one thing we don't have to do, it would appear, is count victory points in the event of a draw

_________________
[url=http://tinyurl.com/bott2015][img]http://i62.tinypic.com/205fcow.jpg[/img][/url]

So I guess siegers wouldn't be a good idea then  

Only if you want to finish with 60pts after 6 draws.

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion

hmmmm, with my tournament scores of late I might just take that!

Well I've just send GW an email:

*******,

I hope you don't mind me emailing you; my name is Matthew ***** and we spoken about EPIC events at a open war earlier this year. I organise allot of independent EPIC tournaments and I sent you a calendar of events for 2008; I would like to thank you for holding this event without clashing with another inderpenant EPIC tournament.

Anyway I've just seen the proposed rules pack and some concerns have been arisen by veteran EPIC tournament players: (http://www.tacticalwargames.net/forums/ ... 2392;st=15 )

Time allocated for each game

2hrs per game is cutting it abit fine, this means players will have to get their heads down and play without any social interaction at the gaming table. This is a problem as:
firstly you end up affecting a valuable asset of the event, a pleasurable social gaming experience
secondly it could result in allot of draws, making the events teams life very difficult.  
1hr and 30mins for lunch seems to long; there will be a big period of time for customers to wait for the next game. As an organiser I do know that you need time to input scores, judge painting etc but 90 minutes? Is there the opportunity for customers to overrun games into this vast amount of time? Is there the opportunity to start early?

Tournament points

This scoring system is very similar to last year, which caused resentment. The margins of points between winning, drawing and losing are massive. It gives no benefit to fight on if you think you can grab a narrow loss. Below is a scoring system used at allot of events:  


(attachment of my victory points table)






The above two factors, and the fact that this is the most expensive EPIC tournament on the calendar, is making me think twice before entering. A few gamers are only going to show GW that EPIC is not a "dead gaming system" and that they are writing it off as a "quirky tournament"; an image I'm sure you don't want to portray.



Again I apologise if this email has not gone through the appropriate channels, I just thought you would like to know any concerns veteran gamers had early, so things might be able to change to accommodate



Thank you



Matthew ******

_________________
You can take my life .... but you will never take my FREEDOM!

Hope it produces some positive results Matt. The scoring is really a bit off.

Everyone should have a Warlord Titan.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Good words Matt.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I notice that Warmaster is using virtually the same system.

I wonder if GW will receive an email, similar to Matt's, from the Warmaster crowd.

_________________
[url=http://tinyurl.com/bott2015][img]http://i62.tinypic.com/205fcow.jpg[/img][/url]

----------

Indeed all GW tournaments seem to use this lame scoring system!

_________________
[url=http://tinyurl.com/bott2015][img]http://i62.tinypic.com/205fcow.jpg[/img][/url]

I actually quite like the look of the scoring system versus the WPS score system. Though I do think there should be some sort of bonus to the loser for limiting the VP difference. The problem with the WPS system is that if you're winning convincingly on turn 3 there's a big incentive to fail to grab objectives and take it to turn 4 and go for the big 5-0. Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't really seem in the spirit of the game. Also, the WPS system implies that each VP has a similar value when, in fact, if you've got 3 VPs, getting VP 4 or 5 is relatively easy compared to getting the first 2. IMO the score system should place the emphasis on getting the win, nothing more.

On the subject of the game length, 2 hours just isn't cutting it for me. I was going to go to this but now I'm having major doubts. There's nothing worse than spoiling a good game with time pressure.

The scoring system is set up for 200 players doing the same system. You need big differences or everyone comes out tied.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

As far as I can tell, GW are trying to downgrade the epic tournaments, they've taken no guidance from the popular and year on year well attended epic events, written a bad system for points, limited the time for games AND upped the price from the frankly shocking £50 of last years tourny. On principle I shouldn't go. But I probably will, just to play more epic.

PS. Last year we had 12 players at the Epic GT, 5 of those came from Bournemouth store (including me) this year none of them will be attending (except me), that smacks of a 8 player tourny!

_________________
"Stars in my pocket like grains of sand."

www.spartangames.co.uk

This year I'll be back  

_________________
_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk - home of the UK Epic tournament scene
NetEA NetERC Xenos Lists Chair
NetEA Ork + Feral Ork + Speed Freak Champion