Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

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 / | =-= | \
/ `__.__' \

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.