[Icehouse] Tournament Icehouse Concepts for Cons? [LONG]

[Subhan Tindall]

Might I suggest Blam! as an option?  Quick, fun, easy to learn.  Very
strategic in 2-player version, slightly less so in multiplayer.  Takes
1 stash/player + 1 chessboard/game.  I've turned several folks onto
Icehouse using it.
And of course, the obvious choice given current marketing strategies
for Looney Labs would be a Treehouse tourney.  You could easily run a
lot of players through a couple of rounds of round-robin in groups of
4-6, then do a bracketed tourney based on standings.  Prize?  A
Treehouse stash or two.
Although Zendo is cool, it is way too idiosyncratic to be suitable to
tournament play IMHO.

On 1/8/07, David Artman <david at davidartman.com> wrote:
> Hi, all;
>
> I am writing to try to generate some brainstorming on how one might setup
> a tournament as a way of demoing Icehouse pieces. I am curious to see what
> folks think about the following:
> 1) What game(s) would be good for such competition?
> 2) Round-robin or brackets? Single- or double-elimination?
> 3) What prize(s) would be attractive?
> 4) Is there any Looney Labs prize support available?
>
> I ask because I am planning to follow a demo day at a Con with a tournament
> the next day--promote extra days at the con and Looney Labs games at the same
> time! Yay!
> ---
> My own thinking thus far is as follows:
> 1A) I first thought of doing Zendo, because it supports several players with
> four stashes, and thus I could run TWO brackets at a time (I have all 11
> colors... and with one more monochrome stash, I could support running THREE
> brackets at a time). I would be the Master of all games; and students would
> score points both for guessing the rule (5 pts, arbitrarily) and for each
> guessing stone they have at the time the rule is guessed (1 pt each). But
> that means they'd have to be put under timed turns, or someone could stall
> their way to victory (parituclarly if each round must conclude on schedule).
>
> I have also considered using highly popular head-to-head games: Martian Chess,
> in particular, as most folks learn it in minutes, but it takes a good deal of
> time to master--no one should dominate out the gate (unless they are a Icehead
> in disguise!). The beauty of such a setup is that I don't have to play and
> can focus on management and adjudication; it is also awesome that MC is a
> "colorless" game and so I can maximize stash usage. Its drawback is that I'd
> have to have a stash + 1 set per pair of players (i.e. 3 sets per player).
> Having 55 sets total means I could only run 18 players at a time, in the
> bracketry, and so I might need several first rounds, to eliminate down to under
> 18 remining on the brackets. Then again, I'd LOVE to have the "problem" of
> trying to accomodate more than 18 registrants for a tournament! ;)
>
> I am probably NOT going to consider doing a non-turn-based game (e.g. Icehouse
> or IceTowers) mainly due to the possability for arguements and interference and
> so forth. I would consider boardless games, if they aren't *too* picky about
> how things are placed (ex: Armada would not be good, because of the "fiddliness"
> of ranging Fire and placing during movement). And before everyone says "Volcano!"
> I'd have to admit that I generally don't like it as a game (boo me) and it is
> too suceptable to first play advantages (so I read). I don't want a game that
> takes 5 stashes plus Caps to play for, maybe, four total players: bad ratio of
> stash-use to players-engaged; and too tough on newer players, especially if
> they are moving last. And it would have to be timed, and it takes a little bit
> of time to "figure out" and....
>
> Finally (brainstorm!) I have considered using more than one game: use Martian
> Chess or something quick and simple for the first round, then a more complex
> game for the second and third rounds (as I'd have fewer players and, thus, could
> support with my stashes), and finally a Zendo extravaganza, for the Final Round.
> That would show off the variety of Icehouse games out there... but it might
> drive away players who are afraid to learn so much so soon and it could be
> somehow cheatable, if I don't consider all the angles well. Also, as my FLGS
> manager has warned me, regarding Icehouse pieces: it is sometimes WORSE to talk
> about all the games one can play; with many folks, it's best to focus on one or
> two options, then point them to the wiki and let them bug out on their own. He's
> found that, with Treehouse, he's best off pitching it like a stand-alone game which
> can be "expanded" to play more games, over time, as you accumulate more stashes.
> Players seem to be more amenable to that approach, particularly non-hardcore (i.e.
> non-gamers). It's easy to sell "one tube, one game" and then pitch "more tubes,
> more games" after the close.
>
> 2A) This probably depends upon the game and stash-to-player ratio. In general,
> though, I would want a tournament structure that lets the losers leave (it IS
> a con, after all) and that can have scheduled "rounds" so that winners need
> not stick around every second of the tournament, to be sure to be on time for
> each round.
>
> Single- or double-elimination is probably a function of the number of players
> who register and the time alloted (and, as always, the length of a typical game,
> for the chosen game). This question might just be solved by basic math....
>
> 3A) I am hoping to make arrangments to be able to offer 5 Treehouse stashes as
> a "grand prize". I may also try to accumulate a few promotional Fluxx cards
> and what-not, for "participants prizes". Finally, I'd *really* like to have a
> single Treehouse stash or two, for runners-up, from which I could further
> promote the single-stash games. Of course, affording these prizes will be a
> BIG part of the decision; it might just be a single stash first prize! ;)
>
> Hmmm... maybe I should use a single-stash game, so the winner(s) can leave
> with a single stash but still have enough to play the game they won? Hmmmm....
>
> 4A) I have heard about something in SuperFRED, and I might be able to get my
> FLGS to help with prizes, for considerations (i.e. sponsership/advertising).
> But in the long run, it would be great if LL had some way to help me drive
> this tournament other than out of pocket. Heck, got any of those "blems"
> monochrome stashes? [I once had an Orange stash whose tube was almost 1/2"
> shorter than standard, due to the thinness of the Mediums and, I reckon, a
> production process that cut tubes to fit (?). I ended up giving that away at
> my last con demo, along with a rough-draft on my upcoming "Pocket Pyramids:
> X Games for A Single Treehouse Stash" free PDF, printed and stapled.]
>
> Sorry so long; thanks for any help/advise you can offer!
> David "Dopey" Artman
> Demo Rabbit since 2006
> (I've been waiting for the New Year *just* to be able to say that!) :)
> _______________________________________________
> Icehouse mailing list
> Icehouse at lists.looneylabs.com
> http://lists.looneylabs.com/mailman/listinfo/icehouse
>


-- 
=====
Work like you don't need money, Love like you've
never been hurt, and Dance like no one's watching.
@->>--  @->>--  @->>--  @->>--  @->>--  @->>--