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.

This is the First Draft of a tournament ruleset for a tournament I have been invited to TO in August. Your help would prove quite useful.

Singles 1750-

Pairings- Swiss Style. Matchmaking will follow these rules:
-Round 1: Random Pairings (The TO reserves the right to re-roll pairings so as to avoid players who have travelled long
distances to have to play round 1 together, this caveat only applies to round 1)
-Round 2+:
1) Players records will be compared to match them against opponents with similar records. Winners should face
winners. Losers should face losers.
2) If there is an odd number of winners, the player with the lowest scoring winning record will face the player
with the highest scoring losing record.
3) The same 2 players will not face each other more than once. If the pairing rules call for such an occasion,
the higest ranked player will face the next highest ranked legal opponent.

-Byes: Byes will be given to the player with the lowest standing who has not already taken a bye. The player with a bye
will be awarded a win with full points for the primary and secondary objectives.

Scoring- A battlepoints system as follows will be used.
Primary Objectives: Players will be awarded 10 battlepoints for winning the primary objective. If the primary objective
is tied, both players will be awarded 5 battlepoints.
Secondary Objectives: Players will be awarded 5 battlepoints for winning the secondary objective. If the secondary
objective is tied, both players will be awarded 2 battlepoints.
Tertiary Objectives: Players will be awarded 1 battlepoint for each tertiary objective they complete. It is possible
that some objectives will be completed by both players.

Tournament Standings- Players will be ranked upon the completion of the tournament by the following criteria:
1) Win-Loss Record (Win>Tie>Loss)
2) Battlepoints
3) T.B.D. [I'd like to use strength of schedule, but issues with drops and bye's could make this a nightmare.]





Mission 1- Operation Locust

Deployment: Dawn of War

Primary Objective: Weighted KP's
Players will be awarded victory points based on every unit destroyed during a game.
HQ: 5
Troop: 1
Elites: 3
Fast Attack: 2
Heavy Support: 4
Dedicated Transports: 1

Secondary Objective: Slot Elimination
Players will be awarded victory points based on every category (HQ, Troop, Elite, Fast Attack, Heavy Support) completely
destroyed at the end of a game. Players earn victory 2 points for each such category destroyed. Dedicated Transports will count
as the type of unit that purchased them for this objective. If an army does not field a type of unit at all (example: a Grey
Knights army consisting of Draigo and 2 Paladin squads) Then types not fielded will count as destroyed.

Tertiary Objectives:
Players will be awarded 1 point each for the following:
First Blood: The first unit to be destroyed will cede this objective to the opposing player.
Slay the Warlord: A warlord that is slain at the end of the game will grant this objective to the opposing player.
Line Breaker: A player may score this objective if he has at least one denial unit entirely in his opponent's deployment
zone
Victory: The player with the most victory points at the end of the game is the winner. A tie is declared if both players have
the same number of victory points.



Mission 2- The Long War

Deployment: Hammer and Anvil

Primary Objective: Base Control + Relic
-Each player will place a single objective (25mm or 50mm base is fine as long as both objectives use the same size base)
in their deployment zone. These objectives will be worth 3 victory points. To control these objectives a player must have at
least 1 scoring unit within 3" of the objectives and no enemy denial units within 3".

(Author's Note: I made this objective the primary mission because I believe this mission to be harder than the relic
style mission)

Secondary Objective:
-There will be a single 'relic' style objective (Please use a 25mm base) in the center of the board. The Relic is worth
3 battlepoints to the player owning whatever model is carrying the relic at the end of the game. The relic style objective will
be subject to the following rules:
-The relic can be picked up by any scoring model. In order to pick up the relic, an eligible model must end it's
movement phase in base to base contact with the relic.
-A model carrying the relic may not move more than 6" per phase. If the model is forced to move more than 6",
place the relic in base to base (or as close as is possible) to the model who was carrying the relic.
-A model carrying the relic may not run.
-If a model carrying the relic embarks upon a vehicle, the vehicle may not voluntarily move more than 6" per
phase, if such a vehicle is forced to move more than 6" place the relic adjacent to (or as near as possible) to an access point.
A flyer transporting the relic is still only allowed 6" of movement, and will crash if not in hover mode.
-A model carrying the relic may voluntarily drop the relic at the end of any friendly phase.
-If a model carrying the relic is slain, that model immediately drops the relic before being removed.
-If a model carrying the relic is part of a unit that makes a fall back move, that model must drop the relic
before making the fall back move.

(Author's Note: I would like to include a mechanic for stealing the relic from a unit in Close combat. I have concerns
about how to make this work without making to hard to hold the relic or too complicated a ruleset)

Tertiary Objectives:
Players will be awarded 1 point each for the following:
First Blood: The first unit to be destroyed will cede this objective to the opposing player.
Slay the Warlord: A warlord that is slain at the end of the game will grant this objective to the opposing player.
Line Breaker: A player may score this objective if he has at least one denial unit entirely in his opponent's deployment
zone

Victory: The player with the most victory points at the end of the game is the winner. A tie is declared if both players have
the same number of victory points.




Mission 3- A Line in the Sand

Deployment: Vanguard Strike

Primary Objective: Table Quarters.
The table will divided into quarters. Before the start of the game, each player will secretly write down a value between
1 and 4 (use each value once) points for each quarter. The values will not be revealed at the end of the game. Each table
quarter is worth a number of victory points equal to sum of both player's assigned values. To control a table quarter, a player
must have more units fully within that table quarter than his opponent. Units that are falling back and immobilized vehicles do
not count for control of a table quarter. To win this mission a player must control territory more valuable than that of his
opponent. Territory with an equal number of units from both players or no eligible units at all are uncontrolled and award no
victory points.

Secondary Objective: Central of the Board.
-Place an objective in the center of the board. This objective is worth 3 victory points. In order to control this
objective, a player must get a scoring unit within 3" of the objective while there are no enemy denial units within 3". A unit
being used to control the center objective is not counted for for the primary objective.

(Author's Note: I am considering an alternative value for the centerfield control objective. Considering that certain
quarters in the primary objective could be worth as much as 8 victory points, I want the secondary objective to be relevant, but
not overwehlming. The fact that a unit controlling the center objective does not contribute to a tablequarter I would want to
lean towards a higher value. I am considering increasing the value to 4 but no more than 5 victory points.)

Tertiary Objectives:
Players will be awarded 1 point each for the following:
First Blood: The first unit to be destroyed will cede this objective to the opposing player.
Slay the Warlord: A warlord that is slain at the end of the game will grant this objective to the opposing player.
Line Breaker: A player may score this objective if he has at least one denial unit entirely in his opponent's deployment
zone

Victory: The player with the most victory points at the end of the game is the winner. A tie is declared if both players have
the same number of victory points.

Any Ideas to improve this tournament?

So reading through my thoughts were as follows.

Never have byes find a ringer for the event. People come to these events to play 3 games saying sorry but at least you get full points is lame.

Mission 1 not a big fan of this mission as it heavily favors or comps some armies. So I run a troop heavy force and you bring 3 heavies, I am way ahead on kps just based on list choices. The vps scored seem arbitrary. Fast attack being only 2 points well daemons and csm love that.

Just a personal feeling missions should not obviously favor certain army choices in their mechanics.

In mission 3 you state that quarter values will not be revealed at the end of the game. So how do you know what your score is?

In general I'm not a huge fan of he missions as they are too divergent from the book missions and easily gameable. But if your intent is for the missions to act as a form of comp then you have succeeded.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just incase I'm unclear here is you comp system based on missions.

Mission1
Don't run 2 hqs
Don't run heavy supports (2vps given up is fine as they are 4 points each when they die)
Run lots of troops and fast attack
Play Necrons or eldar because we have good dedicated transports.

Mission 2
Nothing really here but crons and eldar still rue this due to missions playing toward mobility

Mission 3
Play msu
Play crons and eldar, having multiple small fast units rules in this mission.

I think Byes as full point victories could end up being a nightmare,

Are you running this all on your own ?, or with at least one other person.. if so you them as a ringer, or even try and get a ringer

For the overall winner I'd go from victories
to who beat who (otherwise I can tie with bob on wins, have beaten him in our match and still loose to him)
and VP last

I disagree with using head to head as the first tie breaker, what happens when I beat the player who beat you and you beat me?

Thanks for the advice given so far. Let me pull back the curtain a little bit to show why some of my initial decisions were made in the draft.

The tournament is a one of a series run once a month at our FLGS (no relation between the different tournaments). I am not involved in the handling of money (and as far as I am aware, this is volunteer work). Our store's tournaments are $10 entry tournaments that usually have no more than a dozen or so players. The event I design must conform to the following criteria:

-The event can only go 3 rounds (time is the issue here)
-The event is singles 1750
-My design should not feature elimination.
-My design should not turn any player away that shows up on time.
-Unless recruit them, I will not have anyone to help me run the tournament.

Beyond this I can pretty much do as I please with the missions.


As to the advice given:
Byes- I don't like byes at all, but the requirements I have to adhere to demand them. I was aiming for a bye being a win with full points because I don't want a bye to complete screw someones tourney (a bye sucks as is). Also, given that a bye is given to the lowest ranked person, (after the first round of course) the second and third round byes should have little effect on the tournament standings (at least where the money is in 1st, 2nd,3rd place). I would prefer a ringer and If I can secure someone to play as one I would take that option in a heartbeat.

As to Breng77's criticism of my first mission, you make some good points and I am going to draft some new rules for mission 1. For Mission 3, the end of the game is when you reveal the value of the quarters and when you score your points. The intent is that you know what values you assigned to each quarter (you assigned them after all), but you don't know what area your opponent is valuing except by his force concentration.

I'm fine with having the circular who beat who conditions that have been described. The tournament is about collecting battlepoints whilst winning games. It is entirely possible that you may lose the battle in a given situation, but still win the war (lose the game, but claim the primary objective and a tertiary or two, giving you a really strong loss, while your opponent sqeaks out a win in VP's but only claims the secondary, giving a really weak win. Based on this game alone, your opponent still beats you in the standings, but you can easily surpass him if you win your next game and he loses his.


Thank you all again for your input.

On byes, they are never required recruit a friend to be standby, if you get an even number of player he/she does not play, if you get an odd number he she does. I have also played as the ringer in an event I ran. It just really sucks having to get a bye full points or not. Further full points for the round 1 bye is an issue. That player then plays the best player from fond 1 regardless of skill which could lead to a lopsided victory round 2.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Perhaps if you must do byes count them as the average score for that players other 2 rounds and pair the firs round bye player in the middle of the pack.

Breng77 wrote:
I disagree with using head to head as the first tie breaker, what happens when I beat the player who beat you and you beat me?

I see your point but I look at it this way

In the event of a tie what a TO (with infinite time) would really like to do is get the two players to fight it out in a final deciding round

but with the time limits real life gives this is not possible so the best indication of who would have won such a match is the players performance in their previous one

(but as I say that's just my version of reality)

See in reality what is more likely to happen if players have the same record is that they have not played each other (except in small events this is rarely the case for players finishing near the top.) SO the ties you most need to break are those between 2 players that have not played each other.

I look at it this way.

We play, you barely squeak by me, you go on to get tabled by your second round opponent. Maybe you win on tertiary winning 9-8 or something, and then lose 0-18

I table my second round opponent.and win 18 -0

In round 3 lets say I play your second round opponent, I table him. You barely squeak by another opponent (an easier one than I am playing at this point) I win 18-0 you win 8-7

SO I have 44 Battle points you have 17.

Why again should you finish ahead of me?

Because you squeaked by me but went on to get pounded.

I agree that if you have a better record than me you should finish ahead of me, but not if I have played better most of the day.

Perhaps in our game time ran short and we did not finish to a natural conclusion, maybe 1 key dice roll went your way. Like I said just seems like a bad idea to me.