Mountain Mayhem III Oct 21-22 2017

    It's a kind of magic... Finally! The Behind The Scenes blog tells you more about the coming rules for the magic phase. We hope you will enjoy the read!

    • Norbert wrote:

      6. What could we have done to make the tourney better?Hmm, can't really think of anything since the whole event was so perfect. Maybe a little plaque on the trophies denoting which tourney they were won at. If that is too costly, give less prize money. I know I had this discussion after previous tourneys, but I personally think the cash prizes on the US tournament scene are too generous anyway....


      My fault. I was going to have engraved plates on them, but it was too costly and the awards I chose really didn’t have a good spot to put them anyway with taking away from the item itself. But you are right, and I will consider placement next time when choosing the type of awards. Generous...I guess you’re right because if Shannon wins another, I’ll have to issue a W-2 to him. :P


      7. We increased the length of the games from 2 ½ hours to 2 ¾ were the extra 15 minutes helpful.
      I liked the timing, finished every game.

      It was suggested that perhaps I shouldn't win best painted every time... however, I just play by the rules set by the organizers. So if this is seen as an issue, just make a rule that each model can only ever be in an MountainMayhem-BestPainted-winning army once, though this could be hard to enforce.... ? Or just paint up a nice army. The painting standard at the tournament was high overall. The judges are tired of seeing mine, so this is your chance people!
      I will point out that "every time" is not strictly true. I came second overall in MM1 and for this reason the painting prize went to the villain of this thread who also made me bleed BPs this time round... the inevitable Phil Karl :)


      On the painting, we had 2 judges that knew only 4 people and were given a strict guideline for judging....what I’m saying is that you won fair and square. It would be different if the same judges with the same rubric year after year....but then that would be our problem, not a player’s. :thumbsup:
      B.Jones - Member of the CGL :oldmen:
      • Owner of BH, DL, DE, DH, EoS, HE, KoE, O&G, OK, SA, SE, VS, UD, VC, & WotDG. Yes, it is a sickness.

      Conceptual Design

      Playtester-Mid Atlantic USA

    • Norbert wrote:

      tunasandwichify wrote:

      WAARGHammer wrote:

      It was Chemical and Psychological Warfare!
      You weren't even playing those of us who were breathing thatlshit in!
      ... I beg to differ. As the opponent in question, I was hit first and hardest, and I blame my inability to concentrate, subsequent defeat in that game, and subsubsequent loss of a top-10 placement squarely on the Gaskrieg unleashed.
      1. What did you think of the venue?
      Nice, relatively quiet and spacious. TOP!
      2. What was your over-all opinion of the tourney?
      Excellent organization with no hickups.
      3. Terrain OK?
      Terrain was fine, but a little bit of variety (some impassables, other difficults that forest) couldn't hurt.
      4. Should we continue the Saturday night dinner?
      Hard to see how anyone could think this is a bad idea. Great.
      5. Did you like the Sunday lunch to try to get you out a bit earlier?
      Yes!
      6. What could we have done to make the tourney better?
      Hmm, can't really think of anything since the whole event was so perfect. Maybe a little plaque on the trophies denoting which tourney they were won at. If that is too costly, give less prize money. I know I had this discussion after previous tourneys, but I personally think the cash prizes on the US tournament scene are too generous anyway....
      7. We increased the length of the games from 2 ½ hours to 2 ¾ were the extra 15 minutes helpful.
      I liked the timing, finished every game.

      It was suggested that perhaps I shouldn't win best painted every time... however, I just play by the rules set by the organizers. So if this is seen as an issue, just make a rule that each model can only ever be in an MountainMayhem-BestPainted-winning army once, though this could be hard to enforce.... ? Or just paint up a nice army. The painting standard at the tournament was high overall. The judges are tired of seeing mine, so this is your chance people!
      I will point out that "every time" is not strictly true. I came second overall in MM1 and for this reason the painting prize went to the villain of this thread who also made me bleed BPs this time round... the inevitable Phil Karl :)
      If they want to win best painted then they need to step their game up a bit. If your army is the best painted (judged by impartial 3rd party people) then you deserve it every time. If people want to follow that logic then those who win the other awards shouldn’t be eligibile to win them again.
      As far as the internet connection issues once bitten stated I just used the free WiFi the WVFD had :thumbsup:
    • Poxous wrote:

      7) 2.5 is all 95% of people need. a 15min buffer is good. I'm not a fan of ever letting anyone play over. It's not fair to the normal players who can finish games on time. They gain points they should not have earned. Not fair and it should not be allowed and will never be allowed at my GTs. Finish your game in time or else! 2:45 for 4500pts is already to much time. 75% of games are done in 2 hours.

      I was struck by a person, who shall remain nameless, telling me "look at the tables you play on". Wow....I was stunned by this statement but I feel it should be countered. I will not defend my play now or compare my play when I wanted to do well to this persons because it's not worth it. Needless to say this kind of arrogance is not good and should be curbed. All I can say is SOCREBOARD when I was into WFB. Nuff said.

      First, it's not the 'top tables' that are slow. It is PEOPLE. Now some people who think they are suddenly the 'good players' in the MA because 75% of the BEST players quit the hobby or don't care any more seem to be getting a big head. These guys never had issues before and still don't but the thought is time equals better play. I disagree. These guys had 2:45 hours in the past when the MA was stacked and weren't rocking the top 15-20 so....yeah. Elitism is not an argument for making the rest of the GT wait. 2:5 is good... 2:45 is the buffer. I'm sorry if your style and list can't do that. That is a personal issue not a TO issue.

      GTs should not cater to you because you are slow. You should cater your style to the room and finish your games. It's rude not to. The same people have been guilty at every GT I've been to in the MA for 5 years now. I think it is foolish to make everyone else sit around and wait because some people are slow. I've not finished 6 turns maybe 10 times in 20 years at GTs. Be prepared and know your stuff.
      Hi Todd,
      Thanks for the feedback. It seems my comments to you Sunday might have been misunderstood, or my tone might have been off, if so I apologize. I very much appreciate your support for the hobby. I posed the question of game length because I think it brings up an interesting debate.

      I saw Chris Mitchell also mention concerns about people playing over time getting an unfair advantage to games that finished early. I find this an interesting place to start the discussion, because it could also be argued that if some players get 6 turns in their games and others only get 4 or 5 turns and the rules of the core rule book say the game should go for 6 turns and say nothing about time, then it would actually the players who don't finish their games who are actually being cheated.

      But that doesn't really even get into why the game didn't finish. Did the game not finish because one player intentionally slowed the game down for his own benefit? That sounds like cheating. Did one player slow the game down because he wasn't clear on the rules? That sounds like a lack of readiness, but that begs the question if we want to encourage new players to attend GT's. Was the game slowed down due to excessive bath room breaks, or taking of pictures for their you tube channel? That sounds slightly inconsiderate, but possibly good for the hobby. Were both players involved in a strategic game and carefully thinking through their moves? That sounds like a great game of war hammer, and it would be a shame to have to cut it short.

      One thing I really like about 9th age is the push for balance between army books, and play styles. It certainly is not perfect as show by OK's, but I think it's great for the game. However limiting tournament games by time and not by turns gives advantages to certain styles of armies. For example look at what types of armies are at the top of most US tournaments. Very aggressive armies. Big wins win singles tournaments and aggro armies do it best. I love the diversity we see in armies, and I don't want to have tournaments where everyone is playing OK's. Much like 8th edition tournaments would be dominated by a few builds/books. Some books and play styles are at disadvantage if they don't get to play the full game. Some types of armies simply take longer than others. If you play an army with no magic and no shooting it will simply play faster than some one with an army with magic, or an MSU build that requires checking of many angles and arcs.

      I don't want to start discouraging diversity in armies by limiting games. However, I also wouldn't want to discourage people from coming to events because the games were to long, or things stalled in between games. (I think this is a little odd considering how happy so many of us were to play GOT's Saturday night for 6 hours.)

      Thus I think the 2 hours 45 minutes was actually a good compromise, and people were comfortable with it. I think 3 would be acceptable as well, but 2 and 1/2 is really not enough some times.
    • Thanks Phil.

      I want to make games the best for everyone. My thing is Sat games going long is meh, but Sunday people want to get home. Often we travel 3-5 hours to play and if we can't be done with everything by 4ish it sucks. So my view of this is also based on the group over the individual (gasp! the opposite of me in the real world!). I think 2:45 is not bad. Many people start Games 1 and 4 before the time as well.

      It's tricky. I appreciate you debating it. I think if we go 3 hours we need to start Sunday at like 8:30. Thoughts?