s the cost to get a team entered into Gencon?  I mean, what would happen if it was $1 more, or bring your own stopwatch?

Maybe the roof would collapse like that mall in Onterrible.

Will you write a check for the clocks?

You know what. YES. I would cut the cheque and pay the bill.

Provided you actually listen to fan input, instead of -relegating- people to the “suggestion box”. Hold me to it.

From what I can tell, apparently speaking in person about the tourney style is a totally unacceptable form of communication, and damned is anyone who tries to encourage change.

Writing online also seems to ill-advised as anyone who DARES to have another opinion should be overlooked or invalidated, because their paperwork didn’t make it to the “suggestion box” at the event.

It’s clear from the history of the tourney, and it’s attendee’s, limited interest and ear is being lent to the players. Not when Pride is on the line. (Infact, from what I’ve read here, only -eye- is lent to written submission, everything else is veto’d irregardless of content)

Maybe we’re wrong, maybe Smorey does have it figured all out perfectly, but maybe it’s time to try it differently?

Regardless of how you slice the cake, GENERATING INTEREST in GEN CON should be the primary objective of the pre tourney-effort, not pigeon-holing play style, and excluding/belittling alternate opinions.

What a great way to treat people.

In my -obviously- worthless opinion, the tournament should suit the players/attendee’s, not the other way around.  I hope someone prints that and puts it in the “suggestion box” for me.

http://www.nextag.com/chess-clocks/stores-html

Theres the website.

You can order 30 clocks or cut a check for the cost plus shipping.

After delivery I’d be happy to discuss your suggestions personally and in detail.

Just 30 clocks will do?

Am I allowed to advertise on them?

Seriously, $1000 that is “reusable” every year (we used to beat the hell out of the clocks during blitz and they still survived – how many times would it be touched during AA50?) doesn’t seem that unreasonable.

But, I have a cheaper idea.

My cell phone comes with a stopwatch (I time my grilling by it).  How about yours?

Think 30 clocks is overkill since that would indicate you get 60 players for the event, I’m thinking more like half or less, 15 clocks would be more then well enough, since with the attitudes being shown by the event coordinator is not winning over many people (especially on the forums here) to go to the con and play.

Or if the event is 2 v 2, that would infer 120 players for the event….

I’ve sources some clocks as cheap as $15.

DizzKneeLand is also correct too, there’s probably an APP for that.  Or a program people could use on a laptop.  Or a walmart watch.

I could also possibly secure a corporate sponsor, IF that’s allowed.  Or maybe I’ll just put my face all over them. :D

If we buy these clocks, it’s then implied that you MUST use them?  As there is no sense in buying something that won’t be used.  What are your thoughts/comments Squire?

If someone actually invests in clocks for everyone, custom/face painted/advertised or not, I’d say they should be tried.

Whatever is used though must be uniform. Cant have people using “watches” or “phones” or trust me I’m keeeping a written sheet…Which is why chess clocks would be uniform and not able to be manipulated.

Of course, until I actually saw said clocks, I’d be skeptical.

@DizzKneeLand33:

Or if the event is 2 v 2, that would infer 120 players for the event….

IIRC, GC Milwaukee used to draw 54+ unique teams. So its not unheard of in the past.

Dont think AA42 second ed will garner that record though. Due to limited edition of AA50, that also would never hit 50 teams, cause many people dont even have the game.

BTW, I do have a mint sealed spare copy. Sincere offers always accepted.

Trade you your copy for some clocks? :P

How much does Gencon cost to attend?  and how many people/teams does it usually see?