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.

Just wondering if any of the other large events around the country have considered the Nova Open format.

I heard a rumor that bolter beach might be picking up something close to it.

And I would like to know if others might as well.

I for one would have much more interested in attending events like adepticon and such if the culmination of the weekend was something more than a 3 round RTT. (its a fine weekend, it just doesn't do much for me personally)

So would the community be more willing to attend events that ran 7-8 rounds over 2 days and used a format like the nova open?
Also have any of the event organizers considered switching to this type of event?

Although a TON of smaller events have been contacting me, and a GT in Ireland and Australia respectively, to use the format ... I think larger events shouldn't be encouraged to abandon their unique approaches for it.


I do know that Adepticon and others are moving toward multi-day and knock-out for the finalists, while rewarding any and all undefeateds if they can't pare it down to just a single. That said, that's just a component of what we did, not "our format," and I wouldn't want people being branded as "following us" (as I know certain blogs are going to try and claim).

/wave Timmah.

AdeptiCon is not adopting the NOVA format, however we stand in solidarity with the basic intentions of the NOVA.

We have been actively reworking the AdeptiCon 40K Championships since January and I have posted on here in the past about some of the options we were looking at. 2010 was an anomaly in terms of attendance. We had to increase the tickets available in the Championships 3 times and eventually landed with 80 more players than we originally intended with 59 more on a waitlist (299 in total). At that point it was too late to make any major adjustments since the hotel, tables, staff and everything were locked down. No question that 2011 would be different.

At AdeptiCon 2008 and 2009 we ran a parallel Invitational event based the top finishers in various other Circuit events. No Circuit in 2009 meant no Invitational in 2010. Going back to that format in 2011 is sort of pointless now that the GW is doing Las Vegas.

AdeptiCon is a massive weekend and there is plenty of opportunity for different approaches to gaming and 40K in general.

So what will the Championships look like in 2011? 8-rounds over 2 days (Friday and Sunday). 240 players. W/L/D scoring with one true champion. New Sportsmanship system. Revised PST system. A draft of the rules will be out on Friday, as well as an article discussing the approach and theory behind the new format on the AdeptiCon 2011 Development Blog.

Sorry prolly should have just specified W/L/D scoring instead of saying "the nova open format" since its not like they invented it. (no offense mike )

That being said, what Matthias posted sounds very interesting and makes me excited enough to prolly be attending this year.

The problem for us and a W/L/D format has always been the size of the event. Combine that with moving to a 3-day format and trying to fit 3 large 40K events in over the weekend. One event (the Championships) has traditionally landed on Sunday and has to wrap up by 4:30 in order to facilitate breakdown and allow people to catch flights that evening.

The Team Tournament has always been (and always will be) our flagship event. Sadly this meant that Championships suffered a little and with the massive growth in numbers in 2010 it took it to an unacceptable level. The decision was made in late 2009 to make the necessary adjustments for 2011 to put the event back in it's proper place. What that exactly meant at the time we were not 100% sure (save going to a 7-round format).

That said - I have had countless discussions with Mike, many other tournament organizers and a number of attendees over the past 5-6 months as we have prepped these draft ideas (and ideas for the Team Event). No question that Mike had a minor influence on direction, even if we philosophically disagree on a few points. He is an extremely approachable and respectful person...and that in and of itself has been my main motivator in working with him on a couple of project ideas. Sadly these traits are very rare on the internet.

This format is spreading.

Here's an upcoming RTT being hosted by a Dakkaite: http://orlando40k.3.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=3640&st=0&#entry37566

It's not 'spreading'...it's inspiration. It's trading ideas. It's talking about what works and what doesn't work. It's how I'd like to see the future of events evolve. Sadly there is a MASSIVE move for division these days, so just on the cusp of possible changes, people are retreating behind their defensive barriers and trying to make this a you vs. them issue.

Look at how much Mike was inspired by AdeptiCon. Swag Bags, poker chips, PST missions, plans for future expansion...and no doubt you will see reciprocated inspiration in the 40K Championships at AdeptiCon 2011, the level of transparency in planning, etc.

Fortunately, the best of us aren't retreating behind our defensive barriers. Tards like Tasty trying to stir pots are irrelevant beyond their own little spheres, and other than that source (that didn't attend or even observe) feedback has been intensely positive.

I think the partnership that's grown between the organizers of NOVA, Warcon and Adepticon will yield a lot of positives in terms of improving the "standard" for what a convention/tourney should be going forward.

+1 to Matthias.

The Nova is inspiring, inspiring in the idea that certain concepts can be used in a tournament format and the world doesn't end.

A good idea is a good idea, and the world is not going to explode is a random RTT somewhere uses the same format. In the thread I posted, you can even see where I disagreed with a few things with the Nova and started making my own changes.

Take feedback, adjust to what the player base is wanting, and run good events. That is all that matter, everything else is trivial.

Matthias wrote:It's not 'spreading'...it's inspiration. It's trading ideas. It's talking about what works and what doesn't work. It's how I'd like to see the future of events evolve. Sadly there is a MASSIVE move for division these days, so just on the cusp of possible changes, people are retreating behind their defensive barriers and trying to make this a you vs. them issue.

Look at how much Mike was inspired by AdeptiCon. Swag Bags, poker chips, PST missions, plans for future expansion...and no doubt you will see reciprocated inspiration in the 40K Championships at AdeptiCon 2011, the level of transparency in planning, etc.

Very true.

Like I said before, a swiss style tournament like Nova wasn't a new idea. It was just one of the first times it was attempted in the 40k community.

Now that people see it can work (granted you probably need 2 days) it will help other events take a look at the format style and bring it to their own tournaments. Not the exact same tournament (which could get kinda boring tbh) but their own take on it. Trading ideas like this and moving towards a better tournament setup will help the community as a whole.

Hopefully Adepticon will bring new ideas to the table while considering old ones and being inspired by previous tournaments like the Nova Open. Should lead to some pretty awesome tournaments in the future. Provided the community doesn't break down in to petty arguments and squabbles.

Very interested in what you are talking about for Adepticon - as it's a yearly event for me.

Would you have the championship on Friday and Sunday, Team Tournament on Sat, and Gladiator on Thurs????

Aldonis wrote:Very interested in what you are talking about for Adepticon - as it's a yearly event for me.

Would you have the championship on Friday and Sunday, Team Tournament on Sat, and Gladiator on Thurs????

Schedule is still in the works, but for 40K it is looking something like this:

Friday
Warhammer 40K Championships Qualifier - 240 players - 4 rounds - top 16 qualify for finals on Sunday
Smaller 40K Event - Most likely Combat Patrol or a something similar - 60 players

Saturday
Warhammer 40K Team Tournament - 440 players
Warhammer 40K Combat Patrol - 60 players

Sunday
Warhammer 40k Championships Finals - 16 players - 4 rounds
Warhammer 40K AWC Championships (Invite Only) - 16 players
Warhammer 40K Gladiator Tournament - 120 or more players
Warhammer 40K Combat Patrol - 60 players
Warhammer 40K Kill Team Narrative Event - ~20 players
1 or 2 other 40K Events (Dice Like Thunder Podcast Challenge is one we are looking at)

The thought behind splitting the Championships 4 games/4 games split: We originally were looking at 5 games on Friday, but it was just too brutal of a schedule to kick off the weekend. Ultimately we decided that we can make Friday an event all onto itself that feeds into Sunday and then instead of 'punishing' 240 players by making them play a 5th round Friday (all in all a 14 hour day), we would 'punish' the 16 that qualified by making them get up early on Sunday. Of course it's not really punishment assuming they want to be there! This allows us to have a much more relaxed schedule on Friday with full lunch and dinner breaks and still be done no later than 9:30.

Sounds awesome, Matt!

No sports, no comp=no drama

olympia wrote:No sports, no comp=no drama

If only that were true. I still seem to remember lots of Drama in regards to 'missions' that people tend not to like. basically 'comp, through missions and victory conditions.'

And there is always FAQ drama as every ruling of every FAQ has people who disagree about specific rules and cry unholy murder.

And then you have the fun where people abuse paint standards by putting 3 random color polka dots on an unpainted model and say "it's 3 colors! I am legal!" And then those who don't think painting should be required at all at events.

There will never be one 'correct' way to run a tourney that everyone will like. Which is why it is a good thing that people still run tourneys based upon what they like and thier local gaming base wants. I don't support this underground movement to steamroll other events formats with one that appeals to specific people on the internet where vocal internet opinions makes a severe minority sound like a resounding majority. A large number of people who attend these events simply don't post here or the internet at all, so it is still best for event organizers to do what is best for thier local base and not what is best for some random internet user.

The only 'drama' consists of the KP vs. VP debate. This is an important discussion to have. The scoring of the Nova was transparent which is a rarity for U.S. tournaments.

olympia wrote:The only 'drama' consists of the KP vs. VP debate. This is an important discussion to have. The scoring of the Nova was transparent which is a rarity for U.S. tournaments.

And the wonky 'ard boy missions. There was lots of Drama over that one.

If someone feels the format can be changed to help them personally win, there will be drama. Be it KP/VP, custom missions, Game length, Appearance, FAQ rulings, scoring, whatever. And there is no 'correct' position that everyone will 100% agree and accept on all of these issues so there is no universally correct format.

nkelsh, I think we can all agree that scoring systems should be fully transparent.

I think it's best to completely avoid and excoriate overly negative viewpoints.

Matthias and I have both improved our events by taking notes from each other on subjects we were able. Others can all take notes from that ....

An important note also is being transparent, and opening up your format to the input of others. NO one person is smart enough to put forth their best product without input, revision and active / relentless improvement.

olympia wrote:nkelsh, I think we can all agree that scoring systems should be fully transparent.

Well transparency can be good, people then can't claim to be 'screwed by the scoring' as much as they had full disclosure, but it doesn't eliminate the drama.

People hate when they bring the army they enjoy and they do poorly due to missions and scoring. (I would have won but this mission penalized mech!)

People hate when the scoring is transparent and happens to be stacked against the army they wanted to bring. (I wanted to bring my Mech but mission 3 is totally unfair and penalizies them!)

While I appreciate the steps TOs go to 'please' people, sometimes I think they might be going to far to please a small subset of vocal internet voices and in doing so encourage and promote more drama. I would disagree that Sportsmanship and Comp causes drama, the small minority of vocal internet gamers who are totally intolerant of that particular format cause drama and continue to cause drama until TOs are forced to roll over and submit to them. Mainly because people who are ok with those formats simply don't complain and are often not tuned into an internet forum where people argue all day over the 40k competitive tourney scene. I think people cause drama about formats they dislike in order to get things changed to the way they want it because if it isn't how they like it, everyone around will hear about it and have a headache on their hands.

Comp and sportsmanship are another discussion.

I've never seen a LESS dramatic tournament of scale than the Open this year, and I can promise I'm not drinking my bathwater as I state it.

People don't need to be policed; knuckleheads and shitburgers need to be kept out of the scene altogether, b/c they're the type not helped.

As for Comp, well, I could link articles and what-not about how it hurts the little guy and the local far more than anyone else.

I don't think it's as big an issue as put forth, is all; very few TO's worth anything listen to a vocal minority alone ... good ideas should always be incorporated if they can be, and bad ones need to simply remain in the bad pile. It's not complicated ... in fact, worrying about drama is a far worse form of drama!

MVBrandt wrote:
I don't think it's as big an issue as put forth, is all; very few TO's worth anything listen to a vocal minority alone ... good ideas should always be incorporated if they can be, and bad ones need to simply remain in the bad pile. It's not complicated ... in fact, worrying about drama is a far worse form of drama!

But there are people on the forum who are now shouting down TOs who don't 100% accept your format because it is the format that benefits thier style of gaming personally. Not everyone seeking a tourney is going to be seeking that format. There is not a CORRECT way to run a tourney and TOs choosing to try out new ideas from other successful events is good if they think it helps them accomplish what they are trying to do. TOs being bullied into changing thier events to please a vocal minority is bad.

I get upset when someone announces thier tourney and the thread is besieged by people basically saying "Change your format to the NOVA open or else", I don't see them trying to be helpful to making those events better. TOs should implement changes that help them accomplish thier goals and make thier event better, not blindly be forced into a format that makes it better for some who play the game a specific way.

Personally, I have enjoyed the wide variety of differences in tourney formats out there. I think the hobby would be worse off with standardized tourney formats forced upon everyone. (I know that is not your goal MVBrandt, but it is the goal of some)

I get where you're coming from, only the shouting down really hasn't been that bad. At all. A couple individuals have asked about the subject, this thread or wherever ... and if people want to use my format fine, but I don't think ANYONE who doesn't want to is actually changing their format to fit it.

Variety is important; tournament organizers do still have a responsibility to put on quality, transparent events (IMO), but seriously ... where any random individuals have been advocating for their desires (hardly unique to this subject across the intarweb), no one has been going "OK I'LL CHANGE FER YA!"

Not to mention, a very wide number of tournament organizers without the experience to develop their own systems have been contacting me (as they contact Adepticon/etc.) about getting "ready to go" packets from us, and that will help too - the bigger events having basically done the homework and hard lessons toward creating a "dummy guide" for people to start their tournament organizing experience with field guides.

I can't say that I have seen any threads where people yelled at a TO and told them to switch to the Nova Open format.

I think TO's will continue to either run what will bring in the most people or try and push their vision of 40k on us.

A standardized tournament wouldn't be as bad/harmful to the hobby as you think.

(I know everyone is going to hate me but...) MTG has a standard tournament format and there is still plenty of innovation and variety inside of it. Through different formats and the like.

I can't wait Matt I have about 20 people coming from Maryland to see you again. Can't wait to get there and win some more games. Great show this year can't wait for next year. Don't let all the internet warriors fool you Mike's way of running a tournament was allot of fun. Is his way the only way… No. Is his way the best way, how would I know.

I found it to be a good way of running a tournament. We have used this type of format at both of our GTs this year and it worked very well. But that doesn’t mean it's the only format we use. The only way were going to grow the hobby is to not bash a system that you don't like. If there is something that needs to be changed then email the tournament organizers. If they don't fix it at their next event don't go back to it.

Once again I can't wait for adepticon next year going to be insane. Are you going to use a system like this for the fantasy events?

So much to address...

@Timmah - Agreed on all accounts. Better events is always the goal. Of course the community will always have those that want to break everything down into petty arguments. More on this is a second...

@Olympia - The overly simplistic equation of No Comp, No Sports = No Drama doesn't even remotely get to the core of what is happening lately. AdeptiCon hasn't had Comp scoring on the 40K side in ages (save the pointless 0/3 in the TT which is gone). The bulk of the drama exists on the internet and is mainly started and flamed by those that never have, never will or continually lie about attending. Those people WILL ALWAYS find a way to continue the drama and hatred. It's what they live for. They might fool you by talking about 'community' or 'inclusion', but in the end they need everything to be about them. 100% of the time. Nothing we are doing is to appease that group. Nothing we could do would. They will simply find another reason to flip out and whine in public, it's a perpetual cycle with no end. Drama will always exist. Don't shun it, shed it.

Another thing to keep in mind. NOVA was two events (three if you count the Whiskey Challenge). AdeptiCon 2010 was 99 events including scheduled demo slots. There is plenty of opportunity for the convention to address all manner of gaming. There is absolutely no reason we can't run a hardcore event (like we have done in the past with the Invitational) and a typical PST Battle Points style event. Any changes made in 2011 are not radical departures from anything we have done before and are simple acts of refinement based on attendee feedback, conversations with other event organizers, revisions to games systems and the like.

AdeptiCon's scoring system has always been transparent. Likewise we receive 100's of positive and constructive emails and PMs each year. Adaptation and change have always been part of this convention.

@nkelsh - I 100% agree with you. The people that freak out, want to draw racist comparisons and other poorly throughout whining will always find a reason to be bent out of shape. Nothing you or I or anyone can do about that. The incredibly short-sighted and stupid part is, a convention like AdeptiCon only exist because of gamers. Events only exist because someone champions them. Hell, if someone like Stelek had come to us years ago (or MVB last year) and said - hey I got this idea and I'd be interested in being involved or even running an event - he'd mostly likely be doing that right now.

Events that blindly adopt the NOVA system are not doing anyone any favors. Same goes for something like the INAT. There is theory and motivation behind the use of both and neither will appease everyone right out of the gate, so you need to understand what it is you are doing before simply doing.

There is no move to appease the vocal minority. We are making more tournament oriented changes to 1 event out of 99 (and a major event at that). I am firm believer that there is plenty of room for that at the convention. Honestly, the vocal minority has a good idea or two every now and then.

@scooter - Look forward to it. 2011 is going to be a blast. We got tons of great stuff in the works and are getting a head start of much of it. Also...again...we are NOT adopting the NOVA format at all. To Mike's credit he got me to look at the idea of moving towards a W/L game resolution and even there we have philosophical differences in regards to draws being an integral part of wargaming and swiss seeding/brackets. Otherwise the Championships system is simply our PST system devalued with a few inspirational ideas from the Epic GT Scenario mixed in. AdeptiCon still approaches 40K as a game first. AdeptiCon is still a 'Hobby Event' and proud of it. Never fear!

As far as WFB events...I wish I could speak to that, but I can't at this moment. We have some new staff, a new edition and I am just not sure where they are in regards to scoring and planning at this moment.

@Matthias

If you want to include draws. (not a bad idea) And you just move to a W/L/D system, then just have the top 16 make it to the next day.

In fact one thing I didn't like about the nova format was that even though a couple 3-1's made it to day 2, they couldn't win. It could easily function where day 1 is just seeding/qualifying for a single elimination tournament on day 2.

So if there were draws in the system a 3-0-1 could make day 2 and still win provided their tie breakers were high enough to reach day 2. However you would probably want to stop people from intentional drawing the last round (like MTG) since it could mess the whole system up.

MTG just does:
Wins = 3 pts
Draws = 1 pt
Loss = 0 pts

Top points make top 8 or 16 or w/e.
Seems like it would be easy enough to port to 40k tournaments if that is what you want.

CptZach wrote:@Matthias

If you want to include draws. (not a bad idea) And you just move to a W/L/D system, then just have the top 16 make it to the next day.

Yep. Exactly how it is. 16 will qualify regardless on Friday. Everyone who goes 4-0-0 automatically qualifies. The rest are wildcard slots based on strength of W/L/D record and total objectives achieved throughout the day. This allows us to have some flexibility with the initial starting number of players - since you know stuff comes up, people drop out and all that.

Magic analogy is spot on. The new scoring system borrows a little from MtG, a little from Warmachine and a little from Epic.

Sounds very cool.

Couple issues that I could forsee:

Once you lose you basically out since most day 2 people will either be 4-0 or 3-0-1. (not a bad thing, but something to keep in mind)

If people get behind in games, a lot will try and go for a draw instead of the unlikely win. Since it'll keep them in the running for day 2 and a draw is usually easier to manage through defensive play vs a win. Meaning you probably want your scenarios to be very difficult to draw. Otherwise you are going to end up with a lot of draws probably.

MVBrandt wrote:I think it's best to completely avoid and excoriate overly negative viewpoints.

Matthias and I have both improved our events by taking notes from each other on subjects we were able. Others can all take notes from that ....

An important note also is being transparent, and opening up your format to the input of others. NO one person is smart enough to put forth their best product without input, revision and active / relentless improvement.

This post is full of win.

This is the reason I will be coming next year... if you don't have it on my wedding day...