Time for new tournament rules?

[Tann]

The 20mn limit was a great addition.

But after 16 tourneys on consoles (and a lot more on mobile devices), it still lacks something very important: the real tension of a pinball tourney. Bummer.

With unlimited attempts, no fear to lose a ball, no satisfaction to score something that gives only a few millions points, no "Oh Pinball God, if I make this shot, I'll secure a good score".

Why? Just because if you have a poor game, it's not a big deal, José, you can play as much games as you want.

Basically, your final ranking in a tournament depends on how much time you dedicate to it (until you have a good score on each table). For my part, the three times I wanted to win a tourney because I owned all the tables (one in silver, two in Gold), I played an average of 20 games on each table... and I finished respectively 1st, 2nd, and 5th.

The others tourneys, when I was too lazy to grind good scores (the scores required to win, or at least be in the Top 10), I finished around the 15-20 ranks (even when I didn't own all the tourney tables).

So, is it time for FS to implement new tournament rules?

Share you opinion with the poll or below if you have another ideas.

 

[EldarOfSuburbia]

I'm new to the TPA tournament format since PC tournaments have only just started. However I'm familiar with the arguments from following the mobile tournament threads.

I agree there should be some kind of limiting factors; limited credits and/or "only your last score counts" being the obvious. Which we know can be implemented, because that's exactly how the Challenges work!

Only counting your last score would be my choice, if only one were to be done.
If credits are limited, give players a few to start with (3? 5?) and add one back in every 24 hours. They can stack. So for a week-long tournament if you don't play until day 7, you'd get the full number of credits.

 

[EldarOfSuburbia]

(not counting cheats, if that has happened)

Well there's an obvious cheater who just hacked the current mobile tournament.

And our friendly neighborhood Montana Frank impersonator is clearly infesting the PC tournament (it has somehow scored 24M on Haunted House, which is impossible in a 20-minute time limit).

 

[Dedpop]

Blind tourney would be fun.
And limited attempts (but preferably with 10/15 by table) with the best score registered.

 

[Gus]

I vote for the random option. Any kind of pinball competition is fun, and variety would be the best way to go imo.

I like the current ruleset as well. 20 minutes feels perfect to aim for the best strategy I can come up with, often it's different from a regular game. I don't think it's a grind either, it's just fun. You don't win for playing the most games, it's the top score that counts. I usually get my best scores in 1-4 plays per table, and then there is one or two tables I might play more depending on the competition. Of course I restart in the first couple of minutes if I get a bad start. On some occasions I'm sure I've done 20 (or more damn you Big Shot!) games on a table, but in the end the 20th game can be worse than the first. I understand your point though that unlimited tries can make a player spend way too much time and feel stressed. On the other hand, if there were limited tries and you really wanted to win you would probably play a lot of warm-up games on the tables outside of the tournament.

 

[switch3flip]

I might like a tourney that's kind of like real tournament qualification, where you have a couple of tables and you have to play them one after the other. If you're not happy after you finished the last table, or whenever, you can start over, like a buy-in, but if you do, your previous submitted scores will not count and you have to play all tables again in one succession one after the other to have new scores to submit. So your latest played string of tables is the scores that are the valid ones. In the end you will get points relative to how you placed on each table compared to the other players.

They're already doing a kind of thing like this with the challenges, so it shouldn't be impossible to make a tourney like this.

 

[JPelter]

I'd be pretty happy with any or all of the suggested things, as long as the 20 minute limit goes away. Having a time limiter changes how the tables play a little in some cases, and in some others absolutely massively. I'm hoping Farsight gets the tournament difficulty settings for tables going so we can have shorter tournament games that still actually conform to how the table is supposed to play out.

 

[switch3flip]

I'd be pretty happy with any or all of the suggested things, as long as the 20 minute limit goes away. Having a time limiter changes how the tables play a little in some cases, and in some others absolutely massively. I'm hoping Farsight gets the tournament difficulty settings for tables going so we can have shorter tournament games that still actually conform to how the table is supposed to play out.

I don't mind the 20 minute limiter other than it's starting to get boring, but extra balls vs no extra balls changes strategies on pins, sometimes massively and 20 min games is just another approach which kind of makes you have to find different strategies on tables and it's fun too. There are all kinds of fun formats on fun tourneys in real pin too like everything from pin golf to trying to reach a score to whatever you can think of.

I mean I absolutely agree I would like real tourney settings and stuff also, but that don't mean I completely dismiss this format entirely.

 

[Tann]

On the other hand, if there were limited tries and you really wanted to win you would probably play a lot of warm-up games on the tables outside of the tournament.

Yeah, but you can play as much warm-up games as you want outisde the tourney, the fact there is limited attempts changes everything. If you mess up the game, you end with a bad score. Period.

That's why I think the limited attempts per table (let's say 5) is the best choice. You only have 5 games to try to score the best. Not possible to restart the game if you have a very poor 1st ball, and as you spend your credits one after the other, there is less and less room for errors. = Stress.

Like in a real tourney.

 

[Crepello55012]

I voted something else. Keep it the way it is. I love the way the tourneys are now. I spend all week just playing those 8 tables and by the end of the week I've always beaten my previous high score on every table. Unfortunately the tournament high scores don't register on the permanent high scores, but I've always learned enough in that week to be able to go back to that table and improve my high score.
I love going through all the tables. At first your beating your best all the time but after a few days it becomes harder to improve a score and you concentrate on the tables you are lowest on.
If there were only so many goes per table or a disincentive to even play the table again after a really big score I wouldn't enjoy it as much.
So I vote Leave It Alone!

 

[Kratos3]

Last score would be the best compromise for all arguments, IMO.

 

[Worf]

Yeah, I think last score is best. The decision should be "is this score high enough?" and the risk should be you lose it, or you beat it. Trying to push it should be risking it all.

 

[JPelter]

I don't honestly see any point in having a last score type rule with the 20 minute limiter. What is the actual benefit of doing it like that for the average player? If we remove the 20 minute limiter last score might matter for some tables, but generally not so much.

I guess my objection in general is that if you got score X in 20 minutes, there should be absolutely no way you can't get it again within a few tries at least by following the same general gameplan, so what benefit does the last score system serve? There's some random nonsense on tables like Cactus Canyon that really skews things badly, but that doesn't make a last score situation better. If anything it makes it an even worse idea.

 

[Tann]

I don't honestly see any point in having a last score type rule with the 20 minute limiter. What is the actual benefit of doing it like that for the average player? If we remove the 20 minute limiter last score might matter for some tables, but generally not so much.

It's almost true for tables like AFM, HD3, TZ, MB and CC, where the strategy is pretty simple: make every shot counts during the 20mn (except HD3, on which it's based on the biggest number of video modes). On the other hand, only a few people here are able to make the perfect game on demand (aka PC wizard players... helped a little by the very predictable nudge ).

No, a keyboard can't do any micro nudges in TPA. It's always full strength. But that's actually an advantage anyway, since the nudge is always very powerful and predictable every time.

For my part, on these tables, I'm always near the perfect score, but I always miss some shots time to time. With only the latest score registered, I'm almost sure that one time I get a decent score (not perfect), I wouldn't try to gamble it again and possibly make worse.

I'm with Shutyertrap on this:

People say it is a grind fest because it is limited only to how many tries you feel like giving it. If you are skilled, it is a matter of maximizing points within the 20 minutes. If you aren't so skilled, it's about getting that one lucky game where everything goes right for you. In other words, it's less about talent and more about time invested. I think it would be downright diabolical, and fun, to make it use only what your last score posted was. That way you'd have to think twice about topping a score you were pretty happy with, but think you could do better on, maybe.

For the 20mn limit, I'm again with Shuyertrap:

It's a lot better than the unlimited time was though. I remember seeing some of the AFM and Scared Stiff scores and just giving up before even really trying because there was just no point. I knew it took those people 3+ hours of playing, and I had no desire (or ability) to play that long.

That's why the 20mn limit was implemented. Compete in tourney where a game can last for hours, what's the point?

The only reason to see the unlimited time come back is a tournament difficulty setting (no extra balls, maximum slope for the playfiled, randomized kickouts, etc.)

 

[Locksley]

I voted 'all of the above' after reading the comments here.

When you opened the poll I was partial towards 'Unlimited attempts but only an average highscore of the last 3 games is registered' or 'latest score'.

But I really like getting different rules for each tournament as there is a opportunity here as it is Digital Pinball to enforce rules that would be very hard to do Live (like the 20min limit).
Also some rules fit some people better and it would be nice if all pinball players would get in there comfort zone atleast once when playing tournaments.

I really like ToTM with just 2 attempts and with Tournament settings (like no extra balls but points instead) that would be interesting and fun.

That is only my 2 Kronas....

 

[JPelter]

...CC where the strategy is pretty simple: make every shot counts during the 20mn...

I just have to respond to this because the CC situation illustrates why it's an extremely bad table for a timed tournament without the awards locked down. You absolutely will not and can not get the "ideal" score ever unless you get a very specific award from the quickshot bounty (the +1M bonus one). In a 20 minute game that one single random reward translates to around 40-70M extra score over not getting it. Once FS gets the tournament mode in I assume that will become less of a problem since I think you can set the awards to a fixed point value instead of the random pool.

In a situation where you had tokens or limited tried per table things would be even worse since the people who lucked out on it would have an almost insurmountable advantage over the people who didn't. Granted not that many tables have random awards that are beneficial on the same level, but it's still something to consider.

 

[Kaibun]

I like how it is right now, except I think games shouldn't be timed. Just make the latest high score you did on a particular table count.

 

[Crazy Newt]

I want to see a daily tournament for every table with the following parameters.

• 24-hour daily tournament
• single game only with one available replay that resets the original score
• no extra balls
• fixed awards
• time limit

The weekly and all-time leaderboard could still be implemented with this type of tournament. This would keep my interest in the game very high. I could jump in anytime and feel like there was something awesome to shoot for on any table I felt like playing.

 

[shutyertrap]

I voted for random variety. There's pros and cons to each of the suggested.

Not having played in a tourney in well over a year, playing the PC tourney has brought up a few things that ultimately soured me on playing TPA at all for a while. The first is the hacker/troll scores. I truly despise these, and it bothers me endlessly to see them in a tourney. I can ignore seeing them on the regular leaderboard, until I notice them in tournament. I shouldn't let them affect me, but they do.

The second is what playing for a week with these tables does to my psyche towards them later. My competitive nature causes me to strip the table down to only elements that allow for a great score quick. And then I do it over and over and over again. Now I do the same when trying to earn a wizard goal, but at the end of that I get the goal and a sense of accomplishment. At the end of the tourney I get slapped with the reality of my best not even being close to what's needed. And then I carry a resentment toward the table.

I truly love competing in TotM, and grinding on a table during TotW has actually increased my enjoyment of some tables. I've been grinding on RBION for this tourney, determined to go from 3rd behind two trolls to first. I was very very close. And then Vikingerik comes in and utterly nukes the scores. I now have no desire to touch RBION, and it's one of my favorite tables.

So I think the solution for me is to impose my own limitations. I will pick a day or two to play. I will only play a limited number of times. As Gus pointed out, that is usually a true indicator of my ability, rather than hoping for that one freak game. Because honestly, this tourney has stirred up a lot of old feelings that put me off of playing any TPA for a while.

 

[Buzz1126]

For me, the pressure and the fun in a tournament is the head-to-head aspect. I wish there was a way to implement that in TPA. I'm no electronic or computer wiz, so I don't know if it's even possible. But I would play more of the tournaments than I do now. Is it possible to do some kind of bracket, like is done during March Madness? You know, I just play pinball to relax or pass the time. I can't (and won't) "grind" on a table, and figure out a way to score like a lot of players can. Sometimes, looking at the scores of many of the tables kinda makes me go, "awww f***, why bother." As for awards, if I could just see my name among some of those listed in this thread, shoot, that's award enough for me. Exaulted company, to be sure...