The point system really shines in larger settings with more people. You just got unlucky with only 6 people, and the system fell apart. Statistically, your experience can happen to anyone playing in a small tournament. If this were to consistently happen in a 10+ person tournament, I'd consider dropping Armada because clearly the system is working. Go vent, but don't let it get you down.

Had I known the actual rules, I would have just taken the 10-1 win, and that would have put me over the top.

A) You got to play a full game (yay),

B) Your score would have been the same, as a player conceeding does not give you a 10-1 win. It would have given you 8 Tournament Points and a MoV of 140 (which would have been equal to or a little lower than what you presumably got playing the full game.

I've been thinking a lot about the Armada tournament scoring and IMO it is flawed Player 1 won 2 games against Rieekan Corvette swam scoring 6 and 6 then 1 against (any other list) won scoring 8 total 20 Player 2 played against a new player scoring 10. got the right match up another 10 then lost really bad scoring 1 total 21 who is the real winner? who worked for it? and how would you be if your were player 1

While the hypothetical situation you propose could certainly happen,

It actually cant, the winner is the guy who beat player 2 10-1 in the final round.

Some people just can't logic in the morning. So he goes 1-10, 10-1, 10-1. Doss that work? Assuming, of course that the guy who beat him in the first round doesn't do very well the rest of the tourney, and most everyone else was getting 6-5s and 5-6s.

Had I known the actual rules, I would have just taken the 10-1 win, and that would have put me over the top.

Actually, don't beat yourself up over that.

A) You got to play a full game (yay),

B) Your score would have been the same, as a player conceeding does not give you a 10-1 win. It would have given you 8 Tournament Points and a MoV of 140 (which would have been equal to or a little lower than what you presumably got playing the full game.

Really? So if I'm beating someone really bad, they can just concede at the last minute and deny me my 10 points? That doesn't sound right.

And another thing about it being strictly tournament points that is bizarre - It almost encourages you to be unsportsmanlike. For example, you may drag out a game so you can keep collecting objective points - or you might keep going full steam ahead on someone who is new - when you'd otherwise take it easy on them so they can at least kill a ship or two...

I've had that problem in the past... where I beat people so bad they totally abandon the game - so now I tend to go much easier on people, to ensure they at least have a fun time. I assumed I could do that in tournaments as well - but it appears thats not how this game is supposed to be. Just weird. I have to rethink my entire strategy now.

It's also a significant disadvantage to running multiple small ships - because you are likely going to lose at least 1 or two small ships if running several - and remove yourself from contention most likely in the process.

Time to revisit that triple ISD list.

Something I wanna point out is that in the huge majority of tournaments the stakes are super low. In those tournaments sometimes weird stuff happens, but so what? Maybe you lose out on a coin and a cool alt art card, no big deal. But when the stakes are higher (regionals, nationals), to win the tournament you can expect to need to get strong wins in all your games, and to get at least two of those wins against people who have been winning just as hard. That's what the tournament system is really best for, and imo those are the only scenarios where it really matters.

Had I known the actual rules, I would have just taken the 10-1 win, and that would have put me over the top.

Actually, don't beat yourself up over that.

A) You got to play a full game (yay),

B) Your score would have been the same, as a player conceeding does not give you a 10-1 win. It would have given you 8 Tournament Points and a MoV of 140 (which would have been equal to or a little lower than what you presumably got playing the full game.

Really? So if I'm beating someone really bad, they can just concede at the last minute and deny me my 10 points? That doesn't sound right.

And hey, you were lamenting not knowing the rules.

Had I known the actual rules, I would have just taken the 10-1 win, and that would have put me over the top.

Actually, don't beat yourself up over that.

A) You got to play a full game (yay),

B) Your score would have been the same, as a player conceeding does not give you a 10-1 win. It would have given you 8 Tournament Points and a MoV of 140 (which would have been equal to or a little lower than what you presumably got playing the full game.

Really? So if I'm beating someone really bad, they can just concede at the last minute and deny me my 10 points? That doesn't sound right.

And another thing about it being strictly tournament points that is bizarre - It almost encourages you to be unsportsmanlike. For example, you may drag out a game so you can keep collecting objective points - or you might keep going full steam ahead on someone who is new - when you'd otherwise take it easy on them so they can at least kill a ship or two...

I've had that problem in the past... where I beat people so bad they totally abandon the game - so now I tend to go much easier on people, to ensure they at least have a fun time. I assumed I could do that in tournaments as well - but it appears thats not how this game is supposed to be. Just weird. I have to rethink my entire strategy now.

It's also a significant disadvantage to running multiple small ships - because you are likely going to lose at least 1 or two small ships if running several - and remove yourself from contention most likely in the process.

Time to revisit that triple ISD list.

If playing your best game in order to get the most points seems unsportsmanlike, then I don't even know what to tell you. The entire point of a small tournament is try to play at a higher level of competition than the casual game night. If people get upset by you playing to the best of your ability and really trying to win, then tournaments probably aren't for them.

The advantage of MSU is that you can afford to lose a ship or two and still win 10-1 or 9-2. With something like triple ISD you won't lose big but you're also unlikely to win big.

And another thing about it being strictly tournament points that is bizarre - It almost encourages you to be unsportsmanlike.

Concerning the rules on conceeding I was a bit surprised at first, but I haven't seen any conceeded matches yet, though as a TO I would consider it poor sportsmanship for anyone to conceeded at the very end of a match they're otherwise about to loose 9-2 or 10-1.

I don't believe I've ever heard FFG put to words why they decided on this rule on conceeded. It came in the wake of the whole debacle when draws and intentional draws were removed from the game and I reckon if the 8-0 result wasn't intended partly to make it unattractive to both players as well as keep the blowout 10-1 victory as something you could only achieve through play.

Yeah you beat him... by the slimmest of margins. Hardy deserving of a crushing podium walk.

There is currently a huge problem with the Armada tournament structure and most of it stems from this issue. The way tournament games are playing out now, when you play someone of your skill level there is a VERY high chance the tourney points will be 6-5 or 7-4, meaning you both are now out of the tourney unless the score is 7-4 and you get extremely lucky the rest of the tourney (multiple 10-1s and not a lot of players have 8+ pts per match). This is terrible.

What do you do when you play against someone of equal skill who simply won't allow you to score more than 6 or 7 points? If you go for the gusto you will get destroyed. If you don't, you both get average points and are most likely out of the tourney. There is no easy solution for this, which is the worst part of all this. The only solution is to have either single-elimination events or double-elimination. Double-elimination is great but can take a long time. Single-elimination leaves lots of players without games early in the event and also encourages players to win by small margins, meaning matches will be played to just win by a little bit and cause players to disengage when they are ahead.

I can't think of any way to address all of these issues, but as it is right now the Armada tourney structure is terrible. The players who do the best are the ones that do not encounter other good players in the tourney. I've seen it happen time and time again and I've been to several large events this summer. Those that have high skill do well by not playing other top players. It's just that simple. Once you qualify for any single-elimination rounds (for larger events) the entire game changes. Very odd.

The more I think about it the more this gets my goat.

This is a piss-poor complaint after the fact. Everybody has the scoring rules available up front. The rules tell you the things you have to do to win. Didn't do those things? Then you didn't deserve to win. Better luck next time.

Look, There have been several really well worded explanations for WHY Armada tournaments are scored the way they are in this thread and I understand that - but believe it or not, I did NOT know that wins weren't a part of the equation. I always thought that wins were first, and tournament points simply existed to break ties. Maybe that makes me foolish, but it's the truth.

So yeah I was pretty surprised to find out that it was otherwise. I'm now understanding it better, but I just really wish I'd known that all along. There have been plenty of tournament fights that I've purposely gone easy on my opponent, because I didn't want to hurt their feelings - when apparently I should have.

Example - My final match of the tournament - I destroyed an Interdictor with some really well placed crits from Luke Skywalker and B-Wings (Yavaris was doin some work) - and my opponent got so mad, he started picking up his stuff and said "Screw it I quit - " and began to pack up and leave. I pleaded with him to stay, because maybe he could blow up some of my ships and still get some points out of it... so he did and I managed an 8-3 win - which caused me to only take 2nd place. Had I known the actual rules, I would have just taken the 10-1 win, and that would have put me over the top.

I'm just frustrated for being so ignorant to the rules, in a tournament scene I've been playing in for a long time... It's really awkward.

And another thing about it being strictly tournament points that is bizarre - It almost encourages you to be unsportsmanlike. For example, you may drag out a game so you can keep collecting objective points - or you might keep going full steam ahead on someone who is new - when you'd otherwise take it easy on them so they can at least kill a ship or two...

I've had that problem in the past... where I beat people so bad they totally abandon the game - so now I tend to go much easier on people, to ensure they at least have a fun time. I assumed I could do that in tournaments as well - but it appears thats not how this game is supposed to be. Just weird. I have to rethink my entire strategy now.

It's also a significant disadvantage to running multiple small ships - because you are likely going to lose at least 1 or two small ships if running several - and remove yourself from contention most likely in the process.

Time to revisit that triple ISD list.

As others have pointed out, in most small tourneys the rewards for getting 1st vs 2nd or 3rd are minimally different. In the situation you describe I find most people are gracious enough to play out the game. If you face a complete newcomer you might have to choose between tournament points and building your local player base. I choose the player base everytime.

The story is different at a Regional event, but I haven't met any newcomers to the game at a Regional event. Everyone at ours knew the game, played excellently, and had a good time - crushing defeat or not.

Yeah you beat him... by the slimmest of margins. Hardy deserving of a crushing podium walk.

There is currently a huge problem with the Armada tournament structure and most of it stems from this issue. The way tournament games are playing out now, when you play someone of your skill level there is a VERY high chance the tourney points will be 6-5 or 7-4, meaning you both are now out of the tourney unless the score is 7-4 and you get extremely lucky the rest of the tourney (multiple 10-1s and not a lot of players have 8+ pts per match). This is terrible.

What do you do when you play against someone of equal skill who simply won't allow you to score more than 6 or 7 points? If you go for the gusto you will get destroyed. If you don't, you both get average points and are most likely out of the tourney. There is no easy solution for this, which is the worst part of all this. The only solution is to have either single-elimination events or double-elimination. Double-elimination is great but can take a long time. Single-elimination leaves lots of players without games early in the event and also encourages players to win by small margins, meaning matches will be played to just win by a little bit and cause players to disengage when they are ahead.

I can't think of any way to address all of these issues, but as it is right now the Armada tourney structure is terrible. The players who do the best are the ones that do not encounter other good players in the tourney. I've seen it happen time and time again and I've been to several large events this summer. Those that have high skill do well by not playing other top players. It's just that simple. Once you qualify for any single-elimination rounds (for larger events) the entire game changes. Very odd.

Well, the long term solution is to raise the skill level of your player base so it's more equally distributed.

I get what you're saying. We may be lucky here in Vancouver but it hasn't seemed to be a problem locally. Perhaps because the community is smaller than the X-wing one, and people aren't so cutthroat about competition. There are a wide variety of builds showing up, which mitigates the skill level effect a bit.

Had....

If playing your best game in order to get the most points seems unsportsmanlike, then I don't even know what to tell you. The entire point of a small tournament is try to play at a higher level of competition than the casual game night. If people get upset by you playing to the best of your ability and really trying to win, then tournaments probably aren't for them.

The advantage of MSU is that you can afford to lose a ship or two and still win 10-1 or 9-2. With something like triple ISD you won't lose big but you're also unlikely to win big.

To clarify - I don't think doing your best is unsportsmanlike... but in one game yesterday I literally 1-shot a full-health interdictor with an amazing Yavaris activation.... and my opponent was really upset - visibly shaken and so upset that he started to pack up his things and go home. Had I allowed it, I'd have gained 10 points and won the overall tournament. But I encouraged him to stick it out (he ended up with 4th place), and he brought my victory down to only 8-3. That's what I mean.

If you win via concession, you only get 8 points though... Unless I am wrong. So you would have remained second.

Edit: Found it on page 8 of Tournament Regulations:

"If a player concedes the game, that player receives 0 tournament points and a Margin of Victory of 0. His or her opponent receives 8 tournament points and a Margin of Victory of 140."

The scenario Crab is referring to does happen, though. It's happened to me. I think that's really just an effect of having a granular scoring system though. If that guy were in an X-wing tournament and terrible, he'd be getting beat down in several games over and over all day. There's no real difference, other than how much their bad day feels like your fault.

I also want to point out that playing the game game to your best ability is not bad sportsmanship. Bad sportsmanship is picking up your toys to go home when the game swings against you, or being angry that you're getting milked for Fire Lanes points because you got tabled on Turn 3.

You have to see it from another side.

A 6-5 is only a draw.

A 7-4 a good draw

8-3 is a moderate win

9-2 and 10-1 are good wins.

You cannot be first if you are only doing good draws. You need at least 24-25 points to really say you have 3 wins.

IF wins would decide who will win a tournament, than you dont need the fine difference in the points. You need only Win, Draw, loss.

The drawback on this would be, that you have to play this many rounds to get a clear winner.

And on a tournament with 16-32 player it would mean: 5 Rounds. Good luck doing this with the long roundtime.

And yes, if the opponent concedes it is only 8 victory points. The by far most stupid rule ever. The opponent can ruin your score by just conceding.

And dont say it will not happen. I was leading with 9-2 and it would have been 10-1. And than he just concedes....

You have to see it from another side.

A 6-5 is only a draw.

A 7-4 a good draw

8-3 is a moderate win

9-2 and 10-1 are good wins.

You cannot be first if you are only doing good draws. You need at least 24-25 points to really say you have 3 wins.

IF wins would decide who will win a tournament, than you dont need the fine difference in the points. You need only Win, Draw, loss.

The drawback on this would be, that you have to play this many rounds to get a clear winner.

And on a tournament with 16-32 player it would mean: 5 Rounds. Good luck doing this with the long roundtime.

And yes, if the opponent concedes it is only 8 victory points. The by far most stupid rule ever. The opponent can ruin your score by just conceding.

And dont say it will not happen. I was leading with 9-2 and it would have been 10-1. And than he just concedes....

I feel like they are hedging their bets here, because in the old system, getting a 10-1 for an opponent forfeiting after getting frustrated when the game might end as a 7-3 isn't exactly fair, either. In the end of the day, yes, this game is competitive, but man, it's still a GAME.

yes, this game is competitive, but man, it's still a GAME.

Here come the people saying they pay money for this game so it has to be balanced the way they want it so they feel they get their monies worth out of it....

I don't see why the concession rule wouldn't be simply "the winner gets 8 points or the score indicated by his current MoV, whichever is higher."

It's not perfect, since you can always concede immediately before your MC80 with one hull left gets rammed to death, but it's at least better than the flat 8 we get now.

Ard, I think that's a fair compromise.

I only go to tournaments for 3 games in a row.....

I don't see why the concession rule wouldn't be simply "the winner gets 8 points or the score indicated by his current MoV, whichever is higher."

It's not perfect, since you can always concede immediately before your MC80 with one hull left gets rammed to death, but it's at least better than the flat 8 we get now.

I like this idea overall but I'd like to see something else added on to the quote to cause further hurdles for the spite-conceders out there:

​"Concessions take effect at the end of the turn. The conceding player may choose to continue activating his ships and squadrons as normal or he may forfeit all of his further activations if he wishes. His opponent continues playing as normal until the turn is over."

​If you're about to ram my MC80 to death, I can declare I'll concede but that ramming still happens.

I dont get the arguements, "if you meet someone of equal skill you cant score 10-1"

Well if you arent better than them, then why would you be able to do really well? The whole point of a tournament is that the most skilled player wins. So if you meet someone of equal skill then by definition you shouldnt win....

I also thinks its codswallop, you can easily beat players of your own skill level by considerable margins.

Nothing but games with people trying to do the bare minimum to only get a 6-5 win so they can have nothing but wins but the worst type of game.

NO THANK YOU!

The current system rewards people for taking risks and getting a higher margin of victory and you are rewarded for more points. It promotes battle. Your scenario would result in most games becoming a snooze fest with opponents trying to wait for engagement, hit/run, or standoffs.

Though it also penalizes people who fought equally skilled opponents and rewards people for driving unskilled opponents into the dirt (and possibly out of the game.) any time a punching bag shows up to a tournament that person is going to skew the results in his opponents' favor, and that is unfortunate. Sadly, short of finding some sort of ranking system, there is no way to ensure total equality in these events.

At our store qualifier an inexperienced player ended up taking the bye because the best players had somehow gotten paired together the whole day and got nothing but 6-5s, and he lost twice and got a blow out win against a newer player than him.

I dont get the arguements, "if you meet someone of equal skill you cant score 10-1"

Well if you arent better than them, then why would you be able to do really well? The whole point of a tournament is that the most skilled player wins. So if you meet someone of equal skill then by definition you shouldnt win....

I also thinks its codswallop, you can easily beat players of your own skill level by considerable margins.

Let's say you're super good and get matched up against somebody else super good on round one. 7-4 your favor. There's another super good guy, Mr Lucky, matched up against a noob on that round, 10-1.

"Oh no!" you cry, "not fair!"

But then this magical thing called matchups happens.

You get matched up against somebody else with a 7-4 (probably an average player). Because you're awesome and the only reason you're at 7-4 was your matchup, well, you should spank this guy, because he's right where he belongs. 8-3 your favor.

Mr Lucky, on the other hand, is up against the other 10-1. They're both good enough to have crushed their Round 1 opponents, so they split, 6-5 to Lucky.

End of Round 2, he's at 16, you're at 15. He's just beaten the other guy who was at 15, so pretty good chance you're squaring off against Mr Lucky at the top table. You need only to prove you're better than he is then, because a 7-4 to you puts you on top.