Tournament Format.....

Martin Mayers

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
4,569
Reaction score
1,989
Location
The Gulag
First name
Gulagwanker
Country
llUkraine
Agonising over this....

So. In terms of formatting of tournaments (specifically Bounding First Fire Blackpool, later this year in November)....

If 32 enter the main tournament (optimistic given that this is the first running of this tournament....although I am hopeful that we may achieve this number if interest remains strong as it currently is) then there is no issue ...... straight knockout, FA Cup draw style (ie. totally random draw), 5 rounds.

If 16 enter the main tournament I have two choices. We group into four groups of four, play three scenarios per group to achieve four semi finalists and a finalist. My question then is how you separate group ties. I intend to score 3 points for a win, 1 point for an adjudicated win. Any ties initially to be settled on the 'count back' rule (ie. who won their head to head). But it's mathematically possible for three players to tie. What then?

Alternatively I reduce five scenarios down to four and do straight knockout, same basis as the round of 32. Start the tournament on the afternoon of the Friday rather than the morning.

I won't be introducing many onerous special rules but given the tournament nature of the scenarios involved, I'm thinking of a special rule that allows a leadership modifier to effect repair rolls, and a -0 leadership modifier to cancel off the possibility of X when repairing. Again, thoughts? Good idea, bad idea ?

It's likely that the am scenarios will be relatively short as time is scarcer up until lunch than it is after. How to best enforce this? Thoughts? I have my own ideas but they may be too heavy handed and people are ultimately there to have fun.

I have 5 scenarios which should make a perfect fit. 2 are PTO, a short one featuring USMC, and a longer one featuring Aussies (both v Japanese obviously). Is 2/5 PTO in a tournament environment too much? Both PTO scenarios are straightforward in terms of the rule set. But should I crash one of them and just go for 1/5 PTO. I feel, deep down, that PTO is now such an established area of ASL that a tournament should include it. But, again, ultimately it has to be fun. One of the PTO scenarios is for the semi final.....that is essential to me. I think a tournament winner should be able to handle the different theatres. I could change the earlier one though (but would rather not as it's a very nice, shortish, scenario)

Any suggestions/assistance graciously received.
 
Last edited:

Major Issues

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2018
Messages
325
Reaction score
1,102
Location
Secane, PA
First name
Vince
Country
llUnited States
Don't like the idea of a SR allowing leadership to affect repairs. It favors the side with better leaders, which would generally be Germans over Russians in most scenarios. It also skews the results for ROAR posting, since the scenarios wouldn't be played as written. ROAR does have a listing provision for alternative balances, but how to list something that potentially affects both sides?

Vince
 

Carln0130

Forum Guru
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
2,583
Location
MA
Country
llUnited States
<<If 16 enter the main tournament I have two choices. We group into four groups of four, play three scenarios per group to achieve four semi finalists and a finalist. My question then is how you separate group ties. I intend to score 3 points for a win, 1 point for an adjudicated win. Any ties initially to be settled on the 'count back' rule (ie. who won their head to head). But it's mathematically possible for three players to tie. What then?>>

I would stress that single elimination does not mean pack your bags and go home. There will be open play for all once done.

<<I won't be introducing many onerous special rules but given the tournament nature of the scenarios involved, I'm thinking of a special rule that allows a leadership modifier to effect repair rolls, and a -0 leadership modifier to cancel off the possibility of X when repairing. Again, thoughts? Good idea, bad idea ?>>

Bad idea. The game will take care of itself. I would concentrate more on scenario errata and that sort of thing. This assuming your are going with a list. you might have some newer players too and this sort of thing will just confuse.

<<
It's likely that the am scenarios will be relatively short as time is scarcer up until lunch than it is after. How to best enforce this? Thoughts? I have my own ideas but they may be too heavy handed and people are ultimately there to have fun.

I have 5 scenarios which should make a perfect fit. 2 are PTO, a short one featuring USMC, and a longer one featuring Aussies (both v Japanese obviously). Is 2/5 PTO in a tournament environment too much? Both PTO scenarios are straightforward in terms of the rule set. But should I crash one of them and just go for 1/5 PTO. I feel, deep down, that PTO is now such an established area of ASL that a tournament should include it. But, again, ultimately it has to be fun. One of the PTO scenarios is for the semi final.....that is essential to me. I think a tournament winner should be able to handle the different theatres. I could change the earlier one though (but would rather not as it's a very nice, shortish, scenario)

Any suggestions/assistance graciously received.>>

The shorter scenarios in the morning is what we have done at the Nor'easter for years. Most players are gracious enough when time is up to just fairly state who has the upper hand. As the later round each day goes until dawns early light, we usually cut slack on the finish time. If it looks like it will get too far out of hand time-wise, we do adjudicate. This is pretty rare though. Remember though, the people playing this match are not the only consideration, there are also the people in the next round.

As I see you are going scenario list, I stick to my above suggestion regarding special rules vs policing up the errata. We also keep a supply of "Motor Pool" scenarios on hand. VERY short, but balanced scenarios that allow late arrivals to catch up to the pack.

I would not cut the field up into smaller groups. Keeping one large body allows you more flexibility. If you have two unexpected drop outs in two different groups the separate groups idea becomes a hassle. One group and it can be dealt with pretty seamlessly.

Hope that helps Martin and if you think of anything else, feel free to give a PM. Thanks for the help PTing the Dinant CG, BTW. Never forgot that and appreciate it. Really down to the final run now. Carl
 

Michael R

Minor Hero
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Feb 4, 2003
Messages
4,622
Reaction score
4,162
Location
La Belle Province
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
You can visit canadianasl.org to see how we run the Canadian ASL Open. Click on the link for the charter and then scroll down to the appendix. Our format is set up to work for any number of players.
 

Sparafucil3

Forum Guru
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
11,335
Reaction score
5,070
Location
USA
First name
Jim
Country
llUnited States
If 32 enter the main tournament (optimistic given that this is the first running of this tournament....although I am hopeful that we may achieve this number if interest remains strong as it currently is) then there is no issue ...... straight knockout, FA Cup draw style (ie. totally random draw), 5 rounds.[
How you chose your finalist doesn't matter as long as people know how you're doing it. You may want to try and keep your brackets "even". You don't want the top 4 on the left for instance.

But it's mathematically possible for three players to tie. What then?
You have a tie breaker rule. Just make sure people know it. Maybe the winner is the one who's opponents won the most games. Just be careful. If I win the first round and that player leaves and doesn't play another, I am on the outs because he didn't have chances to win. Nothing will be perfect, just make sure you publish the rules and stick to them. For the most part, ASL'ers are pretty understanding.

I won't be introducing many onerous special rules but given the tournament nature of the scenarios involved, I'm thinking of a special rule that allows a leadership modifier to effect repair rolls, and a -0 leadership modifier to cancel off the possibility of X when repairing. Again, thoughts? Good idea, bad idea ?
I would stay away from this type of thing, but you do you. Just publish in advance (sensing a theme yet? :) ) Personally, if I were running a tournament, the only rule I would put in place is the Pleva OBA rule.

It's likely that the am scenarios will be relatively short as time is scarcer up until lunch than it is after. How to best enforce this? Thoughts? I have my own ideas but they may be too heavy handed and people are ultimately there to have fun.
Don't enforce scenario choice, enforce round length and let players police scenario choice. Then be ruthless in enforcement. At ASLOk, if Bret comes to you and says time is up, you both lose. This is ... you guessed it, well known. :)

Any suggestions/assistance graciously received.
ASL'ers are pretty decent folk. Post your rules in advance and ask for input from people who might attend. One of the locals here in DC just held a new small tournament get together. He just kept it simple to start. You'll do fine. Fewer and fewer people have the stamina to do what you're offering. Most will be grateful and fuck the ones who aren't. Just my opinion, YMMV. -- jim
 

JoeArthur

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
1,108
Reaction score
1,067
Location
Broadstairs
Country
llUnited Kingdom
You cannot be more efficient than the Germans Martin (well OK - there are the Swiss), so have you seen this:

https://www.aslgermany.de/about-grenadier/

The tournament also has a SSR:

The following Tournament-SSR is in effect for all relevant Scenarios consisting OBA

Each time a second red chit is drawn it´s put back into the chit-mix and instead of canceling the OBA module
an additional red chit is added to the chit-mix. This procedure may repeat more than once.
Additional chit draws are exempt from this procedure.

Hope that helps.
 

Martin Mayers

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
4,569
Reaction score
1,989
Location
The Gulag
First name
Gulagwanker
Country
llUkraine
Thanks to everyone thus far which has:

a) Changed my mind on my grudge breakdown rule !

b) pointed me toward the really useful CASLO rules and Grenadier rules.

I would defo use the Pleva rules but there's no OBA in any of the scenarios so not relevant.

Cheers again everyone.
 

JoeArthur

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
1,108
Reaction score
1,067
Location
Broadstairs
Country
llUnited Kingdom
In case you missed this Martin:

https://cardboardwarrior.blog/2018/07/03/texas-team-tournament-2018/

Specifically:

"Ferocity Fest is a mini tourney held on Thursday. It is usually a fairly meaty scenario pitting Allied players vs. each other and Axis players vs. each other. There is a FF point sheet that you fill out as you do various things in game such as X’ing out a flamethrower on the first shot (8 points), killing a tank in CC etc…. When you accomplish an event on the list, you have a phrase to yell out. You are playing your opponent, but you are actually competing against the other players playing your side for points. It’s a lot of fun and I usually participate, actually winning as the Axis side a couple of years ago."

I think Trevor used to do a prize for the most double ones and double sixes back in the days of Beserk! ?
 

Mister T

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
4,204
Reaction score
1,680
Location
Bruxelles
Country
llFrance
Agonising over this....

So. In terms of formatting of tournaments (specifically Bounding First Fire Blackpool, later this year in November)....

If 32 enter the main tournament (optimistic given that this is the first running of this tournament....although I am hopeful that we may achieve this number if interest remains strong as it currently is) then there is no issue ...... straight knockout, FA Cup draw style (ie. totally random draw), 5 rounds.


I prefer the seeded bracket (the Wimbledon approach), but the random draw on round 1 is not a dealbreaker, as long as the swiss system is followed for the following rounds. ymmv

If 16 enter the main tournament I have two choices. We group into four groups of four, play three scenarios per group to achieve four semi finalists and a finalist. My question then is how you separate group ties. I intend to score 3 points for a win, 1 point for an adjudicated win. Any ties initially to be settled on the 'count back' rule (ie. who won their head to head). But it's mathematically possible for three players to tie. What then?

Alternatively I reduce five scenarios down to four and do straight knockout, same basis as the round of 32. Start the tournament on the afternoon of the Friday rather than the morning.


It is better to announce in advance the number of rounds and five is certainly better than four so that it provides better gaming for money. The world cup format -group stage format- seems a bit too complex to manage. Straight knockout would do better. Tiebreakers would fit any situation in which there are between 16 and 32 players, which is the most likely outcome and also more confortable for the TD to handle. Tiebreakers come in various formats and are never entirely perfect but they do the job of providing quickly a winner. Among the possible tiebreakers are the following:
- number of wins of opponents played (or defeated)
- first defeat in the tournament
- average AREA of opponents played

You may introduce an "offensive bonus" (as in rugby union) as alternate tiebreaker (for instance one extra point if the winner takes four buildings instead of the three required on the scenario card and one less point for the loser) but this has the disavantage of often lenghtening games to the very end. It would be original though.


I won't be introducing many onerous special rules but given the tournament nature of the scenarios involved, I'm thinking of a special rule that allows a leadership modifier to effect repair rolls, and a -0 leadership modifier to cancel off the possibility of X when repairing. Again, thoughts? Good idea, bad idea ?

Don't let obtuse onservatism prevent you from expressing your personality in tournament design. The idea of preventing critical weapons to fail completely is a good idea, especially in the smaller scenarios you seem to contemplate for the event. The leadership drm as others pointed out is somehow asymmetric accross countries. I would prefer something short like "a repair dr of 6 never results in weapon disablement". Alternatively you could provide each player with one light mulligan in the course of the scenario; "each player is able to treat one 12 DR result as a 11 DR once during the game."

It's likely that the am scenarios will be relatively short as time is scarcer up until lunch than it is after. How to best enforce this? Thoughts? I have my own ideas but they may be too heavy handed and people are ultimately there to have fun.

Go through the gaming tables two and one hour before the scheduled time limit in order to kindly remind players of time limits. The blind round format is likely to induce players to reflect more than less, so set time limits for setup for attacker and defender setups. The attacker should have much less time to reflect as he is in a stronger position to benefit from the blunders of the defender setup. As to adjudication, you may have your own ideas but make sure you convey them to players beforehand. I can only refer to the Copenhagen rules, which gives satisfaction.

I have 5 scenarios which should make a perfect fit. 2 are PTO, a short one featuring USMC, and a longer one featuring Aussies (both v Japanese obviously). Is 2/5 PTO in a tournament environment too much? Both PTO scenarios are straightforward in terms of the rule set. But should I crash one of them and just go for 1/5 PTO. I feel, deep down, that PTO is now such an established area of ASL that a tournament should include it. But, again, ultimately it has to be fun. One of the PTO scenarios is for the semi final.....that is essential to me. I think a tournament winner should be able to handle the different theatres. I could change the earlier one though (but would rather not as it's a very nice, shortish, scenario)

I suggest, with a view to catering for the widest possible range of players, to give the choice to players between one non-PTO and one PTO scenarios for the two rounds earmarked to PTO, with the non-PTO scenario prevailing in case of disagreement. Remember also that smallish PTO scenarios are more dicy than equivalent (in terms of size) ETO ones .

Any suggestions/assistance graciously received.
 

ecz

Partisan Captain
Joined
Aug 31, 2003
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
599
Location
Italy
Country
llItaly
I agree on what George said.
about the suggested tiebreaker:

- number of wins of opponents played (or defeated)
- first defeat in the tournament
- average AREA of opponents played


the first is my favorite;
the second is something that goes beyond my logic, could cause bizzarre results and does NOT guarantee a fair final standing. I do not suggest it when something better is available.
the third is also very good, almost like the first, but requires AREA is keept decently updated, that - today - is not our case, sadly.

I totally agree about the fact a TD can try something new and not fully explored, but be careful and do not exaggerate.

The offensive bonus in terms of VCs achieved tends to prolong innaturally games so I suggest a different kind of offensive bonus:
it simply works in favor of the player winning more times as "attacker" .

This has interesting effects during the side determination process since the attacker faction becomes basically more appetible. The usual tactic of the expert players (examine the scenario, test it in advance, and bid at the tourny for the best side ) is halted any time a player sees a reasonable chance to win as attacker even if the Defender should have an edge.
In this form I suggest the offensive bonus tiebreaker.

About the mullingan I have to say that while it delivers a hit to bad luck allowing to change a 6,6 to a 5,6 in a key moment, perhaps saving a scenario, it also penalizes skilled players that - usually - can survive to adverse events better than their not so experienced opponents.
So, again, I would limit any exotic special tournament rule to special cases.
 
Last edited:
Top