One idea I've had is to reward more tournament points for killing lots of stuff, regardless of win/loss/margin - so players in a bloody match that ended 310 to 300 would be rewarded more tournament points than players that killed less than 20 each, unlike today's system where MOV ensures those are both 5-5 for tournament points.

You'd theoretically get a tournament point for every X points you killed, plus a few more tournament points if you also won. The specifics would have to be mathed out, but I think you'd have an incentive to play a full match out instead of just sitting in deployment zones - you might as well engage the opponent if killing stuff is always worth more points than doing nothing. It just makes sense to me that an active, bloody, no-holds-barred slugfest of a tie should be better for your tournament score than a passive speed-0 tie. And if two people still want to collude for easy match points, well at least they had to go roll dice at each other to make it happen.

I think you are all thinking about this wrong.

If we want to convince FFG to remove this, the correct way to do this is to troll them by having EVERYONE at a regionals event agree to intentionally draw every single game.

Congrats, we now have 40 people tied exactly after 4 rounds. 40-way tie for first.

Take that, FFG.

So who is with me? Can we get the entire Armada community to pledge to intentionally draw at every single regionals even until FFG removes this from the rules?

Willing to do this. Don't even care about the point being made, just think its hilarious.

One idea I've had is to reward more tournament points for killing lots of stuff, regardless of win/loss/margin - so players in a bloody match that ended 310 to 300 would be rewarded more tournament points than players that killed less than 20 each, unlike today's system where MOV ensures those are both 5-5 for tournament points.

You'd theoretically get a tournament point for every X points you killed, plus a few more tournament points if you also won. The specifics would have to be mathed out, but I think you'd have an incentive to play a full match out instead of just sitting in deployment zones - you might as well engage the opponent if killing stuff is always worth more points than doing nothing. It just makes sense to me that an active, bloody, no-holds-barred slugfest of a tie should be better for your tournament score than a passive speed-0 tie. And if two people still want to collude for easy match points, well at least they had to go roll dice at each other to make it happen.

I think the problem with this is a lot of objectives award points for the penalty of going 2nd. What you are suggesting would swing the advantage even further to the first player's side.

I was all for taking the pledge, thinking that OF COURSE I'm in this to play three awesome games of an awesome game!

Then I realized...does that mean I shouldn't use my store champion bye? Yes!

And I realized that does make me a bit hesitant...after all, I want to win the regional if I can as well. I was already torn about taking the bye, as I do want to play as many games as possible (it's fun)...but perhaps this will push me into not using my bye.

What I'm trying to point out is - do byes fall into the same category as ID's?

I won't be using my bye for a few reasons, and it mostly has to do with wanting to play new people in a competitive environment.

1. I don't think an 8-2 with a 7-3 MOV is good enough for me to hedge my bet with it.

2. The people I play most often locally all have byes as well, so if I use mine I am basically guaranteed to play one of them in round 2 (unless a ton more people show up with byes)

3. I want to play games

Your getting worked up against a unenforceable legal rule.

I can't make someone play one way or another. But if my forces are on the field, they are there to win that game right now. Not other games later.

What I'm trying to point out is - do byes fall into the same category as ID's?

Not generally, because you are making your decision before you know who it effects other than yourself.

And Byes are only first round, they generally don't involve the sticky issues that apply at the end of the tournament.

I was thinking about this more from the point of view of the player, not their opponents. So far the arguments seem to be of two types.

1). I'm here to play games, so play danngit. No ID's. (Or byes)

2). I'm here to win the tournament. ID's are fine. (And so are byes)

I'd like to think I'm type #1. But I'm also type #2. What should I do?

(I'll probably do #1)

@ Scottie and Og, an Armada tournament for me is a chance to play three games against three new opponents. I want to win all my games of course, and while knowing the score can help you make decisions like risking that last ship to try and change a 7-3 to an 8-2, I don't believe that knowledge makes the overall experience more enjoyable. Just go in blind (and drunk) and play to win all your games. Simple.

But Tark I think a lot of people see tournaments different to you, I feel like for a lot of people a tournament is not just an opportunity to play three games against (hopefully) new opponents, but also to test their skills and see whether or not they can come out on top. I can't recall who said it, but someone here made the great comment that winning shouldn't be all important, but trying to win is a major part of having fun at these events. Having the standings is important information that factors into trying to win not just your games but the wider tournament.

This could just be indicative of my own lack of ability. I'm just not talented enough to play at different speeds.

"Hm, this situation requires me to play at 7-3 speed rather than 6-4."

Yyyeah, rrright.

People do have different speeds though, it's just thought of more in terms of how bold their deployment or battle strategy is. It won't be a defined 'speed' change, but it will be an overarching tempo shift. A player trying to score an 8-2 or a 9-1 is going to be flying drastically different to someone who knows they only need a low scoring victory and is working to secure that with the least risk possible.

Last comment on this, I promise. I see tournaments in exactly the same way. I want to win them, of course.

And no, I don't applaud someone for landing favorable matchups in the first two rounds followed by a top table handshake draw. We're all there to play Armada, not play the tourney system. Saying there's nothing we could possibly do to stop collusion is akin to saying there's nothing you can do to stop people from cheating. I don't understand why anyone would want to win that way anyhow.

I'll buy that someone can try to play towards the 6-4 side rather than 10-0, just not that they can call their shots depending on how many points are needed. "I need seven points for first place so I should go in tentatively but not too tentatively since I need one more point than what a six-four would give me but not too aggressively because eight points is too much." Pff.

And I am definitely not proposing anyone other than FFG modify the tournament structure for these Store Championships, Regionals, and Worlds events.

And BYES are fine as a prize! I don't know how they got wrapped into this. Really this was just about intentionally drawing until we all (me in particular) started throwing our baggage at the topic. I'll be quiet now!

I agree, byes are cool prizes for the leg up, and I would be tempted if it netted a 9-1 with an 8-2 MoV, but since the regional bye is the same MoV/tournament point as a normal bye (at least that's what our regional TO said as he has the regional kit and has looked at the rules), the "benefit" isn't good enough for me to skip playing a game.

This could just be indicative of my own lack of ability. I'm just not talented enough to play at different speeds.

"Hm, this situation requires me to play at 7-3 speed rather than 6-4."

Yyyeah, rrright.

My Store Championship win had me in the lead and I needed to score 9 points to secure the win. If I did not know that I would of played the game differently. I would of pushed harder than I did, might of chosen a different objective, etc.

This is a game of information.

Personally, I don't think I'm Confident enough to skip using a Bye if I had one, if I was aiming to win the Tournament...

Picture it, 2016 Worlds, the first and second place players only need 5 points to ensure they get First and Second place......

Would serve FFG right.

At the Hoth System Open this past weekend, FFG allowed X-Wing players at the top tables to take intentional draws to secure spots and lock out lower ranked players. It's a **** stupid rule, but FFG has added it to the documents and by condoning the activity at the Hoth Open System Series they have confirmed that they do not consider it colluding. I don't understand it, I think it's bad for the game, but that's how it is.

Picture it, 2016 Worlds, the first and second place players only need 5 points to ensure they get First and Second place......

Would serve FFG right.

So you're suggesting a final round where 2nd place has no shot at first place (why else would they deliberately ID)? You're right - there is no drama to the final match, but that's because 1st player has already tied up the win even if they lose.

Picture it, 2016 Worlds, the first and second place players only need 5 points to ensure they get First and Second place......

Would serve FFG right.

So you're suggesting a final round where 2nd place has no shot at first place (why else would they deliberately ID)? You're right - there is no drama to the final match, but that's because 1st player has already tied up the win even if they lose.

Clearly he didn't think his hypothetical through.

Noone is going to take an ID unless it benefits them. The only circumstance in which an ID is mutually beneficial in Armada is one in which there is a Top Cut. No one is going to ID just to finish in 2nd in a Swiss only event if playing means they have a shot to win. And even with a Top Cut the only way ID helps both players is if 3rd and 4th (or 5th and 6th) are 6 or more points behind both 1st and 2nd. That's a very narrow area for this ID rule to even be useful in Armada.

Picture it, 2016 Worlds, the first and second place players only need 5 points to ensure they get First and Second place......

Would serve FFG right.

So you're suggesting a final round where 2nd place has no shot at first place (why else would they deliberately ID)? You're right - there is no drama to the final match, but that's because 1st player has already tied up the win even if they lose.

The second player could look at his odds, and the 3rd and 4th place match up, and determine he had a far better chance of placing 3rd than 1st, if he fought it out. And, the leader might be one of the "win at all costs" sorts that would have no qualms about taking a draw and the top prize.

You know Worlds will have a Top 4, if not more don't you? You're litterally making up an irrelevant scenario.

I think the Intentional draw system is fine. I however do not agree with collusion but if it happens there is not much you can do to prove it. I am there to win and if I know that a 5-5 will somehow get me a win you better believe I will use the rules as written to win. If I am a tournament I am not there to play casual but I will be a good sport and be respectful to my opponents but I will also do anything within the rules to win.

ID is legal now. If you do not like this, take it up with ffg rather than players who are playing within explicit rules. Trying to call something collusion when it is specifically allowed, merely because you don't like it, is infantile.

Had a situation a couple weeks ago where this rule came up.

- X-Wing team tournament (teams of three players), five rounds over the day

- the first round match-ups were announced ahead of time by the store

- our first round opponents were acknowledged as being the best team going in. We were considered the second best.

- our first round opponents offered us the intentional draw.

Our opponents basically didn't want to risk the loss in round one, and figured our team might feel the same way.

Clearly, this is not what the ID rule is about, and it was frankly a little disappointing that our opponents (who are all highly skilled players and really nice guys) sought to make the offer in the first place.

In a larger, longer tournament that stretches over a whole day or even a couple of days, I can see the benefit of the ID rule. Otherwise... I mean, we all came to play, right?

Had a situation a couple weeks ago where this rule came up.

- X-Wing team tournament (teams of three players), five rounds over the day

- the first round match-ups were announced ahead of time by the store

- our first round opponents were acknowledged as being the best team going in. We were considered the second best.

- our first round opponents offered us the intentional draw.

Our opponents basically didn't want to risk the loss in round one, and figured our team might feel the same way.

Clearly, this is not what the ID rule is about, and it was frankly a little disappointing that our opponents (who are all highly skilled players and really nice guys) sought to make the offer in the first place.

In a larger, longer tournament that stretches over a whole day or even a couple of days, I can see the benefit of the ID rule. Otherwise... I mean, we all came to play, right?

I can understand where you're coming from but do keep in mind that you had the option (which it sounds like you exercised) to decline the offer and play a game regularly.

Furthermore, accepting an intentional draw doesn't preclude playing a game. You can take the ID and then play a game for funsies (maybe even bringing some silly alternative fleet that's enjoyable to you but maybe not tournament-level competitive).

As I said earlier, I get why people don't like the practice of intentionally drawing. The problem is that there's really no realistic way to enforce a ban on it if both parties are interested in drawing against one another because you can't force people to compete against one another if they don't wish to.

Had a situation a couple weeks ago where this rule came up.

- X-Wing team tournament (teams of three players), five rounds over the day

- the first round match-ups were announced ahead of time by the store

- our first round opponents were acknowledged as being the best team going in. We were considered the second best.

- our first round opponents offered us the intentional draw.

Our opponents basically didn't want to risk the loss in round one, and figured our team might feel the same way.

Clearly, this is not what the ID rule is about, and it was frankly a little disappointing that our opponents (who are all highly skilled players and really nice guys) sought to make the offer in the first place.

In a larger, longer tournament that stretches over a whole day or even a couple of days, I can see the benefit of the ID rule. Otherwise... I mean, we all came to play, right?

Presuming this was a Swiss only event, there is absolutely no benefit to taking a draw at any point. If the event is running the correct number of rounds and you assume no mod wins, the winner is going to be the last undefeated team. The most likely outcome of taking that draw is that you both end up tied for first and thus will be ranked by MoV, why would anyone want to put themselves in the hands of a tiebreaker they only marginally control. I'm not sure your opponents had a strong grasp on the event systems, or this event was run using a custom format.

Had a situation a couple weeks ago where this rule came up.

- X-Wing team tournament (teams of three players), five rounds over the day

- the first round match-ups were announced ahead of time by the store

- our first round opponents were acknowledged as being the best team going in. We were considered the second best.

- our first round opponents offered us the intentional draw.

Our opponents basically didn't want to risk the loss in round one, and figured our team might feel the same way.

Clearly, this is not what the ID rule is about, and it was frankly a little disappointing that our opponents (who are all highly skilled players and really nice guys) sought to make the offer in the first place.

In a larger, longer tournament that stretches over a whole day or even a couple of days, I can see the benefit of the ID rule. Otherwise... I mean, we all came to play, right?

Presuming this was a Swiss only event, there is absolutely no benefit to taking a draw at any point. If the event is running the correct number of rounds and you assume no mod wins, the winner is going to be the last undefeated team. The most likely outcome of taking that draw is that you both end up tied for first and thus will be ranked by MoV, why would anyone want to put themselves in the hands of a tiebreaker they only marginally control. I'm not sure your opponents had a strong grasp on the event systems, or this event was run using a custom format.

Seriously. I read that as "I'm concerned those guys over there are gonna shoot us, so we're going to avoid that scenario by playing it safe and hanging ourselves."

You know Worlds will have a Top 4, if not more don't you? You're litterally making up an irrelevant scenario.

Score wise, the 2015 worlds weren't too far off. The deciding factor would have been that the 2nd place player came to WIN! That, and the fact that ID wasn't a thing.

You know Worlds will have a Top 4, if not more don't you? You're litterally making up an irrelevant scenario.

Score wise, the 2015 worlds weren't too far off. The deciding factor would have been that the 2nd place player came to WIN! That, and the fact that ID wasn't a thing.

I very much could have played that match to a 5-5 if I had wished to. That would have meant me potentially not even getting second place though so playing for the win was the only option. There will be almost no real world examples of someone managing to ID into a cut in this game simply because the point swings are far to large. If you actually look at final tournament standings you will find that there was never a time where the top table could ID and then potentially not have one of them leap frogged in the process. Well, for tournaments of at least 8 I should clarify. If you are running a tournament with 2 players then I imagine you can ID your way all the way to first or second place lol.

Can I intentionally draw X Wings, and Lightsaber fights with my opponent, though!? Pretty please?

There's basically no situation in an Armada tournament where an intentional draw is going to be in the interest of either party at the top tables. In Swiss only formats, there's always someone in 3rd place that can sneak into 1st (or 2nd) with a solid win, and in elimination cuts, there's effectively no situation where the 2nd place player won't be sitting on a bubble with 3rd place breathing down their throats.

If you have 29 players, there **might** be a 1st place that is safe before a cut after 4 rounds, but 2nd place almost certainly won't be with just 5 tournament points.

29 -> 15 - > 7 - > 3 "undefeated" players at a minimum. 3rd place will be right on 2nd place's heels.

If you have 45 players, much the same happens.

45 -> 23 -> 11 -> 5 -> 2 is the most pessimistic view of how many "undefeated" players are left, and that requires an "undefeated" opportunity dropping each round. Again, 3rd place will be right on 2nd place's heels.

You have to have 91 or more players just to do a top 4 cut, which is the only situation I can imagine where a 2nd place might not be in danger of elimination (dropping only to 4th) by taking a 5 point draw. As more players are added, the chances of 2nd place being in real danger increase.

91 -> 45 -> 22 -> 11 -> 5 -> 2 being the most pessimistic way of looking at the number spread.

Remember, that 2nd player in each of these situations, is a player who's scored well, but not well enough to catch the 1st player already.

Essentially, while it is a potential hot button issue for games like X-Wing, it is NOT currently an issue for Armada, and almost certainly will not be an actual issue on anything more than just paper.

As always, I could be wrong about this, but frankly I don't think that I am here.