Hey! Was wondering about offering two possible options, each players only having to commit 3 games to one and/or both competitions.

#1----Paasage Through Mirkwood---everything left as it is, except you have to take the Ugoliants Spawn option at the end....and only two Heros!

#2----Khazad -dum, into the pit. Everything left as is, but you have to use at least 1 dwarf hero.

Thoughts? Does everyone have KD? 3 games a good amount? Still use the weights factor for scoring?

I liked the first idea. I do no have KD, but probably I'm alone on this.
I couldn't play this weekend's tourny in order to play the Rhosgobel challenge.

Hw come you couldn't play this weekend? About KD, that's why I wanted to ask, to see if enough people have it yet.

Zjb12 said:

I had no time to play both games.
And I know that's why you asked, that's why I answered.

I think 3 games is good. I liked the scoring used this week. Personally, I'd find it interesting to involve the tactics sphere somehow...I had very little success with this sphere early on and haven't used it for a while. I think it's still a difficult sphere to use playing solo, but with all the new cards now available maybe it's a little more usable than when I last tried it and I'd be interested to try it more and also see how others use it and what success they have. Perhaps at some time a tourney that involves a requirement for a minimum of x cards from this sphere be included in the deck (x could be 50% or something like that).

Hmmm....tactics is a tough one. Good support when playing with more than 1 player, but hard alone. I almost never use tactics, though i would like to more.

Yu were okay with the scoring procedure for this weekends tourney? By. The weighted factor rally kills you if you lose much more than 1, as I did!

I want to do a Khazad-dum related tournament! I also want to be able to use all the player cards available! (1 core set is great thought)

What about Passage through Mirkwood, everything left as it is, but you have to face Attercop, Attercop in the end?

I like to join tournaments but i dont like the idea of card pool limited. I like to use all the cards. And dont really care what quest to play cose all my decks is build up against any quest. But still, for co-op tournaments i think we need some kind of restricted list......

leptokurt said:

Why stop there! Maybe they could face 2 of them!!!! Actually, what you could do is switch an attercop for ungoliant or instead of randomly picking which ending for the third quest card, you randomly pick which enemy.

The idea of forcing a 2 hero game is interesting, especially if using the "easiest" quest.

We know Secrecy is coming up and it could be that 2 heroes would become a viable strategy with Secrecy cards. Why not try to experiment a bit with it?

SiCK_Boy said:

Genius.

Also, I like the idea of a forced encounter with big spiders (proposed by zjb), the 'beorn's path' could be one of them - Attercopx2 maybe -, and the ohter ('dont leave the path' or something like that) being tthe Ungoliant's little daughter!

Just a little reminder: last time we played this adventure in a tournament it ended in a fiasco because the restrictions were to harsh and players couldn't create enough WP. Playing with only two heroes might lead towards the same problem and almost makes Éowyn a 'must have'.

Perhaps adding a free attachment might help. Favour of the Lady, Celebrían's Stone or Unexpected Courage.

I'm also heavily in favour of restricting Beravor so that she can only use her ability once per turn.

zjb, definitely agree tactics is tough solo and I almost never use it which is why I'd find it interesting to see a tourney at some point that make it's heavy use mandatory. Would give me a reason to try it out again, and I'm also curious to see how better players would do being forced to use (i.e. what creative approachs would they come up with).

There are some great home-made quests out there, several of which don't need you to shuffle any of the "new" cards in to the deck, meaning anyone can print and play them. One other benefit is that you don't need to have bought a specific adventure pack to participate.

Sarn Gorwing or four seasons are possibilities and I'm sure there are others that I haven't tried yet.

Another different take would be to try leptokurts thought of seeking a higher score through points obtained by defeating enemies and exploring locations. If I member right, on enemies you would add threat+attack+defense+hit points+(victory points if they had any.). So, for example, king spider: 2+3+1+3+(0)=9. Locations wold be threat + progress tokens needed. Your score would be lessened by damage, dead Heros, and threat level. There would be no threat lowering allowed, so no Galadrim's greetings, gandalf only for damage or card draw, elf helms response wold not work. The reason for this wold be someone could sit on the deck forever. As it is, most would probably try to play much slower and just finish the quest before threating out as long as they could earn more points peer round than they lost. Hmmm....what do you think? Would this promote more leadership or tactics usage?

leptokurt said:

Right about Beravur. FFG should make this official errata long time ago........

Hi Z! I had been toying around with another Passage Through Mirkwood idea for a tournament that I was planning to run one week in February. It incorporated several various ideas posted on my ideas thread, and it involves some of the specific ideas mentioned here too. It's more "outside the box" than most of the tournaments I have run, and I was considering it before all the discussion around tournament scoring broke out. With that recent discussion, I am realizing my passion lies more in that area of creating a system to facilitate open deck builds in a Living Tournament format - so I'm curious to run a few more straightforward type tournaments in February to focus mainly on the scoring variables (sets of 3 vs sets of 5, stuff like that) as a way of testing for building that system.

Anyway, I'll post the details here for the PtM Tournament I was considering, and if you'd like to run it (or something like it), feel free.

Scenario: Passage Through Mirkwood (x2)
Deck Parameters: 1-3 Core Sets + all SoM Adventure Packs (for both decks)
Tournament Parameters: 2 Games (combined), 2 Separate Decks, 2 Heroes Each, Use All Spheres*
Number of Players: Solo Player

*A result for this week’s tournament will include the combined score of 2 back-to-back games. In each game you are limited to 2 heroes (from 2 different spheres). Between the 2 games you must have all 4 spheres represented. (So, for example, game one could include a Leadership and Lore hero pairing and game two could include a Spirit and Tactics hero pairing). You must win both back-to-back games to equal a successful result. For deck construction, your 2 decks may use cards from 1-3 Core Sets and any of the Shadows of Mirkwood Adventure Packs. Before beginning your 2 games, you must have constructed both of your minimum 50-card decks (i.e. no card sharing between the 2 decks). Oh, and watch out for spiders!

juicebox

@Juicebox---hmmm...sounds interesting. This could be a good idea! Do you think I need to "try" it out first, or are you pretty certain it is possible? I would think it is, but I might force competitors to face ungoliant's spawn. Thoughts?

Z, I'm not sure the playability if additional mechanics are being introduced (i.e. forcing certain enemies).

No pressure to use the idea... just seemed thematic along with how the flow of conversation was going.

I'd be up for the 2-hero Mirkwood quest as presented by juicebox. I don't think you need to spice it up at all.

I've got some time this evening to try it out, I'll let you know how it goes.

Memetix said:

Thanks!!!

juicebox said:

Sounds good. I'll let memetix try it out and then decide. I might also run a second tourney, either khazad-dum or a scenario where I use leptokurts point seeking idea.

Ok - I built a lore/spirit hobbit deck and a tactics/leadership dwarf/eagle deck.

The dwarf deck did what it was supposed to returning covered in blood but successful non-the-less. There was much drinking and rejoicing.

The hobbits with their starting threat of 16 were hoping for a less eventful wander through the forest but boy were they disappointed. Its seems the orcs were having a very noisy picnic in the forest. The poor old hobbits didn't manage to quest successfully during the first 10 or more turns and their threat was rising at an alarming rate until finally they were spotted and attacked by Ufthak and his bodyguards along with 2 big spiders. The silvan rangers managed to hold them at bay and a couple of forest snares meant there was time to counter-attack. Sadly the hummerhorns heard the noise and turned up to investigate next turn along with the Ungoliant spwan as a shadow effect. Suddenly the hobbits were in the open (threat 44) and still no progress on the first quest.

Having forgotten to tie their shoe laces, the hobbits remembered how to make a fast hitch and a well timed greeting from the elves started to turn the tides. Gandalf finally made an appearance and the trackers were making progress too. With only 3 cards left in the encounter deck, the path through the forest was cleared. The hobbits made it out rattled but unscathed.

-----

The decks were built with 1xCore and all APs. Both games were REALLY enjoyable. The start is hairy, resources and allies are slow to arrive, but you know if you can hang on in, things will get better. I think there is a lot of scope for coming up with different deck types and different hero combinations.

It would be very easy to sprinkle in songs and make the decks very similar in style. This would be a shame, so I suggest you enforce the decks to be 2 sphere, only allowing cards from spheres that match your heroes.

Memetix said:

This report is a prime example of why I love this game! Thanks Memetix!!

I LOVE that you went with the two Hobbits too. Well done, and well told.

And yes, I agree on limiting the decks to 2 sphere for this one (plus neutral allies) - sounds like a really fun challenge.