Roman_Sandal said:

Most players I have seen play at this point take about 35-40 minutes a game, but they are still in the "read every card that's played" stage. Once everyone entering a tournament is more familiar with the cards, there is no reason the games should take longer than 30 minutes, netrunner has 65 minute rounds, which feels more than adequate for any tournament level play. 

That said, I really don't expect serious tournaments to kick off for a month at least, which would provide people time to get acquainted with their decks. 
Locally we probably will use a bit longer of a time limit in the coming weeks, maybe 80 minute rounds, to take a bit of pressure off newer players. Either that or I may just keep an eye on how long games are taking in competive play and go from there. 

Kryptonite Kollectibles said:

Swiss Draw?

How many rounds are you looking at having for 8 or less players?

3 matches therefore 6 games each in a tournament?

stormwolf27 said:

Ah, and I see where you were coming from now.  I wasn't considering it from that point of veiw. Only for breaking ties for future pairings/cut downs.

Yes, Swiss Draw and in an 8 person event each person would end up playing 6 games total. 

The more we play, the more we are seeing games come in under the 30 minute mark, it just comes down to familiarity. 

My local store came up with a really good way of handling it. Play 2 games - one as LS, and one as DS. 4 points per objective destroyed as LS, and 1 point per click on DS dial as DS, for a total possible 12 points per side per match. Then, you can use total points per player to determine winner with SOS determining ties. Had some close matches earlier tonight with this, and it seems to work fine.

stormwolf27 said:

And if the LS plays the Trench Run?  Or kills the Heart of the Empire?

ScottieATF said:

that's considered a 12 point win. The caveat being that, if you're going that route and you don't get there before the DS dial reaches 12, you get 0 points if you haven't destroyed an objective yet.

Play 1 round as DS and 1 round as LS against each opponent.

Round wins are 1 point.

Strength of Schedule breaks ties.

Is there anything I've overlooked?

stormwolf27 said:

You've just made Trench Run unplayable, effecting that whole objective set, and you've just taken away a large part of the built in downside of Heart of the Empire, as now it might as well say unattackable.  You can't take the chance in the first game of having a zero as a tie-breaker, because that means losing the game is a near automatic round loss. 

Tournament rules should do there best to not dictate meta or in-game tactics.  Rounds being often being decided by tie-breakers do just that, especially tie-breakers that directly effect a cards usability.   The second game of each of those rounds won't become about winning, it will become about not losing as bad as the other guy did.  Kamikaze runs against objectives that are not tactically viable but will give you the edge in tie-breakers while losing the game.  I seriously hope that is not the way FFG takes thier tournament rules for this game.

ScottieATF said:

So, what you're saying is that the only way to play trench run or go up against heart of the empire is to attack only that, and nothing else? Why would you do that anyway? you get up to 3 attacks per turn (4 or more with trench run, as it's still not clear whether you can attack the DS dial multiple times in a turn, since the card specifically states after saying you can engage it as though it were an objective that it is, in fact not an objective), so why would you just doing 2-5 (being generous) damage to one objective and call it quits for the turn? People im my meta who use trench run will go after other objectives too, and just because they look across the board and see heart of the empire, that doesn't become their only target either. Trench run and Heart are special win conditions that are outside the norm, so why should we make special exceptions for things that aren't within the foundation win conditions? (also, I should note that, even with several LS players using trench run and several DS players having heart out on the table, this did not negatively effect the matches).

stormwolf27 said:

Basically, yes. The entire advantage of attacking Heart of the Empire or the Death Star Dial is that you reduce the amount of total damage that you need to deal to win. Yes, you could engage multiple objectives in a turn, but focusing all of your damage on Heart or the Dial makes the most of your advantage in playing it.

That being said, I disagree that Trench Run becomes useless - it still reduces the damage you need to deal from on average 15 to 10. If your opponent opens Heart of the Empire, or you with Trench Run, it's still worth targeting them.

D.Knight Sevus said:

The risk is to great because if you lose the game, and thus earn a 0 for a tie-breaker, you've conceded the whole round.  As your opponent would have to be completely dominated in return, to the point of scoring not a single objective for you to just even the score.  I mean it isn't hard for the LS to kill one objective even if soundly beaten in a straight up game, but in a game where they knew all they had to do was take one?  Just keep attacking out regardless of how open it leaves you because you only need on objective.

The second game under such a system will be completely perverted.  It will not be about atttempting to win the game, it is only about losing it not as bad.  That is going to lead the savy player into doing some stupid stuff that will gain in the short term but hand the game to thier opponent, because they don't need to try and win the game at all.  The tournament rules for a card game should not change the game that much.

ScottieATF said:

If you lose the game. Only having to inflict 10 damage to win is such a massive advantage that if you can start swinging at Heart or the Death Star on turn 1, it is far more likely that you'll win the game than playing it normally. What I will concede that it does is narrow the window during which attacking Heart and the Dial are viable, but at least in the case of Trench Run, it's still got 2 Force icons for the Edge battle, making it one of the Rebel Alliance's better edge cards.

Additionally, to win the match on tiebreakers, you must do better than your opponent did while actively trying to win the match. If you win as the Light Side player with the dial at 8, you still must play well enough to advance the dial to 9 or higher. If you win as the Dark with two destroyed objectives, you must win the game outright to win the match.

Finally, looking at Netrunner's prestige system, which is very likely to be implemented in Star Wars, winning a match 2-0 gives you 6 prestige, while winning 1-1 on tie breakers only gives you 4, and affords your opponent 2. If you're actively trying to win the tournament (which you ought to be, if you're a savvy tournament player), then it is in your best interests to win every game in the match.

Who's to say too that there won't be other future special win conditions added in future sets that further complicate what ever for and against system we come up with (something that I'm still not sold on that we actually need) but if we HAVE to have a tie breaker system I think it should be disconnected from win conditions entirely. 

An example of this is from deciphers lotr tcg tourney system. It too had 3 unique win/lose conditions that made it too hard to determine win loss differentials. Now their game was one game per round because you only needed one deck but let's say for arguements sake that we are allowing 1-1 draws in a round and both opponents walk away with even points. If at the end of the tourney there are 2 or more players with equal points a count back system was applied to determine the winner. You looked at who each player played and total up their scores, the player who played the toughest opponents won. The only way this system fell down was if everyone played everyone.

Edit: I actually liked this because it created a sense of anticipation while the players waited for the winner to be announced!

D.Knight Sevus said:

Netrunner's prestige system is exactly what I do not want for this game.  In the prestige system your final placement has no strict connection to your win/loss record.  In a 4 round tournament a player could win every round and sit at only 16 prestige while another player could beat him in the standings with only three wins for 18 points, while having lost to the exact player he just beat in placement.  That shouldn't happen in a tournament.  You should not be rewarded in the overall placement by getting easier match-ups.  Also Netrunner, as far as I'm aware, works off players accumulating agenda points to an end goal, on both sides.  SW has different win conditions for each side, thus being less supportive of tiebreakers.

In regards to the Trench Run, I could already find an number of people that question if the Trench Run is worth every playing.  I don't agree with them, but it clearly has its own built in downsides that force you to judge the risk/reward.  It isn't a no brainer even first turn.  If you further enchance the risk, and a 0 for a tie-breaker is a huge risk, you now tip the scales completely.