Indy's Wingman Tourney Team(s)

[Stephen]

Rick has offered to join forces with Stephen Dale and I, making it possible for us to try for the Society's Wingman Tourney on Dec 2-3rd. Not for sure yet, but we're going to try hard to make it work.

It would be great to have a fourth player from Indy so that our squadron can field two separate teams. Any takers? Ken, you're already up there yet you're a full time Indy player... can you make it or do you work that weekend?

[kazorm]

Yes, I would be proud to be Rick's wingman!!! ;D

[Stephen]

That's a rather selective reply

Glad you're back online. A lot of new things since you've been here.

[KevinR]

Hey Stephen, if it's on a weekend and you need someone, you might check with Wyatt. He might be thrilled to go.

[Stephen]

News on Indy's teams at the Wingman Tourney as of midday Saturday -

Ken and Rick are tied for third in the 8-team tourney. Ironically, they're tied with Indy's other (1/2) team, Stephen Dale and Al Christensen. So Indy is holding its own pretty well so far.

Scores hadn't been tallied yet, but after the fourth round last night Stephen Dale and Al had fallen behind after being beaten up pretty bad by the tournament leaders. Rick had also been shot down in a game and he and Ken may be falling as well. Looks like they both need a big boost in the last game to have a shot at the title. More news in the next issue of ISD.

[Stephen]

More news... Rick and Ken started strong but faded to seventh in the final standings after Ken got shot down in three of four games... and despite some bad luck in the final game for Al, who was shot down twice, he and Stephen Dale hung on for a strong fourth place finish in the tourney. More in the next issue.

[AP]

For a 'Northern' perspective on the tourney you can check out the MN post here- ghostjastamn.blogspot.com/

It was a fun day but really should not be called a wingman tourney. We were looking forward to 2 vs. 2 matchups but instead it was 4 vs. 4 with each 'team' grouping up with another for a round robin team tourney. This made for a poor reflection of any given 'teams' results as you had to take the score of your non teammates for each round as well. It was fun anyways, but I hope when they publish scores they also calculate the individual 'wingman team' scores as well.

[Stephen]

Are you serious? I know it was four on four, but do you mean that your team (of two) had to factor in the score of the OTHER two people flying with your nationality? For crying out loud, they're your opponents! How can you get an accurate score if your score is combined with your own opponents?

Sometimes we outsmart ourselves and our tournaments forget why they exist. I will still support the weekend and I hope I can go next year, but if that's how the event is scored then the actual tournament title will mean very little to me.

I'll have a good time gaming, but I won't bother keeping score.

[AP]

Yes, unforunately that is true. Each team inherited the score of their nationality wingmates for each game as well. We argued that for an accurate score there would need to be 8 games so everyone played together once to balance things out, but it didnt fly. It was particularly frustrating in the very first game because our opponents were late, so they had 'sit ins' fly their planes for all but the last turn. Aaron and Earl scored particularly well so they 'inherited' a score of +256, while we got to take a -99. Leaves a bad taste in your mouth!!
It was still fun to play, but we lost all seriousness immediately.

[albpilot]

Yea, I was surprised at that as well. I thought that the scores would be tallied on the 2 person team basis, not the 4 person round basis. Can't say I was real fond of that development. If that is going to happen, what differentiates it from the team tourney, other than mixing partners?

[Stephen]

Exactly... it is simply another team tournament, except that you have no idea who the other half of your team is.

I'm halfway into an article for ISD about building successful DP events - which was started well before this tourney came up - and it may be applicable here.

Suffice to say that, IMHO, tournaments fail because they forget why they exist. The Masters, Armistice Day, Gen Con Open, Society Open, RBF... they all had a reason for their existence. The Masters - for better or worse - strayed from that purpose this year. So did the Wingman Tourney. When that happens people may still show up to enjoy gaming, but the core drawing power of the event is lost, as is the excitement of winning.

The Gen Con Open, on the other hand, is very purpose driven right now. It is building respect and name recognition while other events lose theirs. Its specific purpose was announced, its been preserved, it is trying to build a heritage and a tradition, and it is gaining ground.

When the rules betray the purpose of the event, the "stock" of the event falls. I hope we see a real WINGMAN tourney next year. Otherwise I'll show up to enjoy the game but not bother keeping score.

[albpilot]

admin said:

Exactly... it is simply another team tournament, except that you have no idea who the other half of your team is.

I'm halfway into an article for ISD about building successful DP events - which was started well before this tourney came up - and it may be applicable here.

Suffice to say that, IMHO, tournaments fail because they forget why they exist. The Masters, Armistice Day, Gen Con Open, Society Open, RBF... they all had a reason for their existence. The Masters - for better or worse - strayed from that purpose this year. So did the Wingman Tourney. When that happens people may still show up to enjoy gaming, but the core drawing power of the event is lost, as is the excitement of winning.

The Gen Con Open, on the other hand, is very purpose driven right now. It is building respect and name recognition while other events lose theirs. Its specific purpose was announced, its been preserved, it is trying to build a heritage and a tradition, and it is gaining ground.

When the rules betray the purpose of the event, the "stock" of the event falls. I hope we see a real WINGMAN tourney next year. Otherwise I'll show up to enjoy the game but not bother keeping score.

I don't think I'd characterize this event as 'failed'. I think that if you have to apply a label, 'confused' would be a better fit. Al did a great job overall, but the scoring of it is what made me have that feeling.

[AP]

I agree that it seemed more 'confused' and that goes strictly for the scoring. I thought Al's scenarios were some of the best in recent years that I have been a part of in tournaments.
The 1917 'one gun' battle and the two seater mission were outstanding!! Fokkers vs. Camels just gets old, and I find that it can be tactically stale. When you have to start applying more and more tatics to your situation it makes for a great game. I hope in the next event we will be able to see more of these types...maybe even Nieuports vs. Albs!!!
A whole other can of worms...many complain that a 1917 game would take too long - I think this past tourney the games were taking too long. A 60 second enforced time limit per move is a GREAT idea in my book. It adds a slight element of realism to the game (no time to sit & debate) and it speeds the game up considerably. Pick up games its not such a big deal, but if its a tournament you should be on your 'A' game, paying attention and acting quickly...just my 2 cents...

[Stephen]

I'm not suggesting that the event was a failure... on the contrary, I wish I could have attended. But when events (plural) fail (cease to exist), its for a reason. One of the common reasons IMO is because the event strayed from its original purpose.

[albpilot]

The other odd thing was that even though Ken and I were 'wingmen', the standing rule was that a roll must be witnessed by a NON wingman ally. So why have wingmen pairs then?