Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: LordBurger <LordBurger@***.COM>
Subject: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 02:23:57 EST
Hey all you runners out there. I have been awaiting a format for tourneys in
SRCCG for a while now, and being a Veteran STAR WARS CCG player, i have used a
similar system of Swiss Style play, and Created a fast paced, simple Tourney
Format for The Shardowrun CCG CARD GAME. Let me know what you think of it,
and all criticism is accepted, be nice though. : )

It goes as follows:

Each player plays one deck, and lest just say there are 8 players. Each
player plays one opponent (one on one play prevents friends from teaming up)
and a 60 min round time limit will be inforced. The object is to get as most
reputation in the time limit before your opponent to a total of 75 (75 minimum
to win). If you reach 75 before your opponent, and before the time limit
expires, you get a Full win, 2 points, and a Total Rep. modifier of your
finishing rep #. The opponent would get a Full Loss, with a rep total of the
amount he had when his/her opponent won. If the time limit expires, the
active player finishes his/her turn, and the two rep totals are compared.
Each player would get one match point, and a rep total of the amount of rep
they finished with. Sample 4 round tourney (8 players). For example, round
one ended like this

Dennis played Matt, Dennis won with 82 rep, Matt had 15. Dennis would be 2,
(+82), and Matt would be 0, (+15).
Dan played Tom, Dan won 75 to 0, Dan would be at 2, (+75), Tom would be at 0,
(+0)
Chris Played Phil, Chris and Phil's time ran out, Chris had 45 rep, Phil had
35, Chris would be 1, (+45), Phil 1, (+35).
Finally Bill Played Joel, Bill luckly got a few Cowards off, and Joel could
never recover due to a few Schwaaaaaark's. Bill had 78 rep, Joel -20.
Leaving the totals at Bill 2, (+78), Joel 0, (-20).

Tourney results after round one:
1. Dennis 2 (+82)
2. Bill 2, (+78)
3. Dan 2, (+75)
4. Chris 1, (+45)
5. Phil 1, (+35)
6. Matt 0, (+15)
7. Tom 0, (+0)
8. Joel 0, (-20)

The next round would be 1 vs 2, 3 vs 4, 5 vs 6, and 7 vs 8.
Results = Dennis Win Vs Bill, 85-40, Dan win vs Chris, 90-70, Matt win vs Phil
79-40, and Tom over Joel, 80-53.

New current Standings:
1. Dennis 4 (+167)
2. Dan 4, (+165)
3. Matt 3, (+94)
4. Bill 2, (+118)
5. Tom 2, (+80)
6. Chris 1, (+115)
7. Phil 1, (+75)
8. Joel 0, (+33)

3rd round, same 1 vs 2, 3 vs 4, ect.
Dennis and Dan Tie, Dennis with 70 rep, dan with 65, Matt beats bill 75-45,
Tom beats chris 83-60, and Joel beats Phil 80-65. After third round:

1. Dennis 5 (+237)
2. Dan 5, (+230)
3. Matt 5, (+169)
4. Tom 4, (+163)
5. Bill 2, (+163)
6. Joel 2, (+113)
7. Chris 1, (+175)
8. Phil 1, (+140)

Same pairing manner, Results: Dennis Beats Dan 110 to 70, Tom beats matt,
80-35, Bill beats Joel 90-2, and Phil's mother comes to pick him up due to Bad
report card, so Chris gets a Bye, 2 points, with a +0 to his rep total.
Making the final standings as follows:

1. Dennis 7 (+347)
2. Tom 6, (+243)
3. Dan 5, (+300)
4. Matt 5, (+204)
5. Bill 4, (+253)
6. Chris 3, (+175)
7. Joel 2, (+115)
8. Phil 1, (+140)

If you were to have 16 players, you could go 6 rounds of swiss, and if there
are 32 or more, you would go 8 rounds of swiss.

Everyone hates single elimination tourneys, and im sure everyone has gotten a
bad draw before, and not been able to come back (For those magic players out
there). Swiss is a fun format, and the most fair to new players as well as
seasoned veterans. You are paired to people who have roughly the same scores
as you do, so inexperienced players will play people on there level after the
1st round hopefully.

Simple, easy, no worries about teaming up in multi player matches, and the
games are fast, quick, and exciting. Lemme know what you think??

Just my ideas

DENNIS SHEA
TORGO PHATTY BEATDOWNZ
Message no. 2
From: Phil Jaros <chakan@****.PYROTECHNICS.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 03:59:23 -0600
Dennis wrote:

>Each player plays one deck, and lest just say there are 8 players. Each
>player plays one opponent (one on one play prevents friends from teaming up)
>and a 60 min round time limit will be inforced. The object is to get as most
>reputation in the time limit before your opponent to a total of 75 (75 minimum
>to win). If you reach 75 before your opponent, and before the time limit
>expires, you get a Full win, 2 points, and a Total Rep. modifier of your
>finishing rep #. The opponent would get a Full Loss, with a rep total of the
>amount he had when his/her opponent won. If the time limit expires, the
>active player finishes his/her turn, and the two rep totals are compared.
>Each player would get one match point, and a rep total of the amount of rep
>they finished with.

I like this format better then the rules FASA put out a couple of months
ago. It prevents people from making decks that simply try to go for a
Runner laiden deck that tries to gain a bunch of Rep and neglects mounting
a defence.

The only problem is that it really isn't a viable format for a large scale
tournament...

>Sample 4 round tourney (8 players). For example, round
>one ended like this

<example deleted to save space and to delete the fact that someone named
Phil came in last...>


--
Phil Jaros 888888888
chakan@************.com O=O=O=O=O
___________aaaaaaaaaaaaa___________
___...aaaad8888888888888888p"""""q8888888888888888baaaa...___
``"""""q8888888888888|
|8888888888888p"""""''
``"""""< `=-~-='
>"""""''
Chakan `| ^ |'
The Forever Man / | =-= | \
/ `__.__' \
Message no. 3
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 06:17:43 -0800
LordBurger wrote:


> Hey all you runners out there. I have been awaiting a format for tourneys in
> SRCCG for a while now, and being a Veteran STAR WARS CCG player, i have used a
> similar system of Swiss Style play, and Created a fast paced, simple Tourney
> Format for The Shardowrun CCG CARD GAME. Let me know what you think of it,
> and all criticism is accepted, be nice though. : )

<Details clipped - like Phil, I lost.>

Pretty cool, and a good explanation of the Swiss format. There are a
couple points to make, and they seem endemic to Swiss:

1) Come from behinds. In Swiss, you're always facing people of roughly
the
same standing, but that only means some players will never face each
other.
A bad first-round draw can really damage an experienced player.

(In the examples you provided, after round two, no one moves more than
two spots.)

2) Point v. Reputation system. In your final standings, there
are two people who have lower Reputation than someone else, but a higher
point standing. Not a problem with me; but there are going to be those
who cry foul. It's the difference between someone who can pull off
four mediocre 75-Rep wins, and someone who loses twice but scores big
the other two times. I'm not so sure the first player is so
necessarily better: it takes a lot of skill to scoop 110 Rep when
the normal cap is 75. (You probably also want to include a clause
for when Rep is counted -- whether the game is over if the player
*ever* has moer than 75, or if Rep is counted only at the end of
a particular turn.)

And, as with any point system, you stand the possibility of one player
forcing a draw simply to screw the other guy. (There should probably
be a lamer rule in whatever rules are adopted - but then, I'd like
to think we were all too cool to actually do something like that.)
Combined with four Sucker Runs and four Cover Ups....

Since the yardstick is still Reputation, Media Chick and False
Mentor retain their huge advantage... I'm gonna come up with
some non-Rep based tourneys Real Soon Now.


-Matt
Message no. 4
From: LordBurger <LordBurger@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 15:20:22 EST
Just to point out, coming from an experienced Tourney player (magic, Star
wars, Highlander, and others) Single elimination tourneys are BAD. People
loose first round, and they are mad, and are told, ok, you can go home now.
That sucks, Swiss is fun, because you play the duration of the tourney. You
play new people (at least 4) and you learn new things, and see new deck ideas.
My opinion you have more fun!!!

As for the SRCCG, this is the only way i see it can work. You have to have
the Total Cumulative Rep Points, or there is no way to come back from a loss.
If any of you have played Star wARs CCG, and are familiar with how efficient
and fair that way of tourneys are, then you will find no worries with this
way.

As for This format not being able to hold many people, that is 100% untrue.
If you have from 2-12 people, you hold a 4 round swiss, 13-20 people 6 rounds,
any more you hold 8 rounds. If you look at it, and break it down, in a 4
round tourney, it will be very hard to have more then one person without a
loss, and in the higher round tourneys it will be someone 6-0, a few 5-1, and
so on.

Remember, you will always have Ties in Games, the Cumulative Rep Total System
is a fair way to Go, and it also makes for people who play decks with not
just ways to gain rep, but with ways to make his/her opponent loose rep, more
efficient. He will keep opponents rep totals down, as well as keeping his
total up. (STOPS SOME OF THE CHEESE)

I personally think this needs a little bit of work, but it can get to be a
really fun system of play. I have submitted this to Jim, and am awaiting a
response.

Plese Feel free to E-mail me personally on your thoughts, as well as on the
list

Thanks

DENNIS SHEA
TORGO PHATTY BEATDOWNZ
Message no. 5
From: Jon Palmer <jmp225@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 15:34:34 -0500
>As for the SRCCG, this is the only way i see it can work. You have to have
>the Total Cumulative Rep Points, or there is no way to come back from a loss.
>If any of you have played Star wARs CCG, and are familiar with how efficient
>and fair that way of tourneys are, then you will find no worries with this
>way.
>
>As for This format not being able to hold many people, that is 100% untrue.
>If you have from 2-12 people, you hold a 4 round swiss, 13-20 people 6 rounds,
>any more you hold 8 rounds. If you look at it, and break it down, in a 4
>round tourney, it will be very hard to have more then one person without a
>loss, and in the higher round tourneys it will be someone 6-0, a few 5-1, and
>so on.

I don't like the "cumulative rep" points. It basically forces people to
play with cards like Wild Goose Chase and GAQ to keep their opponents from
building up rep, in case they might end in a tie with the opponent in the
overall standings. I've run a bunch of tournaments, and the best way to
run them normally is to do swiss to a point (best is when you have 4
undefeated players, or sometimes 2 undefeated and 2 once-defeated). Then
have these players face off for the championship. A good way to run this
would be have it get down to whatever point, then have a multiplayer. But
having the possibility that a player with two losses be AHEAD of one with
one loss due to "total rep" is NOT a way to foster goodwill among players.
Maybe total rep can be used in case of ties, but NOT as anything more
important than that.

Jon Palmer
Message no. 6
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 17:18:51 -0800
Jon Palmer wrote:

> I don't like the "cumulative rep" points. It basically forces people to
> play with cards like Wild Goose Chase and GAQ to keep their opponents from
> building up rep, in case they might end in a tie with the opponent in the
> overall standings.

Note: People are going to be playing with WGC and GAQS *anyways*
(specially
GAQS) as, no matter what, the individual game is won by Reputation. I'd
think, honestly, you'd see more of a rise in Cowards and Bad Rep, since
those
directly affect a player's ability to win a game (esp. Cowards.)

> I've run a bunch of tournaments, and the best way to
> run them normally is to do swiss to a point (best is when you have 4
> undefeated players, or sometimes 2 undefeated and 2 once-defeated). Then
> have these players face off for the championship. A good way to run this
> would be have it get down to whatever point, then have a multiplayer. But
> having the possibility that a player with two losses be AHEAD of one with
> one loss due to "total rep" is NOT a way to foster goodwill among players.
> Maybe total rep can be used in case of ties, but NOT as anything more
> important than that.

Okay: So player A loses two game with 0 Rep and pulls off a 110-point
win.

Player B does mediocre (35 Rep) and wins one (70 Rep). He's still ahead
of Player A. (I;m trying to puzzle through a player 'winning' in earned
Reputation despite never winning a game; the closest I get is the
chronic
second-place winner who ends every game with 60 Rep. By most standards,
though, that's doing better than a player who wins one with seventy and
loses another with fifty. Gotta give reliability credit.)

If Player A does two mediocre wins and one giant one, he's proven to be
a better player imho -- 110 point wins are difficult to pull off.
Assuming
a 70-point win cap, A would have to score about double, or 140 points,
in
a single game to cancel out two mediocre games on B's part. That's
pretty
damn tough to do -- not impossible, but if you can swing that sort of
win,
I say you deserve to win the tourney.

(Thinking: 30 Rep Objective, 40 Rep Objective, and on your last turn
snag
a Wanted Skwrk (+10), and stomp on a Dracoform (+10) and two Guardian
Elementals (+10) on your way through an Impossible Mission (+50) with
the aid of a Media Chick (+10) for a grand total of 160 Rep. Not a
terribly likely sequence of events, to me. Mm, maybe that's not the
absolute maximum, but it's sure close.)

It ain't so much that Swiss is necessarily more difficult or complex,
but it
does by nature limit the number of opponents you face, and with a
built-in
scoring system for SRTCG, I don't see the need for adding on another
layer.


-Matt

------------------------------------
"I will work harder." -- Boxer: Animal Hero, First-Class

GridSec: SRCard
Teen Poets FAQ: http://pw1.netcom.com/~mbreton/poetry/poetfaq.htm
SRTCG Website: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/2189/ccgtop.htm
Message no. 7
From: Bolton Sara <pin12962@*******.PING.BE>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 23:21:59 +0100
At 02:23 4/03/98 EST, you wrote:
>Hey all you runners out there. I have been awaiting a format for tourneys in
>SRCCG for a while now, and being a Veteran STAR WARS CCG player, i have used a
>similar system of Swiss Style play, and Created a fast paced, simple Tourney
>Format for The Shardowrun CCG CARD GAME. Let me know what you think of it,
>and all criticism is accepted, be nice though. : )


Somes point:

I think that the rep total must be used only in case of tie ( as someone
point out, it is not normal that a guy come ahead of another with more
"match point", but less rep.

Secondly, someone said "swiss system" is good only for small tourney, i have
participed in M:TG tournament using swiss system and there was more than 120
players, it is perfectly possible to do so, it just need some organisation.

Schmitt Vincent.
Message no. 8
From: LordBurger <LordBurger@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 18:59:35 EST
One REALLY BIG problem with multiplayer formats, are the ALEGIANCE of friends.
If ya ask me, if there are 4 people in the final multiplayer,, and i am in it
with a friend, we are goint to try to get the other two out, and then split
the prize for first and second. That mostlikely will happen, if multi player
occurs then you will find problems like this.

Lets try to keep the Format SINGLE PLAYER

DENNIS SHEA
TORGO PHATTY BEATDOWNZ
Message no. 9
From: LordBurger <LordBurger@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 19:06:25 EST
The Rep points are only to be used as a tie breaker system. If you beat you
opponent, and get a FULL WIN, then you are ahead of your opponent, If there
is is tie, it is used to seed the players in order of who was better. IF
there are 3 people undefeated, it seeds the people in one, two three order, so
that they can be paired evenly.

Without a second system of points, it would be chaos

Do you have any ideas?

LMK

DENNIS SHEA
TORGO PHATTY BEATDOWNZ
Message no. 10
From: Neil Fathulla <fathullan@*******.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 11:04:10 +1000
Dennis,

Good idea and effort. A couple of points to consider,

1. Rep should be used only to determine final standings and then the rep
should be a differance ie if I play you and win 75-35 than I should get 2
points and a differance rating of +40. Again this should only be used to
determine final standings.
2. Swiss is a good idea but this should be followed with a single
elimination 1 v 4 2v 3 then winner of 1 v 4 vs winner of 2 v 3 for overall
champion. Depending on the organisors you could give a seperate prize for
swiss winner and one for overall champion.
3. What about differant scoring two ideas that come to mind.
a) 3 points for a win in allotted time, 2 points for a win after time
limit, 1 point for a draw (can you have a draw?) and 0 for a loss, or
b) 2 points for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss. Bonus points +1 if
you win by more than 50 rep points or lose by less than 20 points.


Just my view. Any comments?



Regards
Neil




LordBurger @ aol.com
04/03/98 17:23



Hey all you runners out there. I have been awaiting a format for tourneys
in SRCCG for a while now, and being a Veteran STAR WARS CCG player, i have
used a similar system of Swiss Style play, and Created a fast paced, simple
Tourney Format for The Shardowrun CCG CARD GAME. Let me know what you
think of it, and all criticism is accepted, be nice though. : )

It goes as follows:

Each player plays one deck, and lest just say there are 8 players. Each
player plays one opponent (one on one play prevents friends from teaming
up) and a 60 min round time limit will be inforced. The object is to get
as most reputation in the time limit before your opponent to a total of 75
(75 minimum to win). If you reach 75 before your opponent, and before the
time limit expires, you get a Full win, 2 points, and a Total Rep. modifier
of your finishing rep #. The opponent would get a Full Loss, with a rep
total of the amount he had when his/her opponent won. If the time limit
expires, the active player finishes his/her turn, and the two rep totals
are compared. Each player would get one match point, and a rep total of the
amount of rep they finished with. Sample 4 round tourney (8 players). For
example, round one ended like this
<<snip>>

Just my ideas

DENNIS SHEA
TORGO PHATTY BEATDOWNZ
Message no. 11
From: Doug <d.clarke@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 16:18:35 -0800
Matt wrote
>(Thinking: 30 Rep Objective, 40 Rep Objective, and on your last turn
>snag
>a Wanted Skwrk (+10), and stomp on a Dracoform (+10) and two Guardian
>Elementals (+10) on your way through an Impossible Mission (+50) with
>the aid of a Media Chick (+10) for a grand total of 160 Rep. Not a
>terribly likely sequence of events, to me. Mm, maybe that's not the
>absolute maximum, but it's sure close.)
>

Or if you used a Bulldog Van on your last run and got two objectives.

Doug
Message no. 12
From: LordBurger <LordBurger@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 19:19:31 EST
I see what you mean, but in a swiss style format, it is the most fairest way
to match people up according to how well they are doing. In teh 1 vs 4, 2 vs
3 format, the top player gets to play the worst player, and that would makle
for big wins by the top ranked player, and not so fair to the younger guys.

And as for the point system, going up to 3 is really difficult to come back
from a loss, or a tie. 2 for a win, 1 for a tie, and 0 for a loss is the best
way of doing it, at least magic, and star wars ccg's see it that way, as do i.

DENNIS SHEA
TORGO PHATTY BEATDOWNZ
Message no. 13
From: Jon Palmer <jmp225@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 19:34:58 -0500
>Matt wrote
>>(Thinking: 30 Rep Objective, 40 Rep Objective, and on your last turn
>>snag
>>a Wanted Skwrk (+10), and stomp on a Dracoform (+10) and two Guardian
>>Elementals (+10) on your way through an Impossible Mission (+50) with
>>the aid of a Media Chick (+10) for a grand total of 160 Rep. Not a
>>terribly likely sequence of events, to me. Mm, maybe that's not the
>>absolute maximum, but it's sure close.)
>>
>
>Or if you used a Bulldog Van on your last run and got two objectives.

Um... game's to 75, right? Ok, 30 rep, 40 rep, opponent takes a full
Impossible Mission w/ Media Chick, you False Mentor it, then you take a
full Impossible mission w/ Media Chick... that's 190, and only difficult
cuz nobody uses Impossible Mission

Jon Palmer
Message no. 14
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 20:16:51 -0800
Jon Palmer wrote:

> >Matt wrote
> >>(Thinking: 30 Rep Objective, 40 Rep Objective, and on your last turn
> >>snag
> >>a Wanted Skwrk (+10), and stomp on a Dracoform (+10) and two Guardian
> >>Elementals (+10) on your way through an Impossible Mission (+50) with
> >>the aid of a Media Chick (+10) for a grand total of 160 Rep. Not a
> >>terribly likely sequence of events, to me. Mm, maybe that's not the
> >>absolute maximum, but it's sure close.)

> >Or if you used a Bulldog Van on your last run and got two objectives.

This, by the way, was why I said, "not the absolute maximum." But this
situation is already in the stratospheric levels of improbability.

> Um... game's to 75, right? Ok, 30 rep, 40 rep, opponent takes a full
> Impossible Mission w/ Media Chick, you False Mentor it,

...Meaning, at the beginning of your turn (or the end of his) you're
over
70 Reputation and you win the game (before you can shadowrun). At
least,
that seems to make the most sense to me.

Certainly some tourney rules will open up other possibilities for
surpassing the normal Rep limit; the exact moment Reputation is
compared against the win-total needed is important enough to warrant
mentioning.


-Matt

------------------------------------
I will work harder. -- Boxer: Animal Hero, First-Class

GridSec: SRCard
Teen Poets FAQ: http://pw1.netcom.com/~mbreton/poetry/poetfaq.htm
SRTCG Website: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/2189/ccgtop.htm
Message no. 15
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 20:25:41 -0800
LordBurger wrote:

Lord B, it might help if you quote at least a smidgen of the previous
post,
especially when there've been such a great number of posts on the topic.

> One REALLY BIG problem with multiplayer formats, are the ALEGIANCE of friends.
> If ya ask me, if there are 4 people in the final multiplayer,, and i am in it
> with a friend, we are goint to try to get the other two out, and then split
> the prize for first and second. That mostlikely will happen, if multi player
> occurs then you will find problems like this.

> Lets try to keep the Format SINGLE PLAYER

Two-player has as many problems; it leads to really degenerate
deck-building.
Decker-thief decks rock in two-player, and are pretty "dumb" to build
(Ice Queen, check, Sticky Fingers, check, Fuchi, check) -- but they
routinely get hosed in multi-player. I don't think multi-player affords
as much room for collusion as you imagine, and, if necessary, there are
lamer rules already adopted by some tournaments (thinking of a recent
Shadowfist posting on r.g.t-c.misc). More importantly -- LB, ol' buddy
--
you can be damn sure that *I'm* going to get first place, and not you,
you putz, even with out fifteen-year friendship. Competitiveness (and
not offering a $10k purse) assures collusion will not occur.

Don't forget, of course, that there's at least one and possibly two
people
working as hard against you.

(Incidentally, I'm not for having a "grand finale" in which the four
semi-finalists play one game against each other to determine the top
four places, which seems to be what you're suggesting.)


-Matt

------------------------------------
"I will work harder." -- Boxer: Animal Hero, First-Class

GridSec: SRCard
Teen Poets FAQ: http://pw1.netcom.com/~mbreton/poetry/poetfaq.htm
SRTCG Website: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/2189/ccgtop.htm
Message no. 16
From: Jon Palmer <jmp225@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 20:32:49 -0500
>> Um... game's to 75, right? Ok, 30 rep, 40 rep, opponent takes a full
>> Impossible Mission w/ Media Chick, you False Mentor it,
>
>...Meaning, at the beginning of your turn (or the end of his) you're
>over
>70 Reputation and you win the game (before you can shadowrun). At
>least,
>that seems to make the most sense to me.

I must've missed a ruling... Does False Mentor now allow you to win the game?

Jon Palmer
Message no. 17
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 20:48:41 -0800
Jon Palmer wrote:

> >> Um... game's to 75, right? Ok, 30 rep, 40 rep, opponent takes a full
> >> Impossible Mission w/ Media Chick, you False Mentor it,

> >...Meaning, at the beginning of your turn (or the end of his) you're
> >over 70 Reputation and you win the game (before you can shadowrun). At
> >least, that seems to make the most sense to me.

> I must've missed a ruling... Does False Mentor now allow you to win the game?

*Sigh*

The point, Jon, is that trying to construct a situation where player X
doubles
or trebles the amount needed to win a game requires going to some
abnormal
lengths -- and that, perhaps, the lengths needed to actually pull it off
make Reputation a more important factor than just plain winning.

The actual timing of when you have enough Reputation to win still needs
to
be resolved, as well.

But, ah, apparently we're just getting to the point where we're just
going
to hawk each other's words and bash each other over the slightest
misphrasing.
Thanks, no thanks, I'm audi.


-M
Message no. 18
From: Jon Palmer <jmp225@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 22:11:07 -0500
>Jon Palmer wrote:
>
>> >> Um... game's to 75, right? Ok, 30 rep, 40 rep, opponent takes a full
>> >> Impossible Mission w/ Media Chick, you False Mentor it,
>
>> >...Meaning, at the beginning of your turn (or the end of his) you're
>> >over 70 Reputation and you win the game (before you can shadowrun). At
>> >least, that seems to make the most sense to me.
>
>> I must've missed a ruling... Does False Mentor now allow you to win the game?
>
>*Sigh*
>
>The point, Jon, is that trying to construct a situation where player X
>doubles
>or trebles the amount needed to win a game requires going to some
>abnormal
>lengths -- and that, perhaps, the lengths needed to actually pull it off
>make Reputation a more important factor than just plain winning.
>
>The actual timing of when you have enough Reputation to win still needs
>to
>be resolved, as well.

I wasn't trying to be offensive or anything. I honestly didn't know if
False Mentor had been errata'd, because it says you can't win by it. It's
not that hard to get 40-50 points over the final rep w/ False Mentor, tho.

Jon
Message no. 19
From: Loki <daddyjim@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 19:17:08 -0800
---LordBurger <LordBurger@***.COM> wrote:

<snip>

> Simple, easy, no worries about teaming up in multi player matches,
and the
> games are fast, quick, and exciting. Lemme know what you think??

Most obvious question, say you can't fill all 16 tourney slots and are
left with 15 players. How do you handle the odd player? Do you just
ahve to drop someone, or do you play with and odd-numbered group each
round?

I think I still prefer a tourney style that alternates one-on-one and
multi-player games to test both playing styles.

-== Loki ==-
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Fearless Leader of the Shadowrun Trading Card Game Mailing List
SRCard FAQ: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr/srstuff/tcgfaq1.htm
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Poisoned Elves: www.primenet.com/~gamemstr
SRTCG trade lists last updated 2/26/98

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 20
From: LordBurger <LordBurger@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 22:39:26 EST
In a message dated 98-03-04 22:20:01 EST, you write:

LOKI WROTE:
<< Most obvious question, say you can't fill all 16 tourney slots and are
left with 15 players. How do you handle the odd player? Do you just
ahve to drop someone, or do you play with and odd-numbered group each
round?
>>

tHERE WOULD BE A BYE, IF THERE IS AN ODD NUMBER OF PLAYERS. WHER YOU GET 2
MATCH POINTS, AND NO REP DIFFERENTAL. VERY EASY
AND THE ONLY OTHER RULE IS THAT YOU CANNOT GET A BYE TWICE IN THE SAME
TOURNEY. VERY EASY.

dENNIS SHEA
LORD TORGO PHATTY BEATDOWNz
Message no. 21
From: Quicksilver <qwksilvr@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Tourney Format Possibility???
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 21:06:51 -0600
At 05:18 PM 3/4/98 -0800, you wrote:
>(Thinking: 30 Rep Objective, 40 Rep Objective, and on your last turn
>snag
>a Wanted Skwrk (+10), and stomp on a Dracoform (+10) and two Guardian
>Elementals (+10) on your way through an Impossible Mission (+50) with
>the aid of a Media Chick (+10) for a grand total of 160 Rep. Not a
>terribly likely sequence of events, to me. Mm, maybe that's not the
>absolute maximum, but it's sure close.)

Hmmm. Maybe I've been playing wrong....
Page 10 of the rulebook (last sentence, second paragraph under OBJECT OF
THE GAME) says 'The first player to acquire the agreed-upon number of
Reputation points wins the game.'.
Doesn't seem to me that you have to play to the end of the turn, as soon
as you've reached/exceeded a winning score the game is over.
Hg

Warning: This message contains my opinions.
I've been wrong before....
....I'll be wrong again.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Tourney Format Possibility???, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!