ITC 2017 Feedback

[OldManMyke]

If you could please put all your feedback on the just completed ITC in this thread that would be great.   Good, bad, suggestions, everything is welcome.  The event will only get better if you let me know what you want.

Thanks in advance and thanks again for making this a great event

[trikk]

The matching system could use a tweak because the pairing system of most teams was: we pick which master to which table you want to assign and then you just pick masters from the current table and the next table.

The system:

Team A picks 1 master for the table

Team B picks 2 masters for the table

Team A picks one of the masters to play their master.

This forced a backup system in pairings.

 

Also I think making a max 2 of each master would be nice so you don't pick Sandeep every game

[Tris]

Great organisation overall, everything went smoothly and without any problems.

Great shout out to the judges too, fair, competent and nice people

But it would be great to actually put numbers on the tables next time, just say 1-5 from left to right and everything is alright.

So the teams won't have to discuss that during their pairing.

 

Oh, and maybe you could put one or two signs up outside the venue next time^^

[Clousseau]

Interestingly, although I had to answer a few more questions than normal, there was nothing particularly unusual, and only 1 where I had to request support (as I'm not a rules master by any means). Everyone took the response positively. I also made a few measurement and LOS calls, always ensuring I had no idea of to whose its advantage was.

Could probably manage with a slightly smaller number of judges, but having a head judge is a great idea, especially one who has an in depth knowledge of the rules.

Apart from the player match up sequence, where feedback from the players is most valuable, I saw no issues whatsoever, and good banter on many tables. Sure, there were some tense games involving the top players/teams, but nothing untoward and certainly nothing to cause concern.

Name badges were a great idea, and loved the team apparel (except maybe the vest tops - sorry guys, but not appealing IMHO). Also great to see almost every model fully painted. Oh yes, there were some really cool custom fate decks out there.

Venue was good, and the screens showing the time remaining were something all venues could learn from.

Good job all round - TO, players, judges and venue. See you next year.

[Paradigm]

It was an amazing event! The venue was great, with lots of space, good ventilation and both drinks and snacks easily available. Nice idea to have lunch included in the ticket, delivered to the venue. The terrain was high quality overall, except for a few tables that were too open in my opinion. The judges did a great job in being easily available, and they seemed to make quick and fair rulings. There was enough time in all of my matches except for one, so two hours plus setup time was good. The prices were really cool as well.

I loved the whole concept of playing in teams. The scoring method worked well. The matchmaking idea was interesting, but I suppose there could have been more tactical depth to it. It was easy to just pick our best master for each table, and our opponents' picks hardly influenced our decisions at all. Knowing your opponents' masters before building your crew had an impact on list building, and I believe this hurts some masters too much. Unfortunately I don't have any good suggestions on how to actually improve this part of the event.

TLDR: 

I had a great time, would absolutely go again even if nothing changes, and I would gladly recommend it to everyone.

[Oshova]

A really well run event, as Mike and the Judges did a great job (as always) of keeping an event in order, keeping everyone aware of time remaining, and answering rules questions/LOS check etc

The one thing I would want to change would be the matchup system. For the most part, when we had decided what Master was playing on each table before knowing what our opponents were using, and from talking to our opponents they seemed to have done the same. Also, with the fact that some Masters have auto takes against them, I don't think that the system used is the best system.

Now, I do like picking your Masters before hand, but I don't like your opponent knowing it before picking crews. So how could it be changed?

OPTION 1:

Each team picks their Masters, and picks what tables they are playing without knowing what the other team will do. Each team then goes table by table announcing the Faction and player they will be putting on that table. Then play the games like you would normally, but having your Master locked in (but only revealing at the Declare Crew step).

OPTION 2:

Each team picks their Masters, but then during the match up portion, the teams only declare what faction they are putting forward, and we use a similar format to this year's where there is a back and forth between teams (I quite like the idea of reversing the 2 and 1 picks like Trikk proposed). Then once each game has been picked, you go to the tables and only announce your locked in Master at the Declare Crews step.

OPTION 3:

Each team picks their Factions, then proceed as per Option 2.

I definitely think that keeping your Master hidden until the Declare Crews step is an improvement, as some Masters just have heavy counters that are Mercenary picks (Sue and Taelor jump to mind).

But other than changing the matching up system, I can't think of any other changes I would want to make at this moment. A well run event, and would definitely want to bring back Black Joker Society again next year.

[trikk]

I don't like the faction ideas.

I think right now the lack of information meant you couldn't really counterpick anything because you just wanted the right master for the right table.

If we'd just put up factions I think the pairing wouldn't really have a lot of strategical value and I think the idea of siding towards the enemy master is kind of what this tournament is about.

 

The idea I like is you pick masters but the enemy just knows your factions. Then you reverse A and B from this year

So team A and B announce faction to each other but have a set of masters like this year.

A picks one

B picks two

A picks  one of two

 

I think getting "each master can be picked a total of 2-3" times would also give a risk managment system

[balgor]

This was a great event, and run really smoothly, and I had a great time, with 5 great games.

 

For possible changes for next year my suggestions would be:

1) Change the matching process so team A puts down a master, team B chooses two masters and then team A picks one of the two masters to play against.

2) I feel the event should be Fixed master with a pool of 10 or 20 points to allow them to have some flexibility.

[lucius101]

1 hour ago, balgor said:

This was a great event, and run really smoothly, and I had a great time, with 5 great games.

 

For possible changes for next year my suggestions would be:

1) Change the matching process so team A puts down a master, team B chooses two masters and then team A picks one of the two masters to play against.

2) I feel the event should be Fixed master with a pool of 10 or 20 points to allow them to have some flexibility.

Do you mean fixed list? or just really tiny crews?

[Guy in Suit]

Well done Mike. 

Element games was a fantastic venue - the friendliest staff and the softest toilet paper of any game store I've visited. 

I'd say the main thing to work on for next year is to encourage the U.K. teams to put up a bit more of a challenge. :-0

I have lots of thoughts on pairings that I will share later, but for what it was, it was fine. Importantly it didn't take to long, and all of my games finished all 5 turns, which is really important to me. 

[Oshova]

26 minutes ago, Guy in Suit said:

Importantly it didn't take to long, and all of my games finished all 5 turns, which is really important to me. 

Definitely an important factor when people are travelling from so far away. It's bad enough just travelling up the country, let alone across several time zones.

[balgor]

1 hour ago, lucius101 said:

Do you mean fixed list? or just really tiny crews?

Very good, I mean 50pts crews with a pool of 10 or 20 points for a little flexibility.

[Oshova]

18 minutes ago, balgor said:

Very good, I mean 50pts crews with a pool of 10 or 20 points for a little flexibility.

So a 70SS pool? I don't think that's as large as pool events have been run at. Pool style events usually give advantage to versatile summoners, as they can summon in what they don't need to have in their pool. Also, this would make people have to play 1 Master for 5 games, which takes out a lot of the tactical aspects of it being so open the way it was this year.

[Von Woozle]

Scores and updates of the event would be good.  I had to read the score sheet from the Polish teams facbook and that was for 1,2 and 3 out of 18 teams.   Also since its a world event and 2017 a live stream would be cool.

[balgor]

10 minutes ago, Oshova said:

So a 70SS pool? I don't think that's as large as pool events have been run at. Pool style events usually give advantage to versatile summoners, as they can summon in what they don't need to have in their pool. Also, this would make people have to play 1 Master for 5 games, which takes out a lot of the tactical aspects of it being so open the way it was this year.

You might be right with the summoners, but I would not really say there was that much of tactical aspects in this years apart from the rounds 3 and 5, as they really did make you think.  In this current format you just choose the strats and schemes you knew you could do with your faction.  Maybe just changing the way the selection process is done so that your opponent chooses the two masters that are put against them is enough.

[OldManMyke]

56 minutes ago, Von Woozle said:

Scores and updates of the event would be good.  I had to read the score sheet from the Polish teams facbook and that was for 1,2 and 3 out of 18 teams.   Also since its a world event and 2017 a live stream would be cool.

Id do updates on day one.  Day 2 i delibrately stopped them as they could give tactical advantage. 

Streaming was discussed but I dont know enough about it or people who do.  Plus what would you stream, general stream of the room, a single table?

[Oshova]

2 hours ago, OldManMyke said:

Streaming was discussed but I dont know enough about it or people who do.  Plus what would you stream, general stream of the room, a single table?

From what I heard, Vengeance were streaming the top table the weekend before. No idea what was going on in the stream or anything, but might be worth talking to the organiser(s) for Vengeance? I definitely think that streaming is a nice addition to a tournament, in this internet age. But it is more hassle, and more cost.

[PanzerHarris]

Loved the event. I've said on Twitter that it was the most fun gaming weekend I've ever had and I stand by that. 

The match up process will never satisfy everyone. Just a quick read of this thread confirms that! The one we had was fine and worked well - if there's going to be a change then it should be one that's put through some testing rather than theoryfaux. ?

I would like to have seen some distinction made between club teams and 'national' teams when it came to trophies. No disrespect intended and I genuinely congratulate them on their win, but Trump Card was made up of the best US players. All the top UK players were either judging or playing with their clubmates. There wasn't a UK version of Trump Card to give them a real run for their money. There will be next year I'm told, but that just decreases the chances for the club teams and it would be cool to have something to compete for if you'd rather play with for Leicester or Yorkshire than form a super team and play for the UK or US. Again, not dissing national teams in any way. Going 5-0 is still a heck of an achievement and playing national teams is a real draw for the event. 

Just my thoughts.

[Psientologist]

6 hours ago, Von Woozle said:

Scores and updates of the event would be good.  I had to read the score sheet from the Polish teams facbook and that was for 1,2 and 3 out of 18 teams.   Also since its a world event and 2017 a live stream would be cool.

The only point these were held back was to not interfere with the event at the end, which although admittedly is a bit lame for the spectator the people in the actual event's experience matters more.

Bag-o-tools wasn't live which is usually there but Mike not only owned up to that he just took screen shots and shared them on social media (Facebook and Twitter).

If you wanted more detail, not just which team faced which team then I did post the pairings (the teams made) after each round on arcanereservoir.com
I apologise if that still isn't enough information, but if you'd like more please elaborate.

I would be very much up for streaming, doing commentary etc. and I'm sure Mike like's the idea of streaming too, but it's not as simple as want.
It costs money to have the equipment to start with, then taking it up, preparing it, more time is then spent making sure it's going smoothly etc.
I'm sure you watched (as did I a bit) the Guild Ball event Vengeance the week before but the Steam Forged themselves put that on and they're based around NWGC.

[Psientologist]

As someone walking chatting with different people all weekend there were only two things I heard they'd like changed.

First is just an echo of the pairings being changed but also,

The painting, at least 4 different groups of people seemed confused about or there was some complication.
I understood you wanted the painting to be a team effort but it seems that surely it was more difficult to judge and also, not that I'm saying people would, harder to know who's cheating.
The judges may recognise the UK player's painting but I for one wouldn't know what say Trump Card's player's best painting would look like.
Personally I'd just let the team nominate a painter to enter the competition after all it was only a trophy for one of the teams players anyway right?

Really good event though, thanks to everyone that spoke to me, I had a great time, great bunch of people, really good venue (one of THE best) and nice staff too... oh and a bar!
From what I saw the event had the perfect level of casual competitive, people wanted to win, there was pride but everyone was polite, had a laugh and played the best miniatures game.

 

[Psientologist]

3 hours ago, PanzerHarris said:

I would like to have seen some distinction made between club teams and 'national' teams when it came to trophies. No disrespect intended and I genuinely congratulate them on their win, but Trump Card was made up of the best US players. All the top UK players were either judging or playing with their clubmates. There wasn't a UK version of Trump Card to give them a real run for their money. There will be next year I'm told, but that just decreases the chances for the club teams and it would be cool to have something to compete for if you'd rather play with for Leicester or Yorkshire than form a super team and play for the UK or US. Again, not dissing national teams in any way. Going 5-0 is still a heck of an achievement and playing national teams is a real draw for the event. 

 

I agree with the sentiment of this but it's just the nature of the beast right?
Trump Card said themselves on Max Value that it'd be more likely the UK (half the field) would consist of clubs rather than super teams and really the only way to stop that would be to only allow a team per country (so Britain could blag 4).

The players from outside the UK are more-likely (not always) going to be some form of "super team" because only the most dedicated (so typically better) players are going travel through multiple time zones to play toy soldiers.

Regarding the personal decision of playing in/getting together a super or club team is, in my mind, the same as making a decision of what master to take in a game or at least your personal expectations.

[Tapdancer]

Generally a great event which was well organised and in a top venue.  The venue staff were really helpful and seemed to put real effort into keeping us happy.  Tables were a bit tight with 5 squeezed into the central row.  From a team perspective this layout made sense but made the games cramped once the individual games began.  Timings and TO queries were brilliant the wall screens and shout outs were a huge help.

As already noted the matchup system whilst good in that it didn't cause a problem was largely irrelevant to the outcome of the round.  Teams simply picked the preferred table/strat/scheme as a group the subsequent pairing process didn't seem to have a purpose (we could have just exchanged lists).

The lock down on competition information from Saturday evening was irritating.  One of the huge improvements to the 2017 tournament scene has been how Bag-o-tools has allowed the competition to be more inclusive and interactive.  Aside from knowing the info directly related to you, it's great to see how others are doing through the day, something which was often impossible previously.  Seeing a blow by blow report with round scores adds considerable to the fun of the event.  Whilst giving up control of the competition info is perhaps something TO's may not like the net benefit is considerable.

[trikk]

Fixed master would probably mean you would pick the top and most versatile master from each faction - Sandeep, Somer, Shenlong (?), Nico, Nellie and Hamelin in almost every team.

I think of the opponent would choose the enemy master it would allow counterpicking and messing up opponent plans as well as give you a chance to pick generalist and specialist masters.

 

I think limiting it to max 3 games with same master would mean you have to play two of them but it would basically stop seing Sandeep each game

(Thank you Drunk History for that Rasputina)

[Clousseau]

The club vs country debate is very interesting and likely to be a contradiction for whichever country hosts such an event. Actually I think that the Swedish  Moose team were also from the same club, and that might have been true for others as well.

Painting should be a team effort as its a team event.

Finding some way to get more different Masters played might be fun.

[Anger Worm]

Quote

I would like to have seen some distinction made between club teams and 'national' teams when it came to trophies. No disrespect intended and I genuinely congratulate them on their win, but Trump Card was made up of the best US players. All the top UK players were either judging or playing with their clubmates. There wasn't a UK version of Trump Card to give them a real run for their money. There will be next year I'm told, but that just decreases the chances for the club teams and it would be cool to have something to compete for if you'd rather play with for Leicester or Yorkshire than form a super team and play for the UK or US. Again, not dissing national teams in any way. Going 5-0 is still a heck of an achievement and playing national teams is a real draw for the event. 

 

The US teams mostly came from two clubs, and was entirely a collection of friends. This, and availability, was the basis for who attended. While you'll only get serious folks travelling, it was hardly a "super team" encompassing the best from across the country.