http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2013/02/tournament-scenario-design-philosophy.html
This article is fine. It's basically the summary of a conversation I had with Derek after our 3rd Megabattle.
There's a lot to it. One thing I'm basically sure that everyone who hasn't been on my side of an event forgets about is the fact that NOT being able to run a W/L (or W/L/D) tournament makes scenario writing (and event running) a lot more difficult.
Really, W/L is like mega-easy mode. Using book scenarios in 6th edition is fine, and combining the objectives into one scenario is an obvious and easy way to add depth and flavor to "the same old same old." It's exactly what I did when a few people kept shouting for a "6th edition tournament." The simplest solution IS often the best.
At Battleground events we don't have the luxury of W/L (outside of 500 points, which is one of many reasons it's awesome). We have too many players / teams. There are more times than not where FIVE rounds wouldn't spit out a clear winner.... It's something we have to address every time.
As much as keeping things simple is nice, we HAVE to complicate things in order to get our winner. We have to add in points and bonus points. We have to make them sort of weird, sort of not weird, sort of tough to score, and not too tough to score. There's got to be as many ways to break ties, gain ground, and lose ground as is reasonable.
Sure it's cool to hand Joe Blow a packet and have him know exactly what he's supposed to do after glancing at it once, for 34 seconds. I do not think our tournament players want super straight forward, "just another game of 40k" type scenarios when they come to our events. In a perfect world I'd like to see (and I believe most tournament players would like to see) different, dynamic, challenging, thought provoking scenarios. Something different than they play on Thursday night or at home with their friends. If we can accomplish that, or even part of it, great.
We've got occasional "straight forward," newbie friendly events. I think the 6th edition version of those events will look a lot like the BAO. Hell, the whole point is that they accomplish the same goal this guy is trying to accomplish.
Some more opinions that don't really matter:
I think Adepticon has, by far, the best scenarios going. I feel this way because they are the most different, most dynamic, and most challenging year after year. I feel like they present players with lots more choices than average (some of which are subtle).
I think that the most focused, best minds from the community are probably better scenario designers than the people currently writing the book scenarios (or just books in general) for GW. Call it amateur like the author did, but here's a couple simple facts:
1) Magic the Gathering is the most popular hobby game (not close), is wildly successful, and regarded as a very, very well designed, very competitive game in part because they seek out and hire / consult the very best minds the community produces and has to offer.
2) World of Warcraft is and has been an absolute juggernaut in the gaming world for close to a decade because they hire, consult, and intensely listen to the community's best, brightest, and most successful players / groups.
Great game companies employ / consult the best gamers? Odd, right? Do I think I'm a great gamer? Hardly! I couldn't tell you the last time I player ANY game!
Anyhow, the article offers some perspective. He's trying to appeal to a different crowd and is writing scenarios for a very different event than what we host.
If / when Battleground runs a GT there will certainly be lots to consider, scenario wise. W/L will be a GIANT breath of fresh air. Until then I'm going to *try* to put out events that accomplish different things and hopefully get better at it each time. The only worry I have is the amount of time I can afford to spend on each one. Time is absolutely the limiting factor.
