Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Bah I am bored and off work watching movies and chillaxin. I started thinking about timed matches after reading some stuff in the tournament thread.


Okay here is how it works

If players finish within the time allowed X awarded to player say 5 points arbitrarily

If Players finish X minutes say you have 2 hours to play and you go all six turns in 1 hour an a half 10 points.

If players do not finish all six matches but go beyond turn 4 0 points.

If players do not finish 3 rounds before 2 hours -5 points to both players. Players must state why ; privately.

If a player through the tournament scores -15 points Penalized an additional amount if it is stated Slow Play or Stall as reason for his player comments.


You'll notice these are just arbitary values ; it also does not penalize slow moving armies , but does encourage players to finish quickly so that both of them will receive points. Slow play may deduct from your score from one game but if your not really slow playing then the other matches should show that.

It will also encourage people to play faster if they want to finish and cooperate more as they do not want a penalty.

Yea, but I dont want to face someones ork horde list with 1002830197820987 boys when I am running a list with all of 5 models on the board and still not finish the game because footslogging orks make me want to punch babies in the mouth with how long they take to move each individual model that has to be measured because my opponent cant move units fast enough ramble ramble ramble /'ead asplodes.

no.

Yeah but that player will be penalized if all of his games do not finish while you would not be.

IE if all 3 of his games do not finish and its listed that it was because of him he is going to be penalized.

Optionally; you could just drop the lowest of the 3 timed scores unless negative.


IE

I have 0 , -5 , 10. My lowest score is dropped. So I have 10.

he has -5 , -5 , -5 ; his lowest time scores are the same so he ends up with -15.

Sometimes the amount of time required to play comes down to the army types being played, and it seems ourageous to penalize people for bringing a specific army. How would you possibly go about "listing" if it is the player or the army he's playing that causes the problem? It seems like you'll be relying on the opinions of his opponents which turns this into something very similar to a soft score when it comes to making the decision to penalize someone or not. This is dangerous as who knows what an opponent who is in close competition with said "slow" player will say at that point. I know we would all like to BELIEVE that he'd say the correct and truthful answer, but we also all know that there re few amount of people out there who would not do that.

I think assigning points points values to game speed is very dangerous and not an ideal solution to the issue here.

Yeah but with both players it at least is not one sided either both players get points / no points or penalized.


I dunno I guess taking away the penalization score would work as to just be a encouragemnt instead of a punishment.

So instead you have those that finish the game in time rewarded.

Caffran9 wrote:Sometimes the amount of time required to play comes down to the army types being played, and it seems ourageous to penalize people for bringing a specific army. How would you possibly go about "listing" if it is the player or the army he's playing that causes the problem? It seems like you'll be relying on the opinions of his opponents which turns this into something very similar to a soft score when it comes to making the decision to penalize someone or not. This is dangerous as who knows what an opponent who is in close competition with said "slow" player will say at that point. I know we would all like to BELIEVE that he'd say the correct and truthful answer, but we also all know that there re few amount of people out there who would not do that.

I think assigning points points values to game speed is very dangerous and not an ideal solution to the issue here.

You're in a tournament and need to adopt a tournament mentality.. If your army CANNOT abide by the mission rules of atleast 5 turns, or 6 then you should pick a different army. Thats like saying "Oh its not fair that the football game lasts an hour.. we need ATLEAST 90 mins to play OUR game"

If thats the case, your team loses because the other team is BETTER than you.. Most 40k tournaments are a total joke if you try to use them to compare skill. Sports are a great way to compare tournaments.. would you even bother watching a game that you knew had a 50% chance of not even being finished? Come on.. why the double standard?

A game that is not played to COMPLETION has 0 merit when applying it to a players skill (or score).. Every single game at a tournament should be completed, if this is not being done then something has to change

Its one of the prime failings of the 40k competitive arena (the others being FAQ/Judges who cant follow them and the scoring system)

Kirasu wrote:
You're in a tournament and need to adopt a tournament mentality.. If your army CANNOT abide by the mission rules of atleast 5 turns, or 6 then you should pick a different army. Thats like saying "Oh its not fair that the football game lasts an hour.. we need ATLEAST 90 mins to play OUR game"

If thats the case, your team loses because the other team is BETTER than you.. Most 40k tournaments are a total joke if you try to use them to compare skill. Sports are a great way to compare tournaments.. would you even bother watching a game that you knew had a 50% chance of not even being finished? Come on.. why the double standard?

A game that is not played to COMPLETION has 0 merit when applying it to a players skill (or score).. Every single game at a tournament should be completed, if this is not being done then something has to change

Its one of the prime failings of the 40k competitive arena (the others being FAQ/Judges who cant follow them and the scoring system)

QFT

You have turned the thousand raging voices in my head into a chorus of.... good. (I'm bad with words)

I still feel that a better and fairer method is simply to split time between the two players. Instead of sharing two hours they get an hour each.

If you run out the clock then it's going to hurt you quite badly - it's not going to cause a problem for your oppponent.

I agree, that was the way I did my timed play for tournaments

Each person gets half the time.. I also decided that the tournament should provide "free" setup time and matchups were announced well in advance so that the horde/slow players could get setting up fast

I like the more encouraging route.

Do not finish beyond 3 turns in the two hours 0

Finish all turns with in the time 5 points