Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

With a break between Thursday and Saturday (yeah, I know most of you will be
"theming" Friday), I'm wondering if there's any chance of those of us stuck at
home getting an update before Saturday. Were I there I'd be glad to pop over to
Starbucks (a wireless hotspot) with my laptop and send an update, but alas I
won't make it this year. Don't know if the Host Resort business center has any
kind of Internet connection, and if you're all too busy gaming and enjoying
each other's company that's perfectly understandable. We'll wait until
Monday/Tuesday next week if need be, but it would be very cool to get an
interim update.

Good luck and good sportsmanship to you all.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/20/2004 5:01:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Mark Stone
<mark@...> writes:

>With a break between Thursday and Saturday (yeah, I know most of you will be
>"theming" Friday), I'm wondering if there's any chance of those of us stuck at
>home getting an update before Saturday.>>

Mark! I must have missed it - I thought you'd be there with us.

The rooms at the host all have internet connections. If you'd really like a
short update between the days, I will see what I can do.

I am forced to admit that I will not be theming, but will instead be in a 15mm
WW2 tourney on Friday (yes, i know, it isn't Warrior. But maybe someday FHE
will make a set of...nah, forget i said that..lol..

However, that tourney does not start til 1pm, so I should have some time to get
some info from Scott and update here.

Sorry I won't see you there.

Jon

[Mark Stone]

--- On July 20 Jon Cleaves said: ---

>
> Mark! I must have missed it - I thought you'd be there with us.
>
> Sorry I won't see you there.
>

Yeah, this year the Thursday - Saturday schedule was a show-stopper for me. I
could have made the flight on frequent flyer miles, paid for the hotel room
with the same, so the only cost would have been a rental car.

But having to take 5 days off from work and family (from California I have to
leave on Wednesday to make an early afternoon game on Thursday) was just too
much. That's a really brutal schedule you guys have this year, to be frank. In
addition to me, I know that both Dave Stier and Todd Kaiser were qualified for
the NICT and planning to come if we had followed last year's schedule. No doubt
there are others who won't be able to make it for the same reason.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

>
>Yeah, this year the Thursday - Saturday schedule was a show-stopper for me.>>

Almost for me as well. I had to work 32 hours of overtime in two weeks in my
new civilian job in order to attend. I theoretically understand the need for
five rounds to get a 'better' result, but I will probably be voting against it
again next year when asked.

<< No doubt there are others who won't be able to make it for the same reason.>>

This year majority ruled. While I had to struggle with the result, I can't see
any other way than to canvass the qualifiers each year as to format and support
Scott 1000% in this. I do think that having done it once, we'll have a clearer
opinion set when asked again.

I'll get you an update on Friday and again sunday pm.

You'll be missed.

J

[Todd Schneider]

Four Hours of sleep just to much for you there Jon? I mean, I have spare
time, but not “That” much spare time…



:-)



Todd





<<<I am forced to admit that I will not be theming, but will instead be in a
15mm WW2 tourney on Friday (yes, i know, it isn't Warrior. But maybe
someday FHE will make a set of...nah, forget i said that..lol..>>>


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/2004



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.721 / Virus Database: 477 - Release Date: 7/16/2004



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Todd Kaeser]

Mark and all,

Don't worry I'll be there.

Todd Kaeser

Mark Stone <mark@...> wrote:
--- On July 20 Jon Cleaves said: ---

>
> Mark! I must have missed it - I thought you'd be there with us.
>
> Sorry I won't see you there.
>

Yeah, this year the Thursday - Saturday schedule was a show-stopper for me. I
could have made the flight on frequent flyer miles, paid for the hotel room
with the same, so the only cost would have been a rental car.

But having to take 5 days off from work and family (from California I have to
leave on Wednesday to make an early afternoon game on Thursday) was just too
much. That's a really brutal schedule you guys have this year, to be frank. In
addition to me, I know that both Dave Stier and Todd Kaiser were qualified for
the NICT and planning to come if we had followed last year's schedule. No doubt
there are others who won't be able to make it for the same reason.


-Mark Stone


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[John Murphy]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> I theoretically understand the need for five rounds to get
a 'better' result, but I will probably be voting against it again
next year when asked.

Perhaps there should be a change to reduce the number of NICT
qualifiers to go along with this, thus reducing the number of rounds
required?

[Ewan McNay]

I'll see what I can do - I'm staying with in-laws ~45 min away, so
have net access but not much time .

More importantly, Mark, where's the Starbucks?

e

Mark Stone wrote:

> With a break between Thursday and Saturday (yeah, I know most of you will be
> "theming" Friday), I'm wondering if there's any chance of those of us stuck at
> home getting an update before Saturday. Were I there I'd be glad to pop over
to
> Starbucks (a wireless hotspot) with my laptop and send an update, but alas I
> won't make it this year. Don't know if the Host Resort business center has any
> kind of Internet connection, and if you're all too busy gaming and enjoying
> each other's company that's perfectly understandable. We'll wait until
> Monday/Tuesday next week if need be, but it would be very cool to get an
> interim update.
>
> Good luck and good sportsmanship to you all.
>
>
> -Mark Stone
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[Ewan McNay]

There are, of course, several issues to play with.

I'm surprised that folk have problems with the extra day, but that
suprise doesn't make it any less real . I now know of 3 players
lost, maybe 4, and that's probably at the level of significance.

On the other hand, this is *the* tournament of the year, and playing
only 4 games (3 for many) just doesn't cut it.

Add into the mix an unwillingness to interfer with Theme attendance,
and you're left with Thursday, Saturday, and possibly Sunday morning
(I confess I don't know why there is not an NICT final game this year
on Sunday, although it has the plus side of being able to compete
fully in Theme also).

If it is the case that starting at noon Thursday is effectively the
same as starting at 8 a.m., though, we could get six games in on
Thurs-Sat and have the result be pretty clear.

Personally, as I've noted, I'd play at least four games each day.
Something like 8-12, 1-5, 6-10, 10.30-2.30 on both Thurs and Sat would
work well ).

Reducing # of NICT qualifiers strikes me as a bad idea for NASAMW - it
removes one of the few incentives to belong, and lessens the draw for
any tournament not offering qualification. The pool-reduction that is
in place this year will likely remove ~6 of the ~22-23 entrants after
the first day, and that may be enough, I think, to allow for three
more games to produce a potential clear winner.

[Insert here the standard windmill-tilt of noting that a system where
it is better to win 5-3 than 5-0* is silly...]

E

John wrote:

> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
>>I theoretically understand the need for five rounds to get
>
> a 'better' result, but I will probably be voting against it again
> next year when asked.
>
> Perhaps there should be a change to reduce the number of NICT
> qualifiers to go along with this, thus reducing the number of rounds
> required?

*In case anyone's missed my ranting on this: your score is composed of
your raw score from each game, plus a % of each oppponent's raw score
equal to your score against them x 10%. So winning 5-0 gives you 50%
of that opponent's score is his other games. Winning 5-3 gives you
that same 50% plus 1.5 points (50% of that 3). Now, that opponent
will potentially have a harder opponent next game because of scoring 3
rather than 0, agreed; but there's still no reason not to have the
add-on points be a % of oppponents' score in all their games **except
the one against you**.

</rant>

[Mark Stone]

--- On July 21 Ewan McNay said: ---

>
> More importantly, Mark, where's the Starbucks?
>

Well, I guess I always assume that Starbucks are ubiquitous; didn't have a
particular one in mind. But according to Starbucks' "Store Locator"
(http://www.starbucks.com), the nearest one is at 2208 Lincoln Highway, which
would put it on the same side as the Lancaster Host Resort and about 3/4 mile
further East.


- Mark

[Todd Schneider]

I think reducing the number of qualifiers is a bad
idea.

As I understand it, the tournament went to a 5 round
format because that will guarentee a winner with no
need for a playoff on Sunday.

Todd

--- John <jjmurphy@...> wrote:

---------------------------------
--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a...
wrote:
> I theoretically understand the need for five rounds
to get
a 'better' result, but I will probably be voting
against it again
next year when asked.

Perhaps there should be a change to reduce the number
of NICT
qualifiers to go along with this, thus reducing the
number of rounds
required?



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.

Hey Guys,

Hcon was great. Ewan's comments are below.

The NICT is "THE" tournament of the year and the longer game format
supports this.

I dislike loosing NICT players but the 5 game format worked well.
Scott H. and I sat down and worked over the schedule several times to
make the 5 game format work. Another issue voiced was the need for
warm up games before jumping into the NICT.

I will let Scott H. publish the schedule for the 2005 Hcon. I wish for
everyone to understand after the first try of the 5 game format, we
have heard and listened to your comments. Scott and I have a few small
points to overcome before he puts out the schedule.

We are trying to have a Mini, Theme, Open, and a 5 game NICT in Hcon
2005. Our goal is to INCREASE the number of NICT players and provide
more gaming for players.

I remember when we played 4 games a day. The scares are still there.
Ewan is really using us as a research project because he tired of
working with rats. So if he invites you to see his work. You may wake
up with a headache and new scare on the back of your head. ;-)

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@y...>
wrote:
> There are, of course, several issues to play with.
>
> I'm surprised that folk have problems with the extra day, but that
> suprise doesn't make it any less real . I now know of 3 players
> lost, maybe 4, and that's probably at the level of significance.
>
> On the other hand, this is *the* tournament of the year, and playing
> only 4 games (3 for many) just doesn't cut it.
>
> Add into the mix an unwillingness to interfer with Theme attendance,
> and you're left with Thursday, Saturday, and possibly Sunday morning
> (I confess I don't know why there is not an NICT final game this
year
> on Sunday, although it has the plus side of being able to compete
> fully in Theme also).
>
> If it is the case that starting at noon Thursday is effectively the
> same as starting at 8 a.m., though, we could get six games in on
> Thurs-Sat and have the result be pretty clear.
>
> Personally, as I've noted, I'd play at least four games each day.
> Something like 8-12, 1-5, 6-10, 10.30-2.30 on both Thurs and Sat
would
> work well ).
>
> Reducing # of NICT qualifiers strikes me as a bad idea for NASAMW -
it
> removes one of the few incentives to belong, and lessens the draw
for
> any tournament not offering qualification. The pool-reduction that
is
> in place this year will likely remove ~6 of the ~22-23 entrants
after
> the first day, and that may be enough, I think, to allow for three
> more games to produce a potential clear winner.
>
> [Insert here the standard windmill-tilt of noting that a system
where
> it is better to win 5-3 than 5-0* is silly...]
>
> E
>
> John wrote:
>
> > --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> >
> >>I theoretically understand the need for five rounds to get
> >
> > a 'better' result, but I will probably be voting against it again
> > next year when asked.
> >
> > Perhaps there should be a change to reduce the number of NICT
> > qualifiers to go along with this, thus reducing the number of
rounds
> > required?
>
> *In case anyone's missed my ranting on this: your score is composed
of
> your raw score from each game, plus a % of each oppponent's raw
score
> equal to your score against them x 10%. So winning 5-0 gives you
50%
> of that opponent's score is his other games. Winning 5-3 gives you
> that same 50% plus 1.5 points (50% of that 3). Now, that opponent
> will potentially have a harder opponent next game because of scoring
3
> rather than 0, agreed; but there's still no reason not to have the
> add-on points be a % of oppponents' score in all their games
**except
> the one against you**.
>
> </rant>