They should be discouraging timed matches as much as they can.

Imagine how "fun" a 6 round tournament, with cut to top 8, would be if matches where untimed...

A draw and they're both in.

They're doing away with draws completely from the sounds of things.

but it's not like removing ID's is going to cause people to start cheating if they didn't already. What ID's did was effectively make collusion legal.

I know a lot of people who play at Regionals and such who would have no issue with taking advantage of rules but won't out and out cheat.

The IDs took pressure off of the TOs big time. People are going to cheat and collude no matter what. ID removed the temptation for two honest players that were afraid to lose so they flew around for 75 minutes doing nothing except hoping their opponent would make a mistake before engaging.

Yes, but No draws period takes the Pressure off also. One wins, one loses. End of story.

Fantastic everybody. The whining gets results. Now all the pressure goes back onto TOs to try and police collusion. Instead of people taking IDs they'll collude.

Prime example

#5 plays #6

A draw and they're both in.

If one tables the other, then the loser is probably out. Players agree that whoever wins will win by as little as realistically possible. Unless a TO pays a bunch of attention to every match it will be hard to police.

The article very clearly explains why this will NOT be happening. Did you read it?

They should be discouraging timed matches as much as they can.

Imagine how "fun" a 6 round tournament, with cut to top 8, would be if matches where untimed...

Kill me now. I know players that almost always go to time. Three hour long rounds? No thanks

Fantastic everybody. The whining gets results. Now all the pressure goes back onto TOs to try and police collusion. Instead of people taking IDs they'll collude.

Prime example

#5 plays #6

A draw and they're both in.

If one tables the other, then the loser is probably out. Players agree that whoever wins will win by as little as realistically possible. Unless a TO pays a bunch of attention to every match it will be hard to police.

Which is a very highly unlikely scenario. If the winner doesn't personally know the loser, why would he risk any possibility of a collusion allegation to help some rando? Just finish crushing him. You have to have two people, both paired, with just the right MOVs, who are both friendly to each other, and both willing to cheat for this to occur. Hell, if they are willing to go that far, they are probably willing to just make up a score.

On the other hand, legalized collusion in the form of an Intentional Draw would happen nearly every time it was beneficial, whether the players are friendly or not.

Yup. "Hey, let's do something that benefits us both" is a much easier conversation to have than "Could you do me a favor and not run up the score, please?"

The IDs took pressure off of the TOs big time. People are going to cheat and collude no matter what. ID removed the temptation for two honest players that were afraid to lose so they flew around for 75 minutes doing nothing except hoping their opponent would make a mistake before engaging.

Right, that's the point of IDs. TOs shouldn't have to make on-the-spot judgment calls that could substantially alter the standings (or rather they should have to make as few as possible). Removing the possibility of drawing entirely has nearly the same effect as allowing ID, because now you it's much more difficult to find someone willing to play a fake match--everyone on the bubble is invested in the outcome, at least in terms of not accruing a loss. The scope and motivation for collusion is reduced from every possible outcome to the match, and now is limited to MOV shenanigans, which are hard to police but have a much smaller effect.

Again, personally I would have preferred a tournament structure that didn't create the incentive for IDs in the first place. But that's a big change to make, and I understand why they went this way instead.

They should be discouraging timed matches as much as they can.

Imagine how "fun" a 6 round tournament, with cut to top 8, would be if matches where untimed...

You misunderstand. Those that win before time should be rewarded.

They should be discouraging timed matches as much as they can.

Imagine how "fun" a 6 round tournament, with cut to top 8, would be if matches where untimed...

You misunderstand. Those that win before time should be rewarded.

You are rewarded, you get a longer break between to grab food and drink and feel more refreshed for your next match. And you can look around at who else is winning and such and see what you may be facing next.

Law and order has been restored in the galaxy.

This article was great. Intentional draws didn't make a lot of sense for X-Wing, and I was on the fence about how necessary they were for Star Wars: The Card Game. Now that they explained what was going on those two-game tournaments, I see why intentional draws are completely necessary. I would be one of those who felt that playing toward a draw is against the rules, so I would have been at a disadvantage in a SWLCG tournament. I can see now how allowing intentional draws really does make for a fairer play experience in that game.

This article was great. Intentional draws didn't make a lot of sense for X-Wing, and I was on the fence about how necessary they were for Star Wars: The Card Game. Now that they explained what was going on those two-game tournaments, I see why intentional draws are completely necessary. I would be one of those who felt that playing toward a draw is against the rules, so I would have been at a disadvantage in a SWLCG tournament. I can see now how allowing intentional draws really does make for a fairer play experience in that game.

This isn't an argument, it's a sincere question. (I don't play card games.) Why is ID fair for card games (or multi-game rounds, apparently), but not for single-game round games, like X-Wing? I don't really understand how the card games work in that regard.

This article was great. Intentional draws didn't make a lot of sense for X-Wing, and I was on the fence about how necessary they were for Star Wars: The Card Game. Now that they explained what was going on those two-game tournaments, I see why intentional draws are completely necessary. I would be one of those who felt that playing toward a draw is against the rules, so I would have been at a disadvantage in a SWLCG tournament. I can see now how allowing intentional draws really does make for a fairer play experience in that game.

This isn't an argument, it's a sincere question. (I don't play card games.) Why is ID fair for card games (or multi-game rounds, apparently), but not for single-game round games, like X-Wing? I don't really understand how the card games work in that regard.

The problem is basically that you can cheat by playing a game where you and your opponent aren't trying to win but are trying to tie. It's cheating, but it is virtually impossible to catch someone doing this. If you refuse to cheat, you're at a disadvantage. By allowing intentional draws, everyone is on an equal playing field. It's not ideal. Ideally, everyone follows the letter and spirit of the game. In high-stakes tournaments, the worst comes out in people, so allowing intentional draws is the most fair way to handle those.

In Star Wars: The Card Game, every match of the tournament is composed of two games -- you play once as the light side and once as the dark side. It isn't uncommon to tie, so it's hard to tell if someone was trying to tie or not.

(EDIT: They used to have tie-breakers at each round based on how many clicks on the Death Star Dial (if both won as Light Side) or how many objectives were destroyed total (if both won as Dark Side). They changed that when they realized that the tie-breaker favored certain decks and strategies over others. Now you just get 1 point if you both win one game.)

This article was great. Intentional draws didn't make a lot of sense for X-Wing, and I was on the fence about how necessary they were for Star Wars: The Card Game. Now that they explained what was going on those two-game tournaments, I see why intentional draws are completely necessary. I would be one of those who felt that playing toward a draw is against the rules, so I would have been at a disadvantage in a SWLCG tournament. I can see now how allowing intentional draws really does make for a fairer play experience in that game.

This isn't an argument, it's a sincere question. (I don't play card games.) Why is ID fair for card games (or multi-game rounds, apparently), but not for single-game round games, like X-Wing? I don't really understand how the card games work in that regard.

I think the point is that it is specifically fair for "two-game Swiss rounds", which happens to be more common in card games. (You'll note that they made an exception for Netrunner and SWLCG) Being that it is an even number of games, 1-1 draws seem pretty likely. Hence, policing real draws from forced draws is quite difficult.

I'm no expert on the card game formats or scoring, however.

I also don't know that "fair" is an accurate description either. More like, "less avoidable".

_{Im glad that they adjusted course. Im interested to see what the change will be come July.}

Well see. I hope they made ID's 0 points, and 100 MOV. This way it's a risk to take them because they are 0 Tournament points. This still allows people who bye the first round, which is a huge advantage and then want to take a break after 3 games of x-wing to get food, while everyone else has already played 4 games and cannot break to get food. However, now there is a risk.

Well see. I hope they made ID's 0 points, and 100 MOV. This way it's a risk to take them because they are 0 Tournament points. This still allows people who bye the first round, which is a huge advantage and then want to take a break after 3 games of x-wing to get food, while everyone else has already played 4 games and cannot break to get food. However, now there is a risk.

It looks like there won't be draws in Xwing at all.

I'm glad FFG listened to the fan base (for better or worse, I don't have an opinion).

Removal of the draw is doable in a few ways but I like the idea of a draw being decided by half point on small ships aswel. If it's still tied after that it may have to be initiative.

This article was great. Intentional draws didn't make a lot of sense for X-Wing, and I was on the fence about how necessary they were for Star Wars: The Card Game. Now that they explained what was going on those two-game tournaments, I see why intentional draws are completely necessary. I would be one of those who felt that playing toward a draw is against the rules, so I would have been at a disadvantage in a SWLCG tournament. I can see now how allowing intentional draws really does make for a fairer play experience in that game.

This isn't an argument, it's a sincere question. (I don't play card games.) Why is ID fair for card games (or multi-game rounds, apparently), but not for single-game round games, like X-Wing? I don't really understand how the card games work in that regard.

Both Netrunner and the Star Wars LCG have matches with two games. As a result, legitimate 1-1 results are a common feature relative to X-wing, where I can count on one hand the number of draws I've seen in three years of X-wing. (I'm sure it's similar for you.) As I understand it it's also much easier to arrange a draw than it is in X-wing, although I don't have any more direct experience than you do.

So there's a reasonable presumption that when you remove draws from X-wing, introducing some mechanism other than the direct results of play as a way to break tied games, you're having an effect on relatively few matches. There's a utilitarian argument that you're minimizing the damage to the game overall, at the cost of a moderately unfair result in a small number of games.

If you remove draws from the card games specified, you're going to be calling a lot more matches on the basis of something other than play. The utilitarian argument is harder to make, because the benefit to all players is the same, but the potential harm affects many more people.

My hope is that they nuke mod wins altogether, and all games end in a full win (1 point) for one player, and a full loss for the other (0 points). If it's tied at the end of 75 minutes, then whoever has initiative wins.

The Swiss structure still isn't ideal, but making tournaments a clean win/loss would be a huge step in the right direction.

They should be discouraging timed matches as much as they can.

Imagine how "fun" a 6 round tournament, with cut to top 8, would be if matches where untimed...

You misunderstand. Those that win before time should be rewarded.

You can't do that without simultaneously punishing players who are unlucky enough to get paired against a slow opponent. It's not your fault if your opponent takes 5 minutes between rounds to place dials.

this is good news to wake up to this morning.

My hope is that they nuke mod wins altogether, and all games end in a full win (1 point) for one player, and a full loss for the other (0 points). If it's tied at the end of 75 minutes, then whoever has initiative wins.

The Swiss structure still isn't ideal, but making tournaments a clean win/loss would be a huge step in the right direction.

They should be discouraging timed matches as much as they can.

Imagine how "fun" a 6 round tournament, with cut to top 8, would be if matches where untimed...

You misunderstand. Those that win before time should be rewarded.

You can't do that without simultaneously punishing players who are unlucky enough to get paired against a slow opponent. It's not your fault if your opponent takes 5 minutes between rounds to place dials.

Slow play is an issue. Ideally, you would call a judge to get encouragement to speed up.

I'm glad FFG listened to the fan base (for better or worse, I don't have an opinion).

Removal of the draw is doable in a few ways but I like the idea of a draw being decided by half point on small ships aswel. If it's still tied after that it may have to be initiative.

A draw and they're both in.

They're doing away with draws completely from the sounds of things.

but it's not like removing ID's is going to cause people to start cheating if they didn't already. What ID's did was effectively make collusion legal.

I know a lot of people who play at Regionals and such who would have no issue with taking advantage of rules but won't out and out cheat.

The IDs took pressure off of the TOs big time. People are going to cheat and collude no matter what. ID removed the temptation for two honest players that were afraid to lose so they flew around for 75 minutes doing nothing except hoping their opponent would make a mistake before engaging.

If they're "honest" players then play the game. It is a tournament. A contest. Play the best game you can and roll with it. I'm an endurance athlete, coach, Fitness Trainer. Cheating has always been and will always be an unfortunate presence in ANY contest. Legitimizing it should never be.

This is awesome news. Thanks FFG!

An answer which looks acceptable to all sides

But taking their time to figure it out is good, and FFG OP are earning back a lot of my crumbled faith with this announcement.

Perhaps. I choose to withhold judgement until such time as we see the proposed solution.

If only everyone had taken that approach a couple weeks ago. Sheesh.

I think if everyone had taken that approach, they likely wouldn't even be working on a "proposed solution". We'd have IDs forever and have to like it.

Not referring to legitimate gripes about ID but the drama following the " official response". OMG, I'm selling my stuff on eBay! This game is dead. FFG = Super Hitler!!!