Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Self-balancing tournament scenarios

  1. #31
    Forum Guru wrongway149's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Willoughby, Ohio
    Posts
    10,849
    Users Flag!

    Re: Self-balancing tournament scenarios

    Quote Originally Posted by SamB View Post
    I'd suggest splitting the players into attackers and defenders. The top half of each group advance. If you attacked in the first round you must defend in the second round.

    Quick! Someone come up with two or three of these before the end of the month! We have a tourney May 25-27.
    Hmm I like that idea. Do you want similar scenarios for the different rounds?

    Such as 'an EXIT VP scenario' to attack and then a different one (but still focused on Exit VP) to defend?
    'I'm smelling a whole lot of 'if' coming off this plan"

    -Jayne Cobb
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  2. #32
    Forum Guru Fort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    7,209
    Users Flag!

    Re: Self-balancing tournament scenarios

    Quote Originally Posted by jrv View Post
    For tournaments which do not allow open play (i.e. the scenario list is limited), one could develop "self-balancing" scenarios. A self-balancing scenario would be one which has an incremental victory goal for one side rather than a victory condition. The goal would be something like, cause enemy CVP or capture stone building locations. The victory goals probably would have to have some kind of tie-breaker or series of tie-breakers to prevent large groups of players from having the same score in a round.

    Everyone would play the same scenario in a round, with the winners of the round being the half of the players who achieved the highest victory goal score, and the half of the opponents whose opposite numbers achieved the lowest victory goal score. That way there's no question of whether the scenario is balanced or not, because the final score is compared against the results of other games, not against an arbitrary, fixed-in-stone, victory condition.

    Of course the mechanism doesn't work for the final round ;-)

    JR
    Unless the tournament were somehow seeded by skill this could turn out to be an unfair process.

    Example: Two players at the top of the game play each other in the first round, they should win in any game over any other player at the event...in this format they prevent each other from achieving an 'edge of the bell curve' result....now both of the higher level of skill players have K.O'ed each other in the first round.
    “You’re never beaten until you admit it.”- George Patton

    A dog is the only thing that loves you more than himself.

  3. #33
    Forum Guru Fort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    virginia
    Posts
    7,209
    Users Flag!

    Re: Self-balancing tournament scenarios

    Quote Originally Posted by Jacometti View Post
    I guess most German players deliberately malfunctioned the MA on one of their AFVs on the first Turn and let the Recalled vehicle drive offboard to end it all, quickly.

    Looks to me simply like REALLY poorly written VCs, open to immense sleeze.

    Good luck making that work in a tournament....
    After 'are eliminated/immobilized' add '/Recalled'

    Add:

    "SSR X. No German AFV may end it's MPh in Motion."

    Scenario fixed....

    (Let 'em make Motion attempts..that'll add to the excitement, imho.)
    “You’re never beaten until you admit it.”- George Patton

    A dog is the only thing that loves you more than himself.

  4. #34
    Vare, legiones redde! jrv's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Teutoburger Wald
    Posts
    8,354
    Users Flag!

    Re: Self-balancing tournament scenarios

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort View Post
    Unless the tournament were somehow seeded by skill this could turn out to be an unfair process.

    Example: Two players at the top of the game play each other in the first round, they should win in any game over any other player at the event...in this format they prevent each other from achieving an 'edge of the bell curve' result....now both of the higher level of skill players have K.O'ed each other in the first round.
    I noticed this well after I started thread, and I wondered if anyone else would. That is something of a flaw. If the best half of the players are on one side and the worst half on the other, then the best of the best and the best of the worst move on (ignoring the factor of luck, where a worse player beats a better player). But the same flaw exists in any fixed tree tournaments (where the players are paired by a fixed tree), such as minis at ASLOK. Unless the players are carefully seeded, all the good players may end up on the same subtree, while all the bad players are on the other. And while that's not exactly fair, it actually isn't that terrible either, unless there are prizes for place and show. If there is only a prize for win (e.g. a mini-tournament at ASLOK), the best player should win it all regardless.

    JR
    Quintili Vare, legiones redde!

  5. #35
    Vare, legiones redde! jrv's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Teutoburger Wald
    Posts
    8,354
    Users Flag!

    Re: Self-balancing tournament scenarios

    Quote Originally Posted by Fort View Post
    After 'are eliminated/immobilized' add '/Recalled'

    Add:

    "SSR X. No German AFV may end it's MPh in Motion."

    Scenario fixed....

    (Let 'em make Motion attempts..that'll add to the excitement, imho.)
    I get the feeling that Burzevo needs more than that, but it's a good start.

    JR
    Quintili Vare, legiones redde!

  6. #36
    Shut up and play! SamB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Seattle, Washington,
    Posts
    6,925
    Users Flag!

    Re: Self-balancing tournament scenarios

    Quote Originally Posted by wrongway149 View Post
    Hmm I like that idea. Do you want similar scenarios for the different rounds?

    Such as 'an EXIT VP scenario' to attack and then a different one (but still focused on Exit VP) to defend?
    Pete,

    That would be fabulous... We're also thinking about "themes" - so if all the scenarios were late war, or early war, or East Front, etc, etc,... that would be even better.

    Think you can get me three by May 25 or so?
    Getting beaten by newbies since 1980...

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4

Similar Threads

  1. Tournament sized scenarios
    By DukeofLazy in forum Advanced Squad Leader
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08 Jan 11, 10:59
  2. Texas Tournament - What Scenarios Should I Play?
    By ChrisBuehler in forum Advanced Squad Leader
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22 Jun 09, 00:57
  3. Scenario re-balancing 'errata'
    By Will Fleming in forum Advanced Squad Leader
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 26 Feb 09, 17:46
  4. 2008 Thunderbird ASL Tournament Scenarios Have Been Posted
    By cujo8-1 in forum ASL Announcements & Events
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 15 Oct 08, 23:56
  5. Tournament Scenarios - info needed
    By Count Belisarius in forum Advanced Squad Leader
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01 Mar 04, 11:47

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •