Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Paulochromis

  • Rank
  • Birthday 03/06/1964

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sydney, Australia
  1. Don't forget that in last year's worlds, 2 of the Top 4 were from outside the US - UK National Champ Keith Wilson who lost in the semi-final to Australia's National Champ Morgan Reid, the eventual runner-up.
  2. I still like the flexibility of "These are not the <insert target here> you're looking for". Whether or not to use "droids" depends on the audience.
  3. I thought SoT landed well above the median on the bell curve. I also like the means to get the kind of ability that so far only comes with a named pilot in an upgrade card.
  4. Well, the first news of Paul Heaver's WC2013 "Stay on Target!" EPT seems to have been spoiled/leaked/announced in June last year, I'm guessing it's about time for news on his WC2014 card to drop. Anyone have any ideas? Just calling for idle (and earnest) speculation, please don't feel obliged to divulge anything prematurely, Paul!
  5. did you check out https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/131310-new-player-quick-start-list-guide/ ?
  6. That's a pretty significant (3pt) Initiative bid!
  7. It's also pretty good at MoV preservation, especially in shorter rounds.
  8. Given that half of Wave 7 are bombers (K-Wing and TIE Punisher), I would have thought your half expectations have been fully met!
  9. I think we'e on the same page. I'm trying to widen the "middle" result, whereas all the MoV talk is about narrowing it. I think Swiss can handle a three result (or the four StevenO mentions) just fine, with or without different scoring incentives. I'm still heavily in favour of Swiss then cut, but once we're into elimination then I don't think MoV should apply. I might be prepared to revisit that if I was persuaded that those those people that tailor for short rounds to get to the cut end up being badly placed for the elimination stage. P.S. There was earlier thread (contrasting swiss then single elimination versus, for example, double elimination from the get-go) that people should also look at for more context around this topic
  10. I think the discussion around MoV is required to address a problem created even earlier, namely the need to support a binary (Win-Loss = 1/0) scoring mechanism. Many sports/games (possibly more so outside the US) support the notion of a draw/tie, so a "trinary" system (1/0.5/0 or 2/1/0). Chess is a good example. Many of the tournament scheduling systems handle draws just fine, especially for the Swiss section (where shorter rounds seem to cause problems more often) If you do feel the need to try and provide more incentive for winning, you can try a 3 for win, 1 for a tie and 0 for a loss instead of the 2/1/0 or 1/0 schemes. Once you get to the elimination stage, MoV is irrelevant (and ironically due to the longer rounds there was less of a problem anyway)
  11. Wow. Morgan - you'll have to fly better than you punt to win this thing!
  12. Whilst I like these lists, I don't have enough Z-95s. What do you think of swapping 2 Bandits plus the spare point for naked Biggs (now there's an image!) or Tarn with R7 Astromech?
  13. Kelvan, in your semi-final 2 prediction you talk about Morgan flying Soontir/Oicunn, but in the linked list he's flying Darth Vader/Oicunn!
  • Create New...