Jump to content

Rotating tables during tournaments?


Maniacal_cackle

Recommended Posts

It's my turn to organise this year's big tournament, and I'm just wondering how to tackle terrain/tables. Ideally we'd like to have themed tables (like our ice map will use all the ice terrain), but it will lead to different tables having extremely different conditions.

This is desirable in my mind, as long as someone doesn't get stuck playing on the same table the whole tournament. In Magic: The Gathering you can just have a 'top table' where the highest ranking players sit, but that doesn't feel like it works well here.

Does anyone have any heuristics/methods to recommend that deal with optimising player variety on the tables? Or is it probably best to just let players self-organise and try to get on different tables each time, possibly first come/first served? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the UK we do normally assign games to tables. So players should play on a range of tables. Depending on how many rounds you are having you might start to struggle if you formally set them up as table 1 table 2 and so forth, and then just set the players out based on their current position in the table with having the same player on the top table more than once in a row (and likewise for the bottom table). For a 3 round event its unlikely a player will play on the same table twice unless they are clearly one of the better players and got to the top of the leader board early and stayed there. In which case its normally not too hard to just switch a couple of table numbers to make the change, and try and make sure they don't; play on the same table 2 games running. 

You could just flip the numbering every other round (Or even just part way through) to make sure there is a bit of a move around. (So for example in odd number rounds Table 1 is top table and table 8 bottom table and even number rounds table 8 is top table and table 1 bottom table 

I don't know how fair it might be to allow players to choose their tables, as it may lead to arguments when its a better table for 1 player than another. If they were randomly determined, then they can't really complain as much (they still will, but as a much lower level grumbling about how luck was against them rather than to you about how it was unfair that player A picked a table that suited his crew better). It might depend on how varied the tables are. I know there area  few "extreme" tables in the collection of Closseau who runs a large enumber of events in the uk that I really enjoy playing on because the table completely changes the way you have to play that game, but some masters do find those tables easier than others. (The extreme one I can think of is a big indoor dungeon/maze which is a lot of fun until you face an incorporeal master on it, or a master that avoids LOS, when it suddenly seems a very uphill game) 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All great suggestions, thanks Adran!

9 minutes ago, Adran said:

I know there area  few "extreme" tables in the collection of Closseau who runs a large enumber of events in the uk that I really enjoy playing on because the table completely changes the way you have to play that game, but some masters do find those tables easier than others. (The extreme one I can think of is a big indoor dungeon/maze which is a lot of fun until you face an incorporeal master on it, or a master that avoids LOS, when it suddenly seems a very uphill game) 

This sounds amazing, would love to play on that table. I'll certainly have to consider some 'extreme' boards (like one where 30% of the board is covered in forest), and will talk to my locals, but I suspect they'll want balanced boards so may not be something that we try just yet.

But it is now on my bucket list to try out some more extreme stuff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I think we are going to go with:

Themed tables (so extremely different conditions), and table assignments will be random each round.

This ensures diversity, but any disadvantages for table are based on chance rather than some judgement call. 

Also encourages people to take the table into account when picking masters.

Will give attendees notice so they know to pack crews that can deal with varied terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, NZ had the pandemic on lock!

This is a great thread, because I'm an average player and have had many a 3 rounder where I've been in the same table two or three times in a row, and when that table's terrain sucks the games/tourney starts to feel like it sucks as a whole!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jesy Blue said:

Yeah, NZ had the pandemic on lock!

This is a great thread, because I'm an average player and have had many a 3 rounder where I've been in the same table two or three times in a row, and when that table's terrain sucks the games/tourney starts to feel like it sucks as a whole!

Good to know that this is a good strategy! I disliked it at tournaments when I get stuck on a table, so figured it must be a thing xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you need a "technical" solution for table rotation, I use the following method:

Round 1 - tables assigned randomly.

Round 2 - the top pair goes to table №1, the second to table №2 and so on. If someone has already played on assigned table just move them to the next one.

Round 3 - the top pair goes to the last table and the last pair to table №1.

Rounds 4,5,6,7 etc - pick a table the top pair hasn't played at yet and go up or down the list of tables.

It's also very convenient to have a spare table or two if possible.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That still leaves middle players stuck in the middle tables on round 3.

Maybe have a table number on the score sheet for the rounds, so before you assign tables you can see what 4 tables the players against each other have already played on, then assign a different one.  It's an extra step, but those extra steps show you care!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Jesy Blue said:

That still leaves middle players stuck in the middle tables on round 3.

Maybe have a table number on the score sheet for the rounds, so before you assign tables you can see what 4 tables the players against each other have already played on, then assign a different one.  It's an extra step, but those extra steps show you care!

"Middle" tables are not any worse, than "top" or "bottom" ones.

Keeping track of the tables each player played at is absolutely necessary. I think it's obvious and didn't mention it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information