Hi there,

our local store is running a tournament and we are discussing the rules. Especially the tie breaker or the "MOV" if you will. My idea for now would be:

90min time limit

Winner gets 1 point, loser 0

MOV = Every unit you killed (points)

I really would have the approach that losing units is not a problem. So no X-Wing System, just the killed points.

What do you think?

Here are they official rules:

A player wins the game either by defeating all their opponent’s units or by earning the most victory tokens a er six rounds.
• If all of one player’s units are defeated, that player is eliminated from the game, and their opponent is the winner.
• If neither player is eliminated a er six game rounds, the game ends and the player with the most victory tokens is the winner.

-If both players have an equal number of victory tokens, the player with the highest score wins. A player’s score is equal to the total point value of each enemy unit that was defeated. is point value includes the point value of the unit and the point values of its equipped upgrades. If this still results in a tie, the Blue Player wins.

just take the renewers rules. should fit the most

what and where are these "renewer" rules (is it a user?)

3 hours ago, TzazikiMann said:

what and where are these "renewer" rules (is it a user?)

Pretty sure that was a "Runewars" typo, but jgibbs got you the correct answer out of the RRG, page 46.

Yeah Runewars sry. Autocorrection can be awesome XD

I thought x-wings were tie breakers

a game of loopin chewie

Populace vote on the paint scheme. Each tied player picks the worst painted model in their force and places them next to each other and the other players get to blind vote which is painted best. Winner of the vote breaks the tie. Shouldn't take more than 5 minutes and encourages decent painting.

I think OP meant tie breakers I the tournament overall, not individual games.

I would track objective points won, and use that as MoV.

It is a little awkward though, since not all missions have the same number of points available.

I wouldn't be surprised if for tournament play, the deployment and missions are determined by the TO and everyone plays the same one.

1 hour ago, Col. Dash said:

Populace vote on the paint scheme. Each tied player picks the worst painted model in their force and places them next to each other and the other players get to blind vote which is painted best. Winner of the vote breaks the tie. Shouldn't take more than 5 minutes and encourages decent painting.

I'm not a fan of populace vote on paint scheme as it setups issues of other players in the event voting for a winner of a match which can create issues as the you may want to vote against a player for seeding reasons.

But a system of using percent of force painted as a tie breaker after " point value defeated" could work, and help create a reason to get your army painted up.

16 minutes ago, DekoPuma said:

It is a little awkward though, since not all missions have the same number of points available.

I wouldn't be surprised if for tournament play, the deployment and missions are determined by the TO and everyone plays the same one.

In Runewars, there are 3 legal choices of each type, with the oldest rotating out each season, and the TO picks one of each (I believe at random) for everyone to play for that round, so each round is different but everybody is always playing the same mission setup. I would imagine Legion being similar, which makes that less of a problem, since everybody has the same chances for victory tokens. (Although it still leaves the fact that a given army might be able to run up a massive margin on a given objective, eg an MSU scoring a bunch of points on Breakthrough, that's not so important if it's only used as a tiebreaker anyways.)

W/L, with # of tokens as a tie-breaker, and swiss pairings, seems legit to me. For sixteen players after three rounds, there can be at most two undefeated players; or one if you can fit four rounds in (depending on whether tournament round time limits end up being closer to 90 or 120 minutes).

I would use what MTG uses and look at opponents win records. If one persons opponents went 1-3 and the other went 3-1, the person who played the 3-1 would win due to facing “tougher” opponents

What’s we’re doing in the tts league is through victory tokens difference.

Each objective has different amount of victory tokens, but usually people only win by 1-2 victory tokens.

For a full event, the victory points like y oku describe is a good first break. The either opponent's strength of schedule or total points killed. For the third, use whichever of those 2 you didn't choose for 2cd.

I would avoid using victory tokens since everyone is likely going to be playing a different scenario.

For the games themselves, victory conditions as stated in the rules, but I would drop the blue player wins a 2 level tie and just call that match a draw.

10 hours ago, svelok said:

In Runewars, there are 3 legal choices of each type, with the oldest rotating out each season, and the TO picks one of each (I believe at random) for everyone to play for that round, so each round is different but everybody is always playing the same mission setup. I would imagine Legion being similar, which makes that less of a problem, since everybody has the same chances for victory tokens. (Although it still leaves the fact that a given army might be able to run up a massive margin on a given objective, eg an MSU scoring a bunch of points on Breakthrough, that's not so important if it's only used as a tiebreaker anyways.)

I'm not so sure. The battlefield selection mechanism is much more gameified in Legion than in RuneWars Minis. I could see a strong argument for keeping the rejection process in the hands of players as part of the strategic planning of a match.

I could see the 3x3 layout being dealt by the tournament organizer, or perhaps even proscribed (in multiple sets, to accommodate different rounds) by the organized play document in each season.

Part of that may hinge on whether we see additional conditions, deployments, and objectives released as the game goes on, too.

In Flames of War an unfinished game would be a loss for both players.

On ‎4‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 12:25 PM, DarkTemplars said:

everyone is likely going to be playing a different scenario

Why would everyone play a different scenario? In other table top wargames its the norm for everyone to be playing the same scenario for each round. This whole thread is exactly why. No need to reinvent the wheel.

On ‎4‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 9:41 AM, Skyguard said:

I'm not a fan of populace vote on paint scheme as it setups issues of other players in the event voting for a winner of a match which can create issues as the you may want to vote against a player for seeding reasons

Not sure what seeding reasons is. But its a blind vote and you can even have it to where the TO picks what he thinks is the worst painted. Yeah in a small group you might be able to pick out which player painted which but in Legion, there are only two factions and they really are going to start looking the same unlike say 40k where every army looks completely different and its easy to go "John is the dark elder player and Bob is the Ork player."

Because of how the defining the battle field works with the cards. They went into that much effort to design that part of the game and I don't see them throwing it out to standardize scenarios across the event.

As more cards get released, I think that you will see some in depth deck construction for tournaments with the decks being tailored for the army being played.

1 hour ago, Col. Dash said:

Why would everyone play a different scenario? In other table top wargames its the norm for everyone to be playing the same scenario for each round. This whole thread is exactly why. No need to reinvent the wheel.

Probably because the rules tell you how to select and set up the battle field? Why would FFG not follow through with that? They did with the Armada objective system.

Not to mention selecting a side to set up after you know the objective gives an advantage to one player.