Welcome DavFlamerock and Knoedelmeister to the Living Tournament scene!!

Bu pdate mp.

Oooohhh… leptokurt joins the ranks of the triple digits.

I am getting a error message when trying to reach the threads to post results. Anyone is having the same problem ►►

Marael said:

Me too. Did want to check the results for the Hunt for Gollum and it directs to an error message. Strange.

Edit: It seems that just the links are dead. If you click at the thread directly everything is fine.

I found what is happening. The "question symbol" is being substituted by other symbol. If you manage to substitute the symbol for the "►", it will works

http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp►efid=286&efcid=4&efidt=620821

In light of the recent discussion in the Into the Pit Solo thread as well as the incredible results posted by Muemakan and Robert lately, I would like to invite everyone to post their decklist and try to give more details on the game played, especially when you''re posting top scores.

In my case, I still don''t understand how Muemakan does. I''m not challenging his results. I had the same questioning on previous tournaments (before the living format). I know (or assume) he plays a rabit deck, but I''d really like to understand how he decides with who to quest and how daring he is (never keeping any hero on defense, for example). Getting insight into that type of gameplay would be helpful to me and, I''m sure, to others who play not just to win, but to get great scores.

I know it''s hard to keep turn by turn notes, especially for 3 games, but if everyone makes an effort (I''ll do the same when I post new results), we can achieve a better "common" understanding of optimal decision-making in the game (as well as potentially point out errors we make - rules or strategy - to each other). Obviously, if we had a full "electronic" version of the game, we could just post "saves"… too bad.

Also, the recent list of results has got me thinking about the debates we had about the scoring system and how much rabit decks would be favored versus consistently winning ones. One thing I don''t see much in results is if people had to try multiple times before getting their 3 wins. But at terms, one can assume that Muemakan''s result will be repeated by others. We could find ourselves in a year or so with only rabbit results in the top 10. It may be too soon to think about it, but I''m sure we''ll want to revisit the scoring system eventually (or just accept that rabit decks are superior).

(By the way, I use the term "rabbit" deck, but I''m not 100 % sure it''s even accurate. But what I do see from these score is decks that win a very short time - and thus generate scores that are way better than previously existing top scores… we''re not talking margin error improvement, or just getting an extra victory point or preventing a couple damages here; we''re seeing victories consistently attained in 2 or 3 less rounds than previous and average results).

For posting decklist, I know someone mentionned issues with translation once. What I do is use the CardGameDB deckbuilder. You can export your decklist in text format. Maybe that''s an easier option for those who play in a foreign language (you can just refer to the images when building your deck in the deckbuilder; it''ll take care of the language for you).

Anyway, I''ll strive to remain in the top 5, but I''m afraid it won''t be an easy task with the recent increase in the competition level!

Good luck to everyone!

Hmmm… I'm not sure what's going on with the links. Thanks for the thoughtful posts about it.

I don't have time right at the moment to try some things, but as soon as I do, I'll see if I can fix it.

Looks like it's time to add Watcher in the Water anyway!

Okay, I did a quick test. It looks like something got corrupted, but if I go in and re-link everything, it seems to be working.

I've provided fresh links for all the Core scenarios at this point. So, those should be fixed.

I'll have a chance to to the rest later tonight.

(Interesting too… the "Measuring Success" links within each scenario living tournament thread were corrupted too, but when I fixed an original link in this thread to a specific scenario, it automatically fixed the "measuring success" link in that scenario too. Strange.)

Okay, all the current links should now be fixed.

Thanks again to Marael and muemakan for your thoughtful diagnostic skills.

Super strange… hope that doesn't happen again.

Meanwhile… beware the impending tentacles!!!

Welcome Tracker1…

…and welcome The Watcher in the Water!

Bit of an update…

There is any discussion about this kind of deck on the other forums ? I remember that tjey revised the scoring system after check the spirit deck is much superior, but as I say in Return to Mirkwood post when Muemakan revealed his trick is that he is a clever player. He thinks that need 0 deckbuilding, but I disagree: he saw a opportunity that I never see, so he looks much more a good deckbuilder.

Of course, after we know what to do, WE do not need to have deckbuilding… It can be that they release some errata to prevent this flaw, or in later scenarios prevent that by some means… but I am not sure they are aware of what is happening. I have a lot of games from Knizia, and normally he is very opened to hear our throughs about his games.

To clarify what a so called "rabbit deck" is:

In Juicy's first ournaments the players only committed one single score. Soon we reaized that one was only able to win when he quested through the adventure as quick as possible, ignoring possible enemies and taking huge risks. A rabbit deck has two goals:

1) generating as much WP as possible

2) with cards that you can play as early as possible

In other words, the WP per resource ratio was the only important factor. The game saw mostly cars like Sneak/Gandalf or Protector of Lórien, but also Escort from Edoras and Westroad Traveller.

This didn't wok in all quests, but in most of them. Journey to Rhosgobel is a good example. With the right starting hand and encounters a player could finish this quest in 2 rounds. Conflict at the Carrock is an example where rabbit decks don't work.

These rabbit decks will give a player excellent results, but their win/loss ratio isn't the best. They were the main reason why we decided to use sets of three games in the Living Tournament System.

A rabbit deck usually includes high WP heroes like Éwoyn and Glorfindel. In that sense I consider these "Unexpected Beravor " decks not as rabbit decks, although they can provide similar results. Beravor decks are much more flexible and have thus a better win/loss ratio.

History and context… I'm for it.

Also, keep an eye out for Tracker1 everybody… slowly and surely working on up the table.

Greetings… Saturday!

Hi Everybody!

My internet connection at home has been out of service the past few days… still out of service, but I was able to get some access today to make updates.

And there were lots.

First, welcome to Mandolf and WillyD158!

Also, congrats to jjeagle (and company) for making so much progress on the 2 Player front.

AND, Narsil0420 paves the way into 3 Player Living Tournament territory. Very cool.

Quick update while I have a hotspot…

Thanks Juicebox!

I've been reading the forums since the game was released and figured it was time to do more than just read. Looking forward to participating in more of the Living Tournaments

My internet connection has been restored!

And, we've got a new leader on the Leader Board!!!

Congrats leptokurt!!!

Also, a big welcome to Shady Rick!

Good Mornings and Evenings all around… (afternoons too).

Time for a bit of an update to the Leader Board…

And then there were 4… players with a Leader Board score above 100.

Nice going folks!!!

Big Welcome to Ted Sandyman!

I vote that FFG includes a juicebox hero in an AP at some point because he's doing such a fantastic job with his living tournament.

Thanks for the love!

And a tiny update…