Got a source for that information?

This is what was on the flyer that came with the Store Championships kit we just ran this weekend...

After a lot of stores complained, FFG followed that up with an e-mail that (IIRC) reduced the number of Swiss rounds by 1 for each bracket after the first.

EDIT: Not meaning to imply that an e-mail is a good way to handle something like this, or that you're at fault for not seeing the e-mail.

Well, that helps...I guess. IMHO, another round could have been knocked off, though. But I'd just as soon run 6 Swiss vs even 4 Swiss and 3 Elimination.

Although 6 double-elimination could work, too. (Although the biggest problem with any of the 'elimination' rounds has been noted already - you end up with the store accommodating a final round, possibly staying open unusually late and some cost to the business, for only a handful of players remaining. I can't see how that is in anyone's interest.)

Well, that helps...I guess. IMHO, another round could have been knocked off, though. But I'd just as soon run 6 Swiss vs even 4 Swiss and 3 Elimination.

Although 6 double-elimination could work, too. (Although the biggest problem with any of the 'elimination' rounds has been noted already - you end up with the store accommodating a final round, possibly staying open unusually late and some cost to the business, for only a handful of players remaining. I can't see how that is in anyone's interest.)

The problem, I think, is really that there's no fat left to cut: every remaining compromise hurts something. You can cut rounds down to 60 minutes, but that alters the constraints on the game. You can cut out rounds, but there's a reason the tourney structure looks the way it does. You can open the store early, but that potentially requires overtime from your employees and can make it just as hard on travelers. You can cap participation, but that means turning people away. There aren't any good solutions.

Well, that helps...I guess. IMHO, another round could have been knocked off, though. But I'd just as soon run 6 Swiss vs even 4 Swiss and 3 Elimination.

Although 6 double-elimination could work, too. (Although the biggest problem with any of the 'elimination' rounds has been noted already - you end up with the store accommodating a final round, possibly staying open unusually late and some cost to the business, for only a handful of players remaining. I can't see how that is in anyone's interest.)

The problem, I think, is really that there's no fat left to cut: every remaining compromise hurts something. You can cut rounds down to 60 minutes, but that alters the constraints on the game. You can cut out rounds, but there's a reason the tourney structure looks the way it does. You can open the store early, but that potentially requires overtime from your employees and can make it just as hard on travelers. You can cap participation, but that means turning people away. There aren't any good solutions.

I think the pure-Swiss option has the best set of compromises.

The objection noted earlier that 'pure Swiss' reduces player engagement by first-round player losses removing someone from contention for the grand prize...sounds a bit hollow to me. Technically it IS true, in that it removes you from contention for the grand prize (probably)...but that is not everything on offer. After all, for most FFG events (and the Store Championship isn't really THAT different), the prizes for the top positions are remarkable similar. And FOR the Store Championships, the top 8 players all got something more than the 'participation prize', with the top 4 getting acrylic tokens (and half of them, in our event, all with a loss to their name after just four rounds of Swiss - so a loss is, on its own, no real indicator that you are going to get nothing for your continued play that day).

I can't really see someone reacting with an 'oh, man, round 1 loss so I have no shot at the grand prize, I guess I'll give up my chances for anything else at all and pack up and go home'.

(Especially since, with 'pure Swiss', you have everyone playing until the very last round - you can well hold off handing out even the participation prizes until that final round.)

There is a weird trend in this thread, people are defending it is good to play more x wing so we should have elimination rounds. But some other people, might be the same, are saying people might quit after a loss of swiss since they can not win any prices. This can be both true for different places and but cant be both true for the same place. People will either stay for more x wing or leave because they cant have prize.

So the solution is simple at least for the store championships level. If your player base wants to play x wing no matter they win or not, elimination is not needed since you wont have people who will leave after first loss. But if your players are just there for the goodies and mass drops are an issue keep them in the store with the chance to come back with the elimination rounds.

More rounds of swiss is also a solution, normally a 16 player tourney does have a clear winner with 4 swiss rounds, you might shave of the elimination and just add one or two rounds of swiss. But this will have some other consequences as well.

I think the pure-Swiss option has the best set of compromises.

The objection noted earlier that 'pure Swiss' reduces player engagement by first-round player losses removing someone from contention for the grand prize...sounds a bit hollow to me. Technically it IS true, in that it removes you from contention for the grand prize (probably)...but that is not everything on offer. After all, for most FFG events (and the Store Championship isn't really THAT different), the prizes for the top positions are remarkable similar. And FOR the Store Championships, the top 8 players all got something more than the 'participation prize', with the top 4 getting acrylic tokens (and half of them, in our event, all with a loss to their name after just four rounds of Swiss - so a loss is, on its own, no real indicator that you are going to get nothing for your continued play that day).

I can't really see someone reacting with an 'oh, man, round 1 loss so I have no shot at the grand prize, I guess I'll give up my chances for anything else at all and pack up and go home'.

(Especially since, with 'pure Swiss', you have everyone playing until the very last round - you can well hold off handing out even the participation prizes until that final round.)

Especially for travelers, the marginal cost of those "extra" rounds after you've been mathematically eliminated can be pretty high. I can buy all kinds of dice bags online, but I can't buy the experience of putting my son to bed at 7:30pm (or a good night's sleep for me).

[EDIT: I'm not saying it's always right to leave early, either--just that there are totally understandable and human reasons for doing so.]

I actually think the best compromise is to start the tournament earlier, but I understand that lots of gamers run on Gamer Time and therefore 1pm is early and 10am is horrendous.

If you went into a single elimination ranked 4th on points, wining your game bumps you up to 3rd.

Not necessarily..

Pre-single elimination:

• 1st: player A, 20 points, 650 MoV
• 2nd: player B, 15 points, 570 MoV
• 3rd: player C, 15 points, 550 MoV
• 4th: player D, 15 points, 470 MoV

After the 1v2, 3v4 pseudo-championship bracket you proposed, Player A beat Player B 100-0, Player D beat Player C 100-0 :

Player C just jumped up to 2nd...

My store championship had 46 players, 6 rounds of Swiss

Started at 11, was supposed to be top cut at 6.30 but over run

I managed to get top 8 (2nd at that point), won to make top 4 but my opponent had to drop out at that point so I got to the final

That was the first break I got all day

Both of us in the final were totally shot, only people there were the two of us, a guy my opponent gave a lift to and the TO and his colleague .

Eventually finished at 11 pm

I guess I would have been happy to finish at the top eight cut as I doubted at that point I could win, however I managed to win :-)

So worked great for me but it did feel too long a day

Well, that helps...I guess. IMHO, another round could have been knocked off, though. But I'd just as soon run 6 Swiss vs even 4 Swiss and 3 Elimination.

Although 6 double-elimination could work, too. (Although the biggest problem with any of the 'elimination' rounds has been noted already - you end up with the store accommodating a final round, possibly staying open unusually late and some cost to the business, for only a handful of players remaining. I can't see how that is in anyone's interest.)

The problem, I think, is really that there's no fat left to cut: every remaining compromise hurts something. You can cut rounds down to 60 minutes, but that alters the constraints on the game. You can cut out rounds, but there's a reason the tourney structure looks the way it does. You can open the store early, but that potentially requires overtime from your employees and can make it just as hard on travelers. You can cap participation, but that means turning people away. There aren't any good solutions.

I think the pure-Swiss option has the best set of compromises.

The objection noted earlier that 'pure Swiss' reduces player engagement by first-round player losses removing someone from contention for the grand prize...sounds a bit hollow to me. Technically it IS true, in that it removes you from contention for the grand prize (probably)...but that is not everything on offer. After all, for most FFG events (and the Store Championship isn't really THAT different), the prizes for the top positions are remarkable similar. And FOR the Store Championships, the top 8 players all got something more than the 'participation prize', with the top 4 getting acrylic tokens (and half of them, in our event, all with a loss to their name after just four rounds of Swiss - so a loss is, on its own, no real indicator that you are going to get nothing for your continued play that day).

I can't really see someone reacting with an 'oh, man, round 1 loss so I have no shot at the grand prize, I guess I'll give up my chances for anything else at all and pack up and go home'.

(Especially since, with 'pure Swiss', you have everyone playing until the very last round - you can well hold off handing out even the participation prizes until that final round.)

Remember why we moved from SoS to MoV. It was because so many people bailed once the lost a game. I am pretty positive if you remove the cut we will fall right back into this same trap.

Anything more than enough rounds of swiss to get 1 undefeated player is a huge waste of time.

Now if your event has 64+ people I could see cutting when you have only 8 undefeated as a time saver for a majortiy of the field (they are still playing 5 games with 64-128ppl and 5 rounds with 129+)

I think the pure-Swiss option has the best set of compromises.

The objection noted earlier that 'pure Swiss' reduces player engagement by first-round player losses removing someone from contention for the grand prize...sounds a bit hollow to me. Technically it IS true, in that it removes you from contention for the grand prize (probably)...but that is not everything on offer. After all, for most FFG events (and the Store Championship isn't really THAT different), the prizes for the top positions are remarkable similar. And FOR the Store Championships, the top 8 players all got something more than the 'participation prize', with the top 4 getting acrylic tokens (and half of them, in our event, all with a loss to their name after just four rounds of Swiss - so a loss is, on its own, no real indicator that you are going to get nothing for your continued play that day).

I can't really see someone reacting with an 'oh, man, round 1 loss so I have no shot at the grand prize, I guess I'll give up my chances for anything else at all and pack up and go home'.

(Especially since, with 'pure Swiss', you have everyone playing until the very last round - you can well hold off handing out even the participation prizes until that final round.)

Especially for travelers, the marginal cost of those "extra" rounds after you've been mathematically eliminated can be pretty high. I can buy all kinds of dice bags online, but I can't buy the experience of putting my son to bed at 7:30pm (or a good night's sleep for me).

[EDIT: I'm not saying it's always right to leave early, either--just that there are totally understandable and human reasons for doing so.]

Again, though, I'm not sure I fully understand that argument.

First off, from the 'elimination' perspective, the top places (aside from the top 2) had all lost a round after only 4 rounds of Swiss from 33 players. So losing a single round is not going to automatically disqualify you from the better prizes*. You'd need to lose at least two rounds of Swiss to do that, in which case you are now not even going to make the top 10 - so if you were a mercenary player only interested in playing if they got a top prize, and lost two rounds, whether the next rounds were 2 more Swiss rounds followed by 3 rounds of single-elimination, or 4 more rounds of Swiss, isn't going to change the picture for you. You'd leave either way.

* The second point is related to that prize comment. The top 8 or so spots are getting decent kit, and with a defined '6 rounds of Swiss' you can even hold the participation prizes handout until round 6. So, sure, elimination from the singular GRAND PRIZE may well happen after a single loss, but that's seriously the only real thing you are out of. I can't imagine many people are seriously playing for ONLY the grand prize and nothing else.

It seems like for any tournament how fast you can get through rounds varies greatly based not only on round length (60-75 minutes) but also on plenty of external factors as well. Clean up those externals and try the shorter game length and that can make more rounds easier.

When it comes to picking a winner I'd say the more swiss rounds the better although I see the appeal of a cut to the top if you're doing poorly. Maybe we should be honest, for everyone who likes just squeezing into the cut there are also those who'd be happy to be done with their placing locked in. Prize levels probably should determine how big this cut needs to be but if 1-4 are just getting fighting to determine a "pick order" for prizes is it always worth all of that time?

I'll tell you what Hida77 (TO) did last year at the Regionals at Madness in Texas, and I thought it was a great thing, too. Once the number of swiss rounds were determined (it was 7 based on FFG's rules, with a cut to top 8, over 60+ players, but I do not recall that number exactly...), and the games were under way, Hida announced, that, during the later swiss rounds, two names would be pulled from a hat in each of those rounds, and a ship of the recipient's choice given to them. I think this was when the Devastator and YT-2400 were getting ready to release, and these were available to choose from as well.

Did my name get pulled? No. But that's not the point. The thought and the chance that it could was enough to keep me interested and playing and hoping, regardless of how I was doing. Now, I know a lot of the kudos for that goes to Madness themselves, if not all of it, but it was a great way to temper the grousing and mumbling that were invariably occurring once we all realized there were 7 rounds of swiss coming - along with the Top 8 - when 5 or 6 rounds of swiss would clearly be enough.

Personally, I don't like the cut to Top 8, or 4 - but I accept it, especially if I make that cut and want the prize(s) bad enough. As it stands, I mostly want the alt-art cards anyway, so no biggie if I don't make it.

I show up, roll dice, have fun, and try to win. I follow that pattern until I'm told I'm out of the tournament.

I intentionally don't pay attention to standings, attempt to tally total MoV, or any of that other nonsense. Knowing all that only distracts me from the game I'm playing so I shut it out.

@PhantomFO, were you referring to the card kingdom (Ballard) championship? IIRC, it was closer to 2 hours. Could be wrong though...

The prospect of 10 hours of X-Wing is not something that I am interested in, so I prefer fewer rounds. Six rounds of swiss is enough to determine a winner and doesn't send everyone else home early.

With 32 players four rounds of swiss then top 8 cut seems perfect. 6 rounds of swiss then a top 8 seems excessive.

Don't think he was asking for a top 8. 6 total rounds.

I agree 100% with the OP. I only rarely attend X-Wing events these days since they typically last 10-12 hours (we have a lot of players in our area). It's difficult to do 7-8 rounds (4-5 rounds Swiss, 3 top 8) in less than 10 hours. I don't mind it once in a while (regionals, nationals, worlds), but it's just not fun on a regular basis. And around here I either have to commit to a 10+ hour day or not go; and more often than not I chose not to go these days.

I hope FFG figures something out as I don't think continuous marathon events are good for the game (or our health or relationships).

Don't think he was asking for a top 8. 6 total rounds.

Gets the best of both world. Players with a 2-3 record or less dont have to stick around for a pointless 5th or 6th round (Your day could be over by the end of round 2 or 3). Shortens the day for most players and the TO.

I think you can do 33-63 total players with only 4 rounds of Swiss and a cut to 8 or maybe 16 depending on the TO. Seems fair for all.

Yeah I wouldn't mind 4 swiss and 3 playoff. My first championship this year was 5 swiss, then cut to top 8. 75 min rounds too. Didn't get out of there until 2, and had a two hour drive ahead of me... :s

I think the pure-Swiss option has the best set of compromises.

The objection noted earlier that 'pure Swiss' reduces player engagement by first-round player losses removing someone from contention for the grand prize...sounds a bit hollow to me. Technically it IS true, in that it removes you from contention for the grand prize (probably)...but that is not everything on offer. After all, for most FFG events (and the Store Championship isn't really THAT different), the prizes for the top positions are remarkable similar. And FOR the Store Championships, the top 8 players all got something more than the 'participation prize', with the top 4 getting acrylic tokens (and half of them, in our event, all with a loss to their name after just four rounds of Swiss - so a loss is, on its own, no real indicator that you are going to get nothing for your continued play that day).

I can't really see someone reacting with an 'oh, man, round 1 loss so I have no shot at the grand prize, I guess I'll give up my chances for anything else at all and pack up and go home'.

(Especially since, with 'pure Swiss', you have everyone playing until the very last round - you can well hold off handing out even the participation prizes until that final round.)

Especially for travelers, the marginal cost of those "extra" rounds after you've been mathematically eliminated can be pretty high. I can buy all kinds of dice bags online, but I can't buy the experience of putting my son to bed at 7:30pm (or a good night's sleep for me).

[EDIT: I'm not saying it's always right to leave early, either--just that there are totally understandable and human reasons for doing so.]

Again, though, I'm not sure I fully understand that argument.

First off, from the 'elimination' perspective, the top places (aside from the top 2) had all lost a round after only 4 rounds of Swiss from 33 players. So losing a single round is not going to automatically disqualify you from the better prizes*. You'd need to lose at least two rounds of Swiss to do that, in which case you are now not even going to make the top 10 - so if you were a mercenary player only interested in playing if they got a top prize, and lost two rounds, whether the next rounds were 2 more Swiss rounds followed by 3 rounds of single-elimination, or 4 more rounds of Swiss, isn't going to change the picture for you. You'd leave either way.

* The second point is related to that prize comment. The top 8 or so spots are getting decent kit, and with a defined '6 rounds of Swiss' you can even hold the participation prizes handout until round 6. So, sure, elimination from the singular GRAND PRIZE may well happen after a single loss, but that's seriously the only real thing you are out of. I can't imagine many people are seriously playing for ONLY the grand prize and nothing else.

Your argument is essentially: "yeah but winning the tournament isn't THAT big of a motivation for players." On that I must disagree with you. For my part, I play to win the tournament.

I'm not going to drop if I lost in straight swiss, but I would be lying if straight swiss rounds wouldn't destroy a lot of the drama and opportunity that you feel when you know there is a cut.

I also dislike your use of the word mercenary to describe people whose primary motivation is to win the tournament. I can assure you that many people who have this primary motivation for tourneys do ALSO play for enjoyment of the game. But without the opportunity to win a tourney I'd rather go to a league night and experience the joy of untimed games in a more relaxed environment.

Yeah I wouldn't mind 4 swiss and 3 playoff. My first championship this year was 5 swiss, then cut to top 8. 75 min rounds too. Didn't get out of there until 2, and had a two hour drive ahead of me... :s

I think the pure-Swiss option has the best set of compromises.

The objection noted earlier that 'pure Swiss' reduces player engagement by first-round player losses removing someone from contention for the grand prize...sounds a bit hollow to me. Technically it IS true, in that it removes you from contention for the grand prize (probably)...but that is not everything on offer. After all, for most FFG events (and the Store Championship isn't really THAT different), the prizes for the top positions are remarkable similar. And FOR the Store Championships, the top 8 players all got something more than the 'participation prize', with the top 4 getting acrylic tokens (and half of them, in our event, all with a loss to their name after just four rounds of Swiss - so a loss is, on its own, no real indicator that you are going to get nothing for your continued play that day).

I can't really see someone reacting with an 'oh, man, round 1 loss so I have no shot at the grand prize, I guess I'll give up my chances for anything else at all and pack up and go home'.

(Especially since, with 'pure Swiss', you have everyone playing until the very last round - you can well hold off handing out even the participation prizes until that final round.)

Especially for travelers, the marginal cost of those "extra" rounds after you've been mathematically eliminated can be pretty high. I can buy all kinds of dice bags online, but I can't buy the experience of putting my son to bed at 7:30pm (or a good night's sleep for me).

[EDIT: I'm not saying it's always right to leave early, either--just that there are totally understandable and human reasons for doing so.]

Again, though, I'm not sure I fully understand that argument.

First off, from the 'elimination' perspective, the top places (aside from the top 2) had all lost a round after only 4 rounds of Swiss from 33 players. So losing a single round is not going to automatically disqualify you from the better prizes*. You'd need to lose at least two rounds of Swiss to do that, in which case you are now not even going to make the top 10 - so if you were a mercenary player only interested in playing if they got a top prize, and lost two rounds, whether the next rounds were 2 more Swiss rounds followed by 3 rounds of single-elimination, or 4 more rounds of Swiss, isn't going to change the picture for you. You'd leave either way.

* The second point is related to that prize comment. The top 8 or so spots are getting decent kit, and with a defined '6 rounds of Swiss' you can even hold the participation prizes handout until round 6. So, sure, elimination from the singular GRAND PRIZE may well happen after a single loss, but that's seriously the only real thing you are out of. I can't imagine many people are seriously playing for ONLY the grand prize and nothing else.

Your argument is essentially: "yeah but winning the tournament isn't THAT big of a motivation for players." On that I must disagree with you. For my part, I play to win the tournament.

I'm not going to drop if I lost in straight swiss, but I would be lying if straight swiss rounds wouldn't destroy a lot of the drama and opportunity that you feel when you know there is a cut.

I also dislike your use of the word mercenary to describe people whose primary motivation is to win the tournament. I can assure you that many people who have this primary motivation for tourneys do ALSO play for enjoyment of the game. But without the opportunity to win a tourney I'd rather go to a league night and experience the joy of untimed games in a more relaxed environment.

I guess my concept of 'winning' is more than 'first place or go home'.

In my perspective, any prize-awarding place at the tourney (aside from 'participation prize', of course) is a #winning result.

But I think you missed the other point I was making - if you lose your first two rounds, whether the next rounds are pure Swiss or a mix of Swiss + Elimination is irrelevant to you. You aren't making the cut with two losses no matter what, so the only question is whether you get to play more rounds of X-Wing (Swiss) or not (Elimination sending most of the players home early).

I guess my bias against elimination is that it's annoying being the only handful of people at the store at 2am, with everyone tired and getting snippy and/or slap-happy, to get a result that could just as easily have been obtained 2 rounds earlier with pure Swiss pairings, just so someone who managed to come in #8 out of 40 three rounds ago might have a shot at the top prize.

(Which is, again, not to disparage players who achieve #8 out of 40 on round 4 of Swiss, but merely to point out that another round of Swiss may well have achieved the same result if the current top-player...paired against the current #2...manages a loss while the #8 manages a win...and now everyone in the new 'top 4' spots have a 4-1 record and it comes down to MoV. Same result, fewer rounds. Less likely to happen, sure, as it takes the whole day of play into the picture instead of basically 'resetting' the results for the top players halfway through the match...but I don't really find that a problem, myself.)

(Which is, again, not to disparage players who achieve #8 out of 40 on round 4 of Swiss, but merely to point out that another round of Swiss may well have achieved the same result if the current top-player...paired against the current #2...manages a loss while the #8 manages a win...and now everyone in the new 'top 4' spots have a 4-1 record and it comes down to MoV. Same result, fewer rounds. Less likely to happen, sure, as it takes the whole day of play into the picture instead of basically 'resetting' the results for the top players halfway through the match...but I don't really find that a problem, myself.)

I don't disagree with this: if the goal of the tournament is to identify the best player, then allowing the #8 player out of 40 to compete for the championship adds noise to the result.

Where we part ways, I think, is that if the goal of the tournament is to identify the best player, then even pure Swiss isn't a very good tournament structure. Swiss is better than single-elimination, but only barely (unless you can rank players ahead of time, which isn't feasible in X-wing).

Yeah I wouldn't mind 4 swiss and 3 playoff. My first championship this year was 5 swiss, then cut to top 8. 75 min rounds too. Didn't get out of there until 2, and had a two hour drive ahead of me... :s

I think the pure-Swiss option has the best set of compromises.

The objection noted earlier that 'pure Swiss' reduces player engagement by first-round player losses removing someone from contention for the grand prize...sounds a bit hollow to me. Technically it IS true, in that it removes you from contention for the grand prize (probably)...but that is not everything on offer. After all, for most FFG events (and the Store Championship isn't really THAT different), the prizes for the top positions are remarkable similar. And FOR the Store Championships, the top 8 players all got something more than the 'participation prize', with the top 4 getting acrylic tokens (and half of them, in our event, all with a loss to their name after just four rounds of Swiss - so a loss is, on its own, no real indicator that you are going to get nothing for your continued play that day).

I can't really see someone reacting with an 'oh, man, round 1 loss so I have no shot at the grand prize, I guess I'll give up my chances for anything else at all and pack up and go home'.

(Especially since, with 'pure Swiss', you have everyone playing until the very last round - you can well hold off handing out even the participation prizes until that final round.)

Especially for travelers, the marginal cost of those "extra" rounds after you've been mathematically eliminated can be pretty high. I can buy all kinds of dice bags online, but I can't buy the experience of putting my son to bed at 7:30pm (or a good night's sleep for me).

[EDIT: I'm not saying it's always right to leave early, either--just that there are totally understandable and human reasons for doing so.]

Again, though, I'm not sure I fully understand that argument.

First off, from the 'elimination' perspective, the top places (aside from the top 2) had all lost a round after only 4 rounds of Swiss from 33 players. So losing a single round is not going to automatically disqualify you from the better prizes*. You'd need to lose at least two rounds of Swiss to do that, in which case you are now not even going to make the top 10 - so if you were a mercenary player only interested in playing if they got a top prize, and lost two rounds, whether the next rounds were 2 more Swiss rounds followed by 3 rounds of single-elimination, or 4 more rounds of Swiss, isn't going to change the picture for you. You'd leave either way.

* The second point is related to that prize comment. The top 8 or so spots are getting decent kit, and with a defined '6 rounds of Swiss' you can even hold the participation prizes handout until round 6. So, sure, elimination from the singular GRAND PRIZE may well happen after a single loss, but that's seriously the only real thing you are out of. I can't imagine many people are seriously playing for ONLY the grand prize and nothing else.

Your argument is essentially: "yeah but winning the tournament isn't THAT big of a motivation for players." On that I must disagree with you. For my part, I play to win the tournament.

I'm not going to drop if I lost in straight swiss, but I would be lying if straight swiss rounds wouldn't destroy a lot of the drama and opportunity that you feel when you know there is a cut.

I also dislike your use of the word mercenary to describe people whose primary motivation is to win the tournament. I can assure you that many people who have this primary motivation for tourneys do ALSO play for enjoyment of the game. But without the opportunity to win a tourney I'd rather go to a league night and experience the joy of untimed games in a more relaxed environment.

I guess my concept of 'winning' is more than 'first place or go home'.

In my perspective, any prize-awarding place at the tourney (aside from 'participation prize', of course) is a #winning result.

But I think you missed the other point I was making - if you lose your first two rounds, whether the next rounds are pure Swiss or a mix of Swiss + Elimination is irrelevant to you. You aren't making the cut with two losses no matter what, so the only question is whether you get to play more rounds of X-Wing (Swiss) or not (Elimination sending most of the players home early).

I guess my bias against elimination is that it's annoying being the only handful of people at the store at 2am, with everyone tired and getting snippy and/or slap-happy, to get a result that could just as easily have been obtained 2 rounds earlier with pure Swiss pairings, just so someone who managed to come in #8 out of 40 three rounds ago might have a shot at the top prize.

(Which is, again, not to disparage players who achieve #8 out of 40 on round 4 of Swiss, but merely to point out that another round of Swiss may well have achieved the same result if the current top-player...paired against the current #2...manages a loss while the #8 manages a win...and now everyone in the new 'top 4' spots have a 4-1 record and it comes down to MoV. Same result, fewer rounds. Less likely to happen, sure, as it takes the whole day of play into the picture instead of basically 'resetting' the results for the top players halfway through the match...but I don't really find that a problem, myself.)

Wow. Lot of points to cover here.

First off, if your tourneys are going til 2AM then you need to talk to your TO about starting earlier. A 32+ person X-Wing Tournament is not something that should be started any later than 10AM. You should be getting done well before then. This is not like a Magic tournament that can be started at 6PM and will wrap well before the store closes at 10PM

Regarding the elimination aspec,t I could have sworn there were a couple 2-loss players who got into the top 16 at worlds. But perhaps that involved more swiss rounds than what you are citing (which is perhaps a 4 round affair?)

In either case, yes, of course there will be those players who are eliminated at some point, but it will take longer and there will be less "meaningless" games overall. In addition it will not be as obvious to people right away that they have been eliminated/have no shot. While any game is fun, not everyone shares this in regards to their 6th timed round of the game. I attended a store championship that had 13 players and no cut. The final round was a kind of a drag. We knew the winner was one of the two individuals playing on table one. Zero drama for anyone else. Zero opportunity for anyone else.

Now flip that around to a situation where we would cut to top 4. I would be in the dogfight of my life in that final round against another 2-1 player who was battling to get into the top 4. As would people on 2-3 other tables (depending on how things shook out). That just makes for a better day of X-Wing.

...

But I think you missed the other point I was making - if you lose your first two rounds, whether the next rounds are pure Swiss or a mix of Swiss + Elimination is irrelevant to you. You aren't making the cut with two losses no matter what, so the only question is whether you get to play more rounds of X-Wing (Swiss) or not (Elimination sending most of the players home early).

....

But I think the point your missing is (Lets say a 40 player tournament) that after only 3 rounds only 1/2 of the players (20) have a chance to win and 50% dont have a statistical chance. This number keeps dwindling each round why stick around for another 4+ hours? You run into a lot more drops in your format of 6 rounds of swiss only. With only 4 rounds, those 20 players will more likely gut it out for another game to finish it out.

First off, if your tourneys are going til 2AM then you need to talk to your TO about starting earlier. A 32+ person X-Wing Tournament is not something that should be started any later than 10AM. You should be getting done well before then. This is not like a Magic tournament that can be started at 6PM and will wrap well before the store closes at 10PM

I wanted to hit this point as a standalone post, as it's a comment I've seen a few make, and I really don't understand.

As noted early in the thread, you really can't reduce the game to 60-minute-rounds, as that SERIOUSLY screws with the balance of the game. So let's look at 75 minute rounds. 15 minutes between rounds is excessive, 5 minutes between them is nice on paper but with 40+ players just doesn't work - you can schedule that, but it'll be 10 minutes before you are starting the clock again, at best (remember that you have to wait until at least most the players have their asteroids placed and ships on the map).

So 85 minutes 'per round' is close enough. 40 players, FFG says, calls for 5 rounds of Swiss and 3 elimination rounds. So 8 rounds.

That is, with no breaks, 680 minutes of play. Oh, of course, we forget that the last round is not timed, so let's expand that one just a touch - say 690 minutes for a more easy calculation. That's 11 and a half hours of play. Presuming the store opens at 10am (many do) and somehow everyone is able to instantly teleport inside, to their tables, paying their entry fee and all...everyone signed up in advance...you are going to end that game at not earlier than 9:30pm.

Realistically? That's never going to happen. With a store opening at 10am, assuming everything and everyone flows like clockwork, you'll have entered all the lists and collected all the fees, performed the pairings, and have round 1 starting at 11am. You'll need at least an hour's worth of breaks in the day (usually a half-hour lunch and a couple longer between-round periods so people can go to the bathroom and such), turning those 11.5 hours of play into 12.5 hours. On top of that 11am-round-1-start, and you are at...nearly midnight. Again, assuming a 10am opening time (not all stores DO have that), and everything flowing like clockwork over the entire day.

That's a heck of a ground rule to say that "you can't go down to 60 minute rounds". FFG allows TOs to go down to 60 minute rounds for the purpose of huge tournaments. Is it ideal? Of course not. But what you are gaining in time FAR outweighs any game distortion. There is simply no other way for a tourney involving 40 players to resolve in a reasonable amount of time.

In the example you gave doing so would lop an excellent 2 entire hours off the length of the tourney and make even a tourney that starts at 10:30 more manageable. If we build in 8 70 minute rounds plus an additional 60 minutes of break throughout the day, you are going to finish around 8:50. And most of the participants would have been able to leave before dinner.

If the game length is truly non-negotiable, I think that imposing a player cap is a far more appropriate solution than removing the elimination rounds, for the reasons I stated in my post above.