I think your basketball metaphor is bad, but I'm happy to engage with the rest! My problem with the take on tournament organization is that it tends to increase the potential for bad matchups. When the missions are all over the place, it becomes impossible to have the tools for all the missions you might have to play. I agree about how that tests players adaptability. Every list is likely to be better a some the missions being played and worse at others, which leads to more matchups between bad-for-this-scenario and good-for-this-scenario lists. I think this increases randomness/chaos and reduces the likelihood that one of the best players wins, which is a negative for me. As a player, I find many missions not particularly fun for one reason or another (hello, Highly Classified!). While it may be more challenging, I find it frustrating to have missions that I find poorly balanced for tournaments AND not fun continually included in tournaments I would otherwise like to attend. I give these missions a chance, too, my judgments are not just "in theory" from the tournament balance or the fun perspective. I would disagree that a "challenging" (struggling to come up with a better term for this) mission set makes the game more about in-game decisions. When your list is not well-prepared for a given mission, you're at a disadvantage before you've even deployed, reducing the value of your in-game decisions on the final result.
@grampyseer It's an issue when some factions lack TAGs by design, but then missions exist which punish you for not having TAGs in the scoring. It's not even a "hmmmm I lack unit x which is useful for this mission" it's "Hmmm, it's actually impossible for me to score the full points for the mission."
That’s never been in dispute. I apologize, my inclusion of a TaG based mission as an example earlier was not meant to be an endorsement of bad missions. I fully accept, and have already stated, that a there are some missions that are broken. I think there are good reasons why some missions are left out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think TAG missions should simply give tags a boost like in looting and sabotage that it can destroy the AC etc maybe it counts as having baggage for counting points.
"If it straddles two zones it can choose to allocate all of its points to either zone, or 50/50 to both Zones" That or make the mission 12 possible OPs (MAX10).
If my sole purpose is to have fun and there are several missions that I don't find fun being used at an event, why would I attend the event? Also, if part of the fun of it isn't trying to win why even keep track of wins and losses? Why not run a Tigerland or whatever that event is called? I think trying to win is inseparably tied up with having fun. I might be taking you the wrong way here, but I would rather both of us be playing sensible lists with all the tools for the mission at hand. I think that generally results in the most interesting games. I think you've tied up fun with competing and trying to win as well, otherwise all the list prep wouldn't be as interesting. Agreed. ;)
@BLOODGOD, I’m curious. What would you consider a good 5 round ITS lineup? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fundamentally, one that doesn't include any of the crappy [tournament] missions I listed. Additionally, I try to keep the following in mind: Keep missions with complicated scoring or extra rules toward the beginning or middle of the day, when people's minds are fresher. Separate similar missions in the lineup so people don't confuse rules with the previous mission. Use missions with overlapping objective locations if possible, so that the terrain can be placed more easily with the objective locations in mind. How does the scoring for this mission commonly go? Do I want that kind of scoring at the beginning (generally low scoring missions might keep the pack tight early), the middle (swingy missions might allow people with one loss to come back), or the end (generally lower scoring missions allow might allow people a bigger chance at affecting the tie-breakers late) of the tournament? No rules here, I just like to think about the effect mission order might have. Have some variety in objective type (button-pushing, discrete objective control, area control, fetching, killing), though too much variety can feel unfocused. If I were running a five-round, two-day ITS10 tournament for a large crowd this year, I might choose the following missions, in this order (ugh, that damn xenotech is in way too many missions) Acquisition (point control mission) Unmasking (my favorite ITS10 mission: needs some killing, some defense, and a little button pushing; early because its hard) Quadrant Control (area control mission) Firefight (high scoring available, killing mission) Supplies (objective fetching mission) Capture and Protect, Frontline, Power Pack, Safe Area, and Supremacy would also be considered. Comms Center and Tic-Tac-Toe require too many objective markers for a big event and I personally do not like Frostbyte. C&P, FL, and PP were the last cut; I'd definitely consider using any of those to replace one of the current missions if I wanted to have a more focused event (perhaps Capture and Protect for Quadrant Control, or Power Pack for Firefight, etc.).
I belatedly apologize for the overly-strong tone of my dismissal of your basketball metaphor. Thanks for not just disengaging.
Yeah, we’re not very far apart in our ideas, but only in our definitions. I would call that a fine tournament list, but I’d try to sub in a “wild card” mission. Maybe Biotechvore, hunting party, or rescue. Additionally, I don’t categorically avoid the objective room missions or 9 console set ups, so long as I have the terrain figured out. When I say “challenging” I mean the kind of tourney that lets you build two lists, but wish for a third. That’s really it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If I had the terrain for 25 tables worth of 9 objective markers, those ones would be in. I like them. The objective room, beyond being a difficult requirement, is obnoxious because of it's infinite height: I really hate non WYSIWYG terrain in Infinity. It warps every table and makes them too similar, so those missions are out for me.
In theory I agree with this, but in practice I find that it narrows the meta instead of expand it. Then I am also of the opinion that a tournament should be enjoyable to attend than it should be challenging (challenge can be a contributing factor to enjoyment, but it can also be a detracting factor) and missions like Rescue simply pile on too many negative experiences to players. I honestly don't see this as a very huge disadvantage. TAGs can end up too much of a liability thanks to Total Control or the massive points footprint they have, if you know they are coming they are too easy to skew against.. A different take for a future season might be to designate a mission TAG for these missions where a specific O-12 TAG (or insert carbon-copy alien TAG with a different name) is the one you need to protect and score with. At least the points footprint would be mitigated here.
