Friendly tournament last week-end

4 posts / 0 new
Last post
John Flipp
John Flipp's picture
Friendly tournament last week-end

So me, my brothers and some friends had a small tournament on saturday, with the format of 200-5 which me and Skyscraper already tried in the past. We played on half maps (thanks to Dwayne for sending them to me) but this time I wanted to try without time limits of 50 mins like we did last tournament. It had it's advantages and disadvantages.

First, many of my friends dont play this game that often so they had to refer to the rules many times, or interrupt my game to ask me. So there was no ''stress play'' and games were a lot more tactical.
I kept some teams from last tournament for my friends to choose from and one in particular rose more than others, while last timed tournament it was a mess to play because of all the conditions and different powers (beholders Wink ).

The main disadvantage was that games were not always ending at the same time so we had to wait a bit. Also we played less games because of that too, but for us it wasn't much of a problem.

Overall I see a big difference in team making when you know its timed or not. With timed, big hitters with simple powers are very good because you stack points rapidly, or you can have lots of healers and deflecting powers that can prevent the opponent from scoring anything.

Without time, those options are still good but a lot of creatures have complex powers that are good on the long run. You also tend to forget less immediate interrupts and champion powers that could change the course of the game.

I still don't know yet what I like most, because I had a lot of fun both times. I guess I will have to try those formulas again and even new ones...
Anybody here ever thought about team play? (two vs two, with small teams on a big map with four start areas)


Always up for a good trade!

Ira's picture

Thanks for the tournament information. I agree that completely untimed games can be tricky, since players can end up waiting a long time for the next game. That said, I also think there's something satisfying about getting to the "true" end of the game. When considering tournament design for competitive events, I aim for something like 80% of games should be resolved by the time limit.

So, perhaps you don't need "untimed" but if you picked something like 60 or 70 minutes, you'd get most games finishing. Also, as your players get more experience, the games will go faster. Certainly for 200-5 on small maps, I'd expect many games to finish in 60 minutes, unless players take a particularly long time with each move. Then again, if you're just playing with your friends in a friendly tournament, it seems best to pick whatever time format works for that group - I'd do a lot to cultivate more players!

Can you share any of the warbands/maps you used, or any particularly interest matchups or plays?

plastic finn
plastic finn's picture

Thanks for the report.

On the team format:
Yes, we've played 2-on-2 numerous times since the first in 2007 (I remember it, it was that good). I can be fun both for variety and getting to play with more people (games tend to last a bit longer, too). Also, if you have a very uneven field where you can pair the best player and the newcomer, it can sometimes be an even better choice.

I remember at least one European Championship where 2-on-2 was used as the fun format one night. And good fun it was! (thanks to the organiser Joost!)

Also, in one Finnish Championship (around 2009-2011) everyone who did not make it to the finals entered a "brawl" on a single map, I think 6 players or so, and IIRC with ca. 2 figures each. I wasn't in it, but they certainly seemed to have fun! Goes to show all kinds of team/group games can be very entertaining. Go for it!

skyscraper's picture

Cool stuff guys, and thanks JP for reporting!