An interesting team covenant article from today:

http://teamcovenant.com/theorist/2015/02/19/smart-money-the-60-minute-round/

An interesting team covenant article from today 5 days ago

But yes, interesting article on the consequences 60 minute rounds can have on list building.

Wow, really weird. Everyone seems to hate/think 60 min rounds don't work.

Even before I went to events, I always thought 60 was the standard so whenever myself and friends have times game,s they have been for 60 mins. And then at the events I've been to (in the UK) 60mins has been fine. A lot of people still finish before that limit.

I don't see an issue with it at all.

I believe my Store Championship this weekend will be having 45 min rounds!

Having a round time limit that is lower than 75 allows you to manipulate your squads. You can bring two big ships, manage the clock and make sure you never lose a single ship. I don't agree with that theory but that is what you see when you reduce the amount of time. Even in 75 minute games you sometimes wish that you had that extra five minutes or so to finish off a crippled falcon.

For a prime example of what impact a short time limit can have on a game, look at the finals of last Canadian Nationals.

The game ended with 2 Blues (1 full health, one with a couple shields left I think) pointed at Chewbacca, in a corner, with a single hull left. Game went to time, Chewy won. An extra round would have almost guaranteed a win for the B-Wing player.

Basically, short rounds encourage squad building in a such a way that you either don't lose ships because they're built to take a beating and really hard to take down in 60 minutes, or squads that can fly in, shoot down 12+ points of ships in the first couple exchanges, then run away / turtle up and wait for time to run out. Longer rounds make these options less tempting because your opponent has more time to take you down.

Admittedly I've only played in two tourneys, but in the 9 games between them I finished every single game within the hour timeframe. Maybe one game each round went to time. I don't see the problem with 60 minutes at all

I believe my Store Championship this weekend will be having 45 min rounds!

Is your store only open for 3 hours on a Saturday? There is no reason for an X-Wing tournament to have 45 minute rounds. You should complain to the TO and to FFG.

In a system where MOV determines standing instead of just a straight W/L record, time restraints have a much more egregious impact on games, so TOs should do whatever they can to give players as much time as possible.

A Store Championship is a premiere level tournament and should be allotted the entire day to finish (8 hours) which is plenty of time to run 75 minute rounds with 5 rounds of swiss or 4 rounds of swiss with a cut to the top 4. The biggest time waster I see is lunch breaks, players should be encouraged to plan ahead and bring lunch ahead of time and eat between rounds. It would also encourage players to play faster if they want to eat.

60 minute rounds are a sad necessity for stores with limited time restraints.

60 minute rounds are a sad necessity for stores with limited time restraints.

I feel like the TO should be free to publish two time limits, one that will be used if turnout is under a certain number and one if turnout meets or exceeds it.

For example: Rounds will be 75 minutes unless we have 16 or more players, in which case they will be 60 minute rounds.

Firstly, it would be good to have longer games when possible. It might also tamp down on speculative list building, since as an attendee you can't be sure on turnout.

In my experience, 65-70 mins would be the sweet spot. I can't tell you how many times (in a 60 min game) a large ship has stayed alive with 1 hull point at the end of time. Given 5 more minutes, the outcome would've changed.

Personally, I'm fine with 60 min rounds, but would not want 75 min rounds. I won a Store Championship that had 5 swiss rounds and Top 8 cut (8 rounds total) at 60 mins/round and it lasted almost 11 hours. Here's the breakdown

7 rounds/60 mins = 7 hours

15 mins between rounds (score calculations, pairings, setup, etc.)= 1 hour 45 mins

Dinner break (after swiss) = 30 mins

Final Table (untimed) ~ 80-90 mins

60 min rounds = 10 hours 45 mins

75 min rounds = 12 hours 30 mins

I believe my Store Championship this weekend will be having 45 min rounds!

A Store Championship is a premiere level tournament and should be allotted the entire day to finish (8 hours) which is plenty of time to run 75 minute rounds with 5 rounds of swiss or 4 rounds of swiss with a cut to the top 4. The biggest time waster I see is lunch breaks, players should be encouraged to plan ahead and bring lunch ahead of time and eat between rounds. It would also encourage players to play faster if they want to eat.

Or maybe smoke less? I know players that go smoke after every round.

In the UK 60 minute rounds is the standard (from all the tournaments I've been to, and have heard about).

I'd be hard pressed to pay to play in a 45 minute per round tourney. If i did I would most certainly run a yt 1300, and yt2400 and say good luck killing both of these ships in 45 minutes.

An interesting team covenant article from today:

I'd challenge the "interesting" designation. He doesn't like 60 minute rounds, because playing in a shorter time span introduces constraints that don't exist in untimed games or in 75-minute games. That makes perfect sense, but it's not much of a blog post.

[Excessive criticism removed.]

Store Championships are not premier events. Those start at Regionals.

An interesting team covenant article from today:

I'd challenge the "interesting" designation. He doesn't like 60 minute rounds, because playing in a shorter time span introduces constraints that don't exist in untimed games or in 75-minute games. That makes perfect sense, but it's not much of a blog post.

*removed*

I wish I could like this post more than once!

I've killed and lost my share of big/high HP ships in 60 mins.

And yeah, maybe some lists would win more in longer rounds, and others in shorter rounds. That's just another part of the game. If your list NEEDS longer to stay alive/kill stuff, maybe it's the list that needs tweaking not the time limit.

Why should players get a longer time limit for what seems to be one reason; a better chance of winning. That seems off to me. Shouldn't all 100 point games past casual level have the same time limit? Just like the tourney rules are all the same?

An interesting team covenant article from today:

I'd challenge the "interesting" designation. He doesn't like 60 minute rounds, because playing in a shorter time span introduces constraints that don't exist in untimed games or in 75-minute games. That makes perfect sense, but it's not much of a blog post.

[Excessive criticism removed.]

Yeah, it isn't exactly a eye-opening observation. It was pretty much true even back in Wave 3. But, you cannot get around the necessity of 60 minute rounds.

I question Armada's ability to be a tournament game with it's 2 hour limit.

I wish I could like this post more than once!

I appreciate the vote of confidence, but could you remove the second paragraph in the quote? I don't want to derail the thread into a one-sided fight against someone who isn't around to answer.

Yeah, it isn't exactly a eye-opening observation. It was pretty much true even back in Wave 3. But, you cannot get around the necessity of 60 minute rounds.

It was true in Wave 1, really. Beating a TIE swarm with four X-wings was possible, although it took some doing, but you really needed to slow-play it, pick your territory, and use asteroids to pull the formation apart--and that wasn't really possible in a sixty-minute game. (It wasn't always possible in a 75-minute game, either.)

I just look at the time limit, whatever it is, as part of the box you fight in. Design your 100 point squad to get certain things done in that time frame within that 3x3 play area. Inside that box, competitors can do whatever it takes to win.

Some players may be assigning too much importance to Store Championships and assuming they're supposed to be more standardized than they really are.

I said this in the other thread

Why not here

I had wondered if this could compete against the bbbbz type build.

The article makes a lot of sense

6 tie bombers

96 pts

Put proximity mine on on

You'll gain initiative for blocking, and I think this type of build would do well against the current meta builds.

In comparison to the bbbbz build

Bombers 36 hp bbbbz 36

Bombers total attack 12 bbbbz total attack 14

Bombers evade 12 bbbbz evade 6.

So in comparison they have same hp. But twice the overall agility, which makes them tanky. Be hard to kill them on in 60 min imo.

They are not committed to flying in formation. Two squads if three and you can cover a lot of area arc wise and block high ps fast mobility ships.

Same idea as bbbbz.

Only real downside I see is they are more prone to crits.

Another idea I been thinking about and the pt value of each ship is 1 less at 21 pts per ship when compared to a blue.

4 Syndicate thug

Autoblaster Turret

Title

Unhinged astromech

Binayre pilot

Hot shot Blaster

Again same amount of hp. 36

At range 2-3 it's definitely not the strongest but at range 1 is where this really shines.

4 ys at range 1 get 12 total attack dice

Then another 8 unblockable.

Then the z gets 3 for a total of 23 red dice

Vs 19 with the bbbbz type build.

Though they do have the same amount of agility

But again I believe the yyyyz are under 100 pts so again they will gain initiative against other builds.

Great blockers and if you can stop Han in his tracks and get range 1 it's going to hurt.

Again not committed to formation flying so spread out, cover lots of arcs and block higher ps fast mobility ships.

I'm just theory crafting, but with some practice i think both those squads can do well in a competitive setting.

I hope to try doing some play testing when time allows

Here's the breakdown

7 rounds/60 mins = 7 hours

15 mins between rounds (score calculations, pairings, setup, etc.)= 1 hour 45 mins

Dinner break (after swiss) = 30 mins

Final Table (untimed) ~ 80-90 mins

60 min rounds = 10 hours 45 mins

75 min rounds = 12 hours 30 mins

One of the reasons why I stopped skipping leg day and increased my standing/cardio workouts at the gym.

I said this in the other thread

Why not here

Because you've posted this in 2 (3?) threads now?

If you want feedback, there's a Squad Building subforum... Don't hijack other threads.

Hijack?

I am not trying to hijack any thread.

I'm also not looking for any feedback.

Have you read the article.

I'm trying to think of ways to compete with the bbbbz type build.

That can compete against the bbbbz build and with other meta lists.

And just like the title of this thread, Ibelieve they work well in with the writer of the article was talking about

If you took maybe a extra min to understand what it is I'm talking about you see I'm comparing some list ideas I've thought about after reading the article.

Building lists that form to the time clock, and compete against the bbbbz and other meta builds.

The writer of the article talks about how other builds can have a hard time to beat a bbbbz build in 60 min

I mentioned this in the other thread which was in the question section, I see no harm

At least I'm trying to discuss something that is on the same topic

Please show me where I asked for anyone feedback.

Your above post is actually nothing but pure rudeness and did nothing positive for this thread.

Way to contribute