Cactus Game Design Message Boards

Quote from: Red Wing on July 15, 2012, 08:00:14 PM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on July 15, 2012, 07:05:43 PM

It might be cool if the three were a T1-2P, T2-2P and TEAMS.  That way a playgroup would get plusses to demonstrate versatility.

That wouldn't really be practical to do at Nats though. Also, many groups probably won't have T2 decks.

I don't understand your first comment.  If you have time to play three T1-2P games, why wouldn't you have time to play one T1-2P game, one T2-2P game, and one TEAMS game?

You do know that T1-2P games tend to be much shorter than T2-anything or Teams, right?

Our playgroup does NOT have anyone to compete in T2, so if we did go that route, we'd have to be limited to Playgroup Type-A

As for the number of players if all the games between 2 playgroups are simultaneous, then the number of players representing each playgroup wouldn't affect the time per round.  I would like 4 or 5 players rather than just 3 if possible.  It would make the event more of a "playgroup" event rather than just a few pals who play together sometime.  And I'm guessing there will be at least 8 "playgroups" that will have at least 5 players at Nats.  (TN, KY, OH, MN1, MN2, John M.'s, Roy's, and probably somewhere else).

As for KY being "southern OH", I think for this event it would actually work better to split, since we'll probably both be well represented, and it would help the event to have more "playgroups".  But thanks for the invite

I'm pretty excited for this

I get to pick which MN playgroup I'm a part of right? I've attended just as many Twin Cities tourneys as I have Rochester ones.

Technically, yes...

I'm trying to think of an appropriate prize.

Can we have multiple entrants for a single playgroup?  Even if we ignore nominal possibilities such as RDT, Wild Bill's playgroup had like six or seven different players who placed at Nationals last year.

I'm definitely okay with this, and it could be an alternative for Prof U's playgroup as well. You will have to choose how to divide yourselves though.

GA may be slightly weak if I can't convince tyler to compete lol.

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on July 15, 2012, 10:14:34 PM

Wild Bill's playgroup had like six or seven different players who placed at Nationals last year.

All the more reason for them to be in a single group.  Make some room for other playgroups to place too.  The event really won't end up being very interesting if the top 3 spots end up being MN1, MN2, and MN3.

I can understand that. Maybe all y'all could allow injury substitutions between rounds and the Captain of the playgroup could vary the team membership as rounds progress?

As for KY being "southern OH", I think for this event it would actually work better to split, since we'll probably both be well represented, and it would help the event to have more "playgroups".  But thanks for the invite

You're welcome sir, and I completely agree with you. Our playgroup is upwards of 12-15 at this point when they all show up.