GenCon Indy 2012



  • @DizzKneeLand33:

    @squirecam:

    But what they did have was a “math” scheme to get the allies into france for good by turns 5-7, or USSR defeated by then. Not saying they were right, but by turn 6-8 you did have a good idea which side was ahead. �� That game being revised. Now, I have had revised games that went 20+ turns too.

    I’m not saying AA50 can be determined in 6 rounds. But with a 42 start you can get a good judge of how the game is going after 7 rounds.

    So, in essence, you are a gaming god then.

    For, it’s quite humourous your quote.  One of my games is with me as the Allies, where Russia fell a LONG, LONG time ago, and I have never stepped a TOE into France.  And yet…. I think that I’m at least equal, if not a bit up.

    Granted, Japan has about 957 fighters (or maybe just 34), but nothing else…

    So, at GenCon you would have declared me the loser 13 turns ago… I would have spent travel money and money to get into the convention to have you tell me I’m the loser, since I didn’t get into France by round 7 and Russia has fallen…

    LMFAO.

    Italy owns Russia, Germany owns Arch, Japan owns Urals.  And yet… it’s still an AWESOME game.  Glad souL and I didn’t play our game at GenCon…

    I was never a part of that group nor did I believe that they had an infallible system. That was also for revised and not AA50.


  • SFO Founder TripleA Admin

    I don’t think generating interest at GenCon is a problem. It’s an enormous convention.

    There are more factors at play here. One thing is that what Larry says for tournament rules goes. Next, the tournaments at GenCon are huge (from my understanding) and the budget is limited to what WotC provides for games and prizes, chess clocks not being one of those things. Another thing is that there are beginners (as compared to us) and, if you want to promote the game, they should NOT be alienated. Next, there is a limited amount of time to play in a face-to-face tournament. Finally, Greg has 19+ years of experience which gives him good wisdom about running a tournament but he knows he doesn’t have all the answers.

    If we want to engage in a discussion about face-to-face tournament rules, it needs to be civilized. Don’t go around name calling or making assumptions about why or why not something is the way it is. You can’t start off by saying, “your rules completely suck.”

    To this end, I would like to start a thread about tournament rules in the appropriate forum. In this discussion, there will be armchair comments and comments from those who actually played with the tournament rules.

    @Gargantua:

    Will you write a check for the clocks?

    You know what. YES. I would cut the cheque and pay the bill.

    Provided you actually listen to fan input, instead of -relegating- people to the “suggestion box”. Hold me to it.

    From what I can tell, apparently speaking in person about the tourney style is a totally unacceptable form of communication, and damned is anyone who tries to encourage change.

    Writing online also seems to ill-advised as anyone who DARES to have another opinion should be overlooked or invalidated, because their paperwork didn’t make it to the “suggestion box” at the event.

    It’s clear from the history of the tourney, and it’s attendee’s, limited interest and ear is being lent to the players. Not when Pride is on the line. (Infact, from what I’ve read here, only -eye- is lent to written submission, everything else is veto’d irregardless of content)

    Maybe we’re wrong, maybe Smorey does have it figured all out perfectly, but maybe it’s time to try it differently?

    Regardless of how you slice the cake, GENERATING INTEREST in GEN CON should be the primary objective of the pre tourney-effort, not pigeon-holing play style, and excluding/belittling alternate opinions.

    What a great way to treat people.

    In my -obviously- worthless opinion, the tournament should suit the players/attendee’s, not the other way around. � I hope someone prints that and puts it in the “suggestion box” for me.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    So, if I were you (Gargantua), and that would never happen, I would just come to GEN CON, play and see how competent you really are at playing the basics of AA whatever version. Because if you can’t win playing the basics, how competent do your really think you are playing in any rules set of AA?  It think maybe you should start with the 1941 game…that might get you a win here or there…

    Greg Smorey

    Well here’s one for the records folks.

    GLOBAL 1940 ALPHA 3.9+ via TRIPLE-A
    Gen con (MiamiUmike) -VS- AA.org (Gargantua)

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27887.45

    Gen Con surrenders US #2

    Greg has 19+ years of experience which gives him good wisdom

    That’s probably so, but I hope this year he’s learned humility, and to treat AA.org’ers/online-gamers with more respect and dignity.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    P.S. For the Record, Mike is a decent guy, and we had an excellent game going until he let it slip! :S

    I am looking forward to a rematch if he is. He’s creative and despite the showing - has definetly tasted battle before.  I regret automatically prejudging him earlier in this thread.  I hope he sticks around AA.org for alot longer!



  • :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    All these “Gen Con legends” should play at AA.org and prove their worth.

    Then we will know the truth about skills.



  • A) Regarding AA50 game quality:
    For DizzKneeLand33 and others, the logic of their preference for AA50 tourney format seems to be:
    *** Use chess clocks –> Minimum 12-round games --> Games are closer to out-of-the-box (OTB) victory condition (VC) when time runs out --> BETTER GAMES ***

    I disagree with this logic.
    1. Even 12-round games will not achieve OTB VC–Dizz mentioned ongoing games of 17, 20 and 23 rounds–so an event will still need a tourney VC, such as Most Victory Cities or Most Territory IPCs (tiebreaker) that Greg uses.
    2. Since tourney VC is needed no matter the number of rounds, I’m skeptical that most players will find longer games (# rounds) inherently better.  For example, to me an Allied 10-8 Victory City tourney win is just that–a win–whether after 12 rounds or 6 rounds.

    Perhaps the argument is, if a tourney guarantees 12-round games, more folks from this forum will show up.  Ok, that would be good, but again, I’m skeptical.  Folks here, I presume, are used to long games, yes, but games in which you can take a good amount of time to take each turn, with the full use of battle calculators, etc.  Would they really leap into the equivalent of a “speed chess” tourney, with 5-minute turns, just because it was guaranteed to last 12 rounds?  I doubt it.

    B) Regarding chess clocks:
    1. Worth considering - I’d probably suggest their trial in a Masters/expert level tournament first, so that mainstream tourneys stay accessible to newcomers.
    2. You are in fact modifying the game - rulebook has no timing rules, so you would be “making them up”–anathema to some on this forum.
    3. It seems to me that to use chess clocks, you’d have to set the number of rounds in the tourney. In chess, for example, it is commonly 40 MOVES in 2 hours.  In AA50, it might be 12 ROUNDS in 6 hours.  Each side starts with 180 minutes (half the time), and if either side runs out of time before 12 rounds are complete, they lose.  Realize that setting the number of rounds is changing the OTB rules, no more or less than Greg’s current AA50 format of  setting no time limit on turns, no minimum number of rounds, and game time limit to 6 hours.
    4. If you have to set the number of rounds, I think 12 is too many.  You’d be talking about 5-minute turns on average, including all dice rolling for battles–sure, Italy is OK with that, but others, not so much–which is insanely fast.  Might be good for a “Blitz AA50” tourney, but not for the mainstream one.  I would suggest 7 rounds (8.5-min turns), or 8 rounds (7.5-min turns) at the most. 
    5. I don’t think there should be a set limit on each turn.  I think, just like in chess, players should be free to spend less time on earlier moves–standard opening sequences if you will–and more time crunching numbers for major battles at the end.
    6. I think the main advantage of a clock would be ensuring that each side gets the same amount of time to plan and act.  The disadvantage is that you have to set the number of rounds, which is undesirable to some who prefer the game to be more “open” in that length.
    7. If you’re going to go this route, it has to be with chess clocks.  People using a stopwatch or cell phone or some device that is easily disrupted (reset by mistake, etc.) is a recipe for disaster.
    8. Chess clocks are a non-trivial investment, and should not be sprung on Greg.

    Like I say, I think chess clocks (divide time in half, set number of rounds to achieve) could be deployed at a Masters or some other expert level event.  It would lend to the gravitas of the tourney and would be a small-scale test to see how they go over.  It may be that players in other tourneys notice and say, “why don’t we use those, too?”

    C) Regarding good discussion:
    There are ways to make the following points that wouldn’t make the posters come across as immature or disrespectful:
    questioneer - “Suggested the chess clock idea to Smorey ages ago…again he wouldn’t listen to reason.”
    DizzKneeLand33 - “So, in essence, you are a gaming god then…LMFAO.  Italy owns Russia, Germany owns Arch, Japan owns Urals.  And yet… it’s still an AWESOME game.  Glad souL and I didn’t play our game at GenCon…”
    Imperious Leader - “All these ‘Gen Con legends’ should play at AA.org and prove their worth.  Then we will know the truth about skills.”
    Not to mention the juvenile gloating above of Gargantua and questioneer.

    I’m grateful that djensen, ghr2, and jim010 are on the forum to make their points with civility.

    BB



  • BB you do realise your people skills went down 3 points? as to timeing changing the rules, don’t think WotC won’t be thinking about doing it, they already do it with Magic: the Gathering in tournements.

    speaking of Which, every single one of your posts has been to post only negative comments all of them, especially about members of the board here, that while I don’t know them i’m more prone to side with them because of the attitudes coming from your side of the argument.



  • @Scarapis:

    every single one of your posts has been to post only negative comments all of them

    you’re wrong  😄



  • @Scarapis:

    BB you do realise your people skills went down 3 points?

    Seriously, though, my posts have been mostly neutral discussions of the history of current AA50 tourney rules, and a discussion of where they might go in the future (chess clocks, etc.)

    @Scarapis:

    as to timeing changing the rules, don’t think WotC won’t be thinking about doing it

    I think you overestimate WOTC’s interest in A&A tournament format.  The A&A tourneys at the cons are just an advertising expense to them.  It’s conceivable that someone in their marketing department would feel strongly that new timing rules will increase con tourney attendance and therefore sell more games, but, based on what I hear, they’re not that involved.  Timing rule changes will come from the players and tourney organizers, not from WOTC.

    @Scarapis:

    speaking of which, every single one of your posts has been to post only negative comments all of them, especially about members of the board here, that while I don’t know them i’m more prone to side with them because of the attitudes coming from your side of the argument.

    Positively, I support player input into tourney format, even if that means changing the current format (e.g., NO, set # of rounds, different victory conditions, etc.), and I think that some form of timed format, such as chess clocks, is worth trying out.  Both ideas have been brought up by members of this forum.  I’ve pointed out disadvantages of those ideas as well, but that’s the point of a good discussion.  I’ve certainly been far less negative of those ideas than certain forum members have slammed into Greg’s current tourney format.

    In any case, where members have been arrogant or uncivil, I’ve called them out on it, because it gets in the way of good discussion.

    BB


  • 2020 '16 '15 '14

    BB, I’m sorry if you took my post as being arrogant or uncivil.  My post was in response to what I thought was arrogance regarding the tournament organizers being able to always tell who is winning via one specific strategy, namely a pure KGF strategy (involving the race of stacking France versus the run to Moscow).  I wanted to point out that the game is much deeper than that.

    As far as the clock procedures would go, I think it would need some playtesting first, because there are some very valid point regarding how many rounds per hour would be required and so forth.  Or, like in chess tournaments, you could have a primary time control and a secondary time control.  Many of the tournaments I played in were 40 moves in 2 hours and sudden death in another hour (others were 25 moves in 60 minutes with adjudications possible in very long games).  Concerning A&A, perhaps it could be 7 rounds in 2 hours and 4 rounds for the next hour (I’m just guesstimating those numbers – others would be much more knowledgeable that I regarding timing for rounds).  Also, the game could still go to a third time control if one side had a lot of time left (it would be that team’s option) before going to the VC/IPC values/adjudication.


  • SFO Founder TripleA Admin

    I am starting to like the idea of time controls. If I recall correctly, I was both on the giving and receiving end of complaints about “taking too much time” during the last tournament I played 5 or more years ago at GenCon LA.

    If you have a clock, then you can take an hour on your first move if you want and 5 minutes on each one after that.

    The big problem is logistics. Do you take money out of you prize budget for chess clocks? If there are only 1 or 2 tournament organizers, how do you get them there? Do you require people to purchase and bring their own?

    Would a chess clock alienate some casual or beginner players? Does that matter?

    Axis & Allies really isn’t meant to be played in a time restricted format so how do you make it playable in that format?


  • SFO Founder TripleA Admin

    I’ve started a new thread to discuss face-to-face tournament rules:
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27947.0



  • @Gargantua:

    Well here’s one for the records folks.

    GLOBAL 1940 ALPHA 3.9+ via TRIPLE-A
    Gen con (MiamiUmike) -VS- AA.org (Gargantua)

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27887.45

    Gen Con surrenders US #2

    Now, now - let’s be clear on this. You are playing someone who has played this game once with the original OOB rules and zero times under Alpha +3. You are playing someone who missed one key line out of about 30 pages of rules. And, if I recall, given that this was supposed to be a friendly game - you turned down a chance to continue the game by simply allowing me to make a different purchase to put units on Japan and pick up from there….You must not have been too sure of yourself to not want to continue…  :evil:

    So - just keep that in mind before you crow about your victory too much -  😄

    Regards,
    MM

    PS - it still was fun to try…LOL



  • Quote from: Gargantua on July 20, 2012, 08:27:01 pm

    Well here’s one for the records folks.

    GLOBAL 1940 ALPHA 3.9+ via TRIPLE-A
    Gen con (MiamiUmike) -VS- AA.org (Gargantua)

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27887.45

    Gen Con surrenders US #2

    ==================================
    Now, now - let’s be clear on this. You are playing someone who has played this game once with the original OOB rules and zero times under Alpha +3. You are playing someone who missed one key line out of about 30 pages of rules. And, if I recall, given that this was supposed to be a friendly game - you turned down a chance to continue the game by simply allowing me to make a different purchase to put units on Japan and pick up from there….You must not have been too sure of yourself to not want to continue… �

    So - just keep that in mind before you crow about your victory too much - �

    Regards,
    MM

    PS - it still was fun to try…LOL



  • Good Idea!



  • Quote from: Gargantua on July 20, 2012, 08:27:01 pm

    Well here’s one for the records folks.

    GLOBAL 1940 ALPHA 3.9+ via TRIPLE-A
    Gen con (MiamiUmike) -VS- AA.org (Gargantua)

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27887.45

    Gen Con surrenders US #2

    Now, now - let’s be clear on this. You are playing someone who has played this game once with the original OOB rules and zero times under Alpha +3. You are playing someone who missed one key line out of about 30 pages of rules. And, if I recall, given that this was supposed to be a friendly game - you turned down a chance to continue the game by simply allowing me to make a different purchase to put units on Japan and pick up from there….You must not have been too sure of yourself to not want to continue… �

    So - just keep that in mind before you crow about your victory too much - �

    Regards,
    MM



  • BB,

    Seriously, if you are “offended” by my statement then you got serious issues.  Being one of “Smorey’s boys”, I see that hypersensitivity is contagious. :roll:


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    BB is only offended that he just joined on July 15 and has 6 posts so he has to bark loud to draw attention. :mrgreen:



  • @DizzKneeLand33:

    As far as the clock procedures would go, I think it would need some playtesting first

    Just bought a chess clock.  I’ll see if I can get a timed pick-up game or two in at GenCon, see how it plays and get back to you…



  • I need someone to explain a bit better how this chess clock idea will work.

    Let’s say the tournament round is set for 6 hours (which is what AA50 games are set to currently). This would then mean each team has 3 hours of time? In the middle of round 6, Italy is up and opps - the Axis run out of time - they automatically lose?

    If this is correct, then I guess that means we want to have NO new people play the game. Not even people who have played but are not true ‘experts’. The only situation I could see possibly thinking about using this idea would be in a Masters type tournament. That would be it. Otherwise, you will kill any non-hardcore player from ever even attempting a tournament game. For the Masters, it might work.

    I’d be willing to give it a try - just to see how it goes - but I cannot see how this helps grow the number of people who would want to play in a tournament.

    MM



  • @miamiumike:

    I need someone to explain a bit better how this chess clock idea will work.

    Let’s say the tournament round is set for 6 hours (which is what AA50 games are set to currently). This would then mean each team has 3 hours of time? In the middle of round 6, Italy is up and opps - the Axis run out of time - they automatically lose?

    If this is correct, then I guess that means we want to have NO new people play the game. Not even people who have played but are not true ‘experts’. The only situation I could see possibly thinking about using this idea would be in a Masters type tournament. That would be it. Otherwise, you will kill any non-hardcore player from ever even attempting a tournament game. For the Masters, it might work.

    I’d be willing to give it a try - just to see how it goes - but I cannot see how this helps grow the number of people who would want to play in a tournament.

    MM

    Then don’t tell that to WotC since in their magic tournements they have them timed, and at the end of that time whoever is up wins, thats life get over it, in a tourney of say 6 hours if ea. player/team took 15 minutes per turn, that would still allow 12 turns per player/team, which would definately give an idea of who the clear winner is, but then you will find some fault in that hypothesis, since anything that takes away from your style of play is wrong. at least BB is willing to give a try, but your ready to doom it before it starts.



  • @Scarapis:

    Then don’t tell that to WotC since in their magic tournements they have them timed, and at the end of that time whoever is up wins, thats life get over it

    WOTC does not treat their A&A tournaments the same way as their Magic tournaments.  I used to play in Magic PTQs, so I know.  Magic tourneys are multiple qualifier events throughout the year, not just at the cons, and they have cash and invitations to the Pro Tour on the line (Pro Tour winners get $40,000), so that’s a whole different level of seriousness.  For A&A, at Origins and GenCon, WOTC is happy if there’s a good turnout and Greg organizes events across the variety of their product line.  For their part, players have been thrilled with the fantastic prizes Greg procures within the budget WOTC gives him.  I wouldn’t want there to be cash or some other heavy duty prize on the line because I think that has the potential to turn the tourneys ugly in a hurry.
    @Scarapis:

    …in a tourney of say 6 hours if ea. player/team took 15 minutes per turn, that would still allow 12 turns per player/team, which would definately give an idea of who the clear winner is, but then you will find some fault in that hypothesis, since anything that takes away from your style of play is wrong. at least BB is willing to give a try, but your ready to doom it before it starts.

    Mike’s points are valid, and he is not trying to doom anything, merely trying to maintain and increase A&A event attendance at the cons across the board.  I think a timed event is worth consideration, but as I mentioned earlier, try it out in a Masters or expert level event first and see what traction it gains.  We can disagree on the number of rounds–I think 5-min country turns (15 minutes per side as you say) to fit in 12 rounds in 6 hours is a bit brisk.  Seven rounds (8.5-min country turns) or eight rounds (7.5-min country turns on average) seems more doable to me.  Also, as I talk about in the separate FTF thread that djensen started, what happens if 6 hours expires in the middle of Germany turn 8, with both sides having used up their 180 minutes exactly?  The 12-round target has not been met by either side, neither side has timed out, and the game is not at the end of a US turn.  So this format is trickier to figure out than it first seems, but still worth considering–I’m not dooming it by any means.

    BB



  • but the whole idea of the clocks is to prevent people from taking forever to make their turns, thats why chess tourneys came out with the clocks, they would have players who took hours to make a move, and i’m sure there are people who will take forever to decide their moves in this game, when I played A&A (original MB) i’d take a minute to make my move and a couple minutes for combat resolution so a few minutes at the most.

    not too mention the idea of a timed game appeals to me because it adds that sense of pressure the commanders felt in the war, have to make quick decisions.

    not too mention with a lack of timed rules, what say if a player who is up realises he screwed up and is going to lose, so he decides to stall the game so he does not lose? you need time no matter how you look at it, or the game can be abused.



  • Scarapis - you really need to stop comparing Magic to A&A - they are two entirely different games and gaming systems, as BB has pointed out. WIth that logic, I can compare Monopoly and Rise and Decline of the Third Reich and try to put the same constraints on both games….

    People stalling and messing around is always a possibility - but - in the many years (6+ now) that I have either played or ran Greg’s tournaments we have very rarely ever had problems. If someone is stalling or playing excessively slow, they get warned. If they continue - they forfeit. I am not sure how many years it has been since that happened.

    And you need to read my posts a bit closer - I said I would be willing to give it a try and, in fact,
    I think in a Masters or ‘expert’ tournament it could work. It will NEVER work, IMHO, for a tournament designed to attract as many people as possible. As BB also stated - that is the goal for Greg and for WotC for the A&A line of games.

    MM


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 13
  • 29
  • 111
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 5
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

75
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts