logo

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:40 pm 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:35 pm
Posts: 677
Location: Danville IL
At my Local venue there has been a call for a casual tourney night. I'll be honest I don't honestly think there can be such a thing as a "casual tourney" but I could be wrong.

How can you make a tourney fun? I mean honestly most of the tourny strategies are not really all that fun for the opponent? Should there be a ban list and if so what should be on it? Should entire types of things be removed like activation control or Master Tactician?? Just wondering if anyone had some insight.

_________________
Winning a tournament always allows doing whatever is within the rules to win. - Billiv15


[===0=]=============>


Sentinel for Life!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 10:48 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:00 pm
Posts: 6615
Location: Southern IL
Alternate formats are always fun - play Tile Wars, team matches, multi-player battles, no faction rules, and so forth.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:07 pm 
One of the Sith on Malgus' Shuttle
One of the Sith on Malgus' Shuttle
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:31 pm
Posts: 3575
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Back when we still played in Cincy (granted this is over 2 and a half years ago before the V-Sets), we would alternate games or themes each week. Some of the ideas we used were:
"No Unique" (obviously no Uniques)
"Beast Master" (squad has to have at least 3 Savage pieces or have Savage characters take up a third of your squad points)
"Lead the Charge" (one Unique commander and grunts)
"Pure Faction" (all 1 faction, no Fringe and no Affinity)
"Relative's Day" (pick at least 2 characters that do not follow faction rules and pick a single faction to fill the rest of the squad)
"Movie Only" (characters only featured in the movies, you can make it only for a single movie, single era, or mixed)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:32 pm 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:35 pm
Posts: 677
Location: Danville IL
I think the players want as few of restrictions on what they play but at the same time they want to say no to the things you see in tourney squads.

_________________
Winning a tournament always allows doing whatever is within the rules to win. - Billiv15


[===0=]=============>


Sentinel for Life!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:33 am 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:00 pm
Posts: 6615
Location: Southern IL
Try 2 on 2 team matches - each team made up of two legal 100-pt squads, don't have to be same faction, no duplicate uniques on a team (you could allow that, I haven't played it that way). CEs/SAs for followers affect the specific squad, stuff for allies affects the whole team.

The only restriction is building at 100pts ;) (and if you restrict uniques)
Or you could make it 150pt squads to open it up more, but it could get crazy and take a lot longer.

Last time I played it was prior to the v-sets, so I'll bet there are some really awesome teams that can be built now. (there were some great ones before)

You could also pair the teams randomly and just roll with it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:34 am 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:57 pm
Posts: 3515
audrisampson wrote:
I think the players want as few of restrictions on what they play but at the same time they want to say no to the things you see in tourney squads.


The problem with this is that something else will just rise to the top. Someone will play something new and different, since they don't have to worry about the standard matchups, and will go undefeated with it and that will become the new hotness in your group. The next step will obviously be to ban that squad, and it will just happen again. Such is the nature of competition; there will always be something (or some set of things, as we are lucky enough to have in our game) that is "best". I think the meta in competitive play right now is really pretty great, because that set of things which are "best" is really a pretty large set, but there are obviously still some things left out of it (you're not gonna play a competitive squad made of Klatooinian Enforcers, or based around General Solo).

I've seen this kind of attitude expressed before (disliking competitive play), and I tend to agree with you that it's really a dislike of tournaments in general, because competition will ALWAYS be a result of tournaments. Is there prize support? That breeds competition. Are you going to keep track of win/loss records? That breeds competition. Will the person who has the best win/loss record at the end of the day be considered the "best" there that day, or recognized at all in some way? That breeds competition. I don't think you can ever successfully divorce competition from tournament play in any meaningful way. If it's a tournament, it isn't "casual", it's "competitive".

Now, this doesn't mean you can't change stuff up to make it more fun for everyone if they really don't have fun with the standard format. For one thing you could just try different formats. Play a Dynamic or Epic Duos tournament, or play a TILE WARS tournament, or a 500 point Epic tournament. Play 100 points instead of 200. Or do some things jedispyder suggested and require certain theme squads; that will get people thinking outside the box and should prevent any of the really powerful "meta" squads. Team games are another really cool, fun idea.

You could also try playing a draft. Here in Atlanta we sometimes play a format called a Cube Draft, which is like a standard booster draft but you get a set of cards out of the Cube, which is a big box of cards that are all pretty crappy, or just crappy without other enablers. You play a lightside or darkside squad and it creates some really neat squad ideas. There might be a good commander in there, but there are no Mouse Droids and you might not get a follower to benefit well from that commander since you have to draft all your pieces. The great thing about it, I think, is that there actually can be some really strong pieces in there, but if it's missing the enabler (for example, Captain Panaka but no Mouse Droids or Mas Amedda) you have to play it totally differently than you normally do, and who knows what it will combo with since you're drafting. It's a really fun format, I think.

_________________
"An elegant, easy-to-understand concept or mechanic that accomplishes 95% of what you want is much better than a clunky, obtuse mechanic that gets you 100%" - Rob Daviau

"You can't per aspera ad astra unless there's some aspera in front of your astra. And that means sometimes the aspera gets you." - Donald X. Vaccarino


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:14 am 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:35 pm
Posts: 677
Location: Danville IL
Yeah your pretty spot on for what is going on. For the 300pt "fun" event everyone agreed on a ban list that included Bastilla, GOWK, Windu and the War Cordinator but as soon I brought up activation control all of a sudden I got resistance. I can't say for sure but I have a feeling someone wants to abuse that.

_________________
Winning a tournament always allows doing whatever is within the rules to win. - Billiv15


[===0=]=============>


Sentinel for Life!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:17 am 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
Echo wrote:
I've seen this kind of attitude expressed before (disliking competitive play), and I tend to agree with you that it's really a dislike of tournaments in general, because competition will ALWAYS be a result of tournaments. Is there prize support? That breeds competition. Are you going to keep track of win/loss records? That breeds competition. Will the person who has the best win/loss record at the end of the day be considered the "best" there that day, or recognized at all in some way? That breeds competition. I don't think you can ever successfully divorce competition from tournament play in any meaningful way. If it's a tournament, it isn't "casual", it's "competitive".

I agree with everything Echo wrote, but I really want to highlight this section. I think it's worth having a good discussion with your group about their goals/desires/purposes when they get together to play SWM. If some players are looking for competition and others are simply looking to roll some dice, you've got 2 different groups, with 2 different motivations.

We actually had this come up in the GVL (Gamer's Vassal League, remember that?) a couple of years ago. It was designed as a non-competitive league, and that was cool. Lots of people enjoyed it: we formed teams of players, each of whose contributed to the team's progress. However, the rewards were tied to victory: for example, you got 2 new pieces for a win, but only 1 new piece for a loss (or something like that). I raised back then the same points that Echo raises here: the moment you attach ANY external value to winning (beyond the natural desire we all have to not get pwned), you're setting the breeding-ground for competitive play. A new competitive meta will surface, and you'll repeat the problem that you currently have. And so we had a problem with competitive play in a non-competitive league. If you want a truly non-competitive atmosphere, then it must truly not matter if you win or lose.

I think it all starts with having this conversation with your playgroup and deciding together on what kind of atmosphere you want to have.

And then, if you do decide that you want to remove the competitive aspect of your playgroup, and make it just "for fun," you'll need to remove all external incentives to winning. Anything less will still breed competition, and therefore tourney-squads and tourney-tactics. Have fun! :D

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:20 am 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
audrisampson wrote:
Yeah your pretty spot on for what is going on. For the 300pt "fun" event everyone agreed on a ban list that included Bastilla, GOWK, Windu and the War Cordinator but as soon I brought up activation control all of a sudden I got resistance. I can't say for sure but I have a feeling someone wants to abuse that.

Lancer? Yobuck? Poggle Bombs?
Leia to Tarkin: "The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers."

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:31 am 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:35 pm
Posts: 677
Location: Danville IL
Right now the group is clearly split into two. The several of us that many of you have met from the regionals and the rest of us. If we were a larger group this really wouldn't be an issue we would probably split in half form two small groups and call it a day.

_________________
Winning a tournament always allows doing whatever is within the rules to win. - Billiv15


[===0=]=============>


Sentinel for Life!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:32 am 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:57 pm
Posts: 3515
audrisampson wrote:
Yeah your pretty spot on for what is going on. For the 300pt "fun" event everyone agreed on a ban list that included Bastilla, GOWK, Windu and the War Cordinator but as soon I brought up activation control all of a sudden I got resistance. I can't say for sure but I have a feeling someone wants to abuse that.


You're probably right. The problem with ban lists is that people will just play other top tier things, or create a new "top tier" if you ban enough. Also, banning the War Coordinator means that Vong are absolutely awful again and you changed them from being a below average faction to a completely unplayable faction. War Coordinator hate is something that I absolutely can't understand one bit; it's not like they make the Vong a great faction. They're still pretty bad, they just have a chance at competing now.

With that ban list, though, what's stopping someone from just playing Lancers or Yobuck? You took out Bastilla, one of the main counters to the strong Lancer/Yobuck squads, and increased the point cost which I think benefits those types of squads more than most others. I guess you could ban the Lancer and Yobuck, but then swarms become amazing because you took out everything that could beat them (Bastilla, Lancers, and Yobuck). So a good Rebel swarm with the Ithorian Commander is now the best bet. I guess you could ban the Ithorian Commander, or maybe Tempo Control so at least they aren't getting Dodonna, but then some other swarm takes its place. Probably something with Death Shots.

I think you get my point; this continues ad nauseam. It seems like people just have a pet squad that they want to play that does poorly in the current meta, so they want to start banning things until their squad can do well. That's all well and good, but what if someone else wants to play a squad that gets beat by your pet squad? Should we ban the thing that makes your squad good?

If the complaint is just about stagnation (people playing the same squads every week), you probably could fix that with a regularly changing ban list. Say this week Bastila, GOWK, Mace, and the Yammosk are banned; next week tempo control and Strafe Attackers are banned, the weak after that swap characters are banned, the week after that all boardwide CEs and Mas Amedda are banned. That would be pretty interesting, and would force people to re-analyze the meta every week. You'll just have to be prepared for some weeks there to be some hugely overpowered combo that one guy thought of and he dominates with it, but hey, at least squad building is interesting. I don't think this really removes the "competitive" aspect of the tournament, but it shakes things up, which might be enough for everyone to have more fun with it.

_________________
"An elegant, easy-to-understand concept or mechanic that accomplishes 95% of what you want is much better than a clunky, obtuse mechanic that gets you 100%" - Rob Daviau

"You can't per aspera ad astra unless there's some aspera in front of your astra. And that means sometimes the aspera gets you." - Donald X. Vaccarino


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:45 am 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:57 pm
Posts: 3515
audrisampson wrote:
Right now the group is clearly split into two. The several of us that many of you have met from the regionals and the rest of us. If we were a larger group this really wouldn't be an issue we would probably split in half form two small groups and call it a day.


Yeah, this is a really unfortunate situation that lots of groups will face. Trevor makes really, really good points about it. Some people want to play competitively and just genuinely enjoy that, like me. When you ask me how I play SWM for fun, I'll say "I play uber competitively". That's fun for me; I see the meta as a problem that needs to be solved, and my opponents as obstacles to a very satisfying, fulfilling victory. Sometimes I lose, and that sucks, but I just move on to the next challenge. The challenge behind high level competition is really, really fun for me. Even when I play a little less seriously, I'm still in it to win it. For example, every year at GenCon I play a slightly goofy squad in the Mystery Map tournament. Last year my one and only shooter was Bomo Greenbark! I had a lot of fun in that tournament because I was playing something new and unique. But guess what? I was also playing competitively and playing to win, and I wound up winning that tournament.

Some people don't think that way, though. They want to be casual, have their big dudes base your big dudes and roll some dice. They don't look at the board and analyze what their BEST move should be, they analyze something less well-defined, like what they think the most fun or interesting move would be. I've seen people make sub-optimal moves, even if they knew it was sub-optimal, because they felt it would make a more interesting game, and that's what they're there for. That's fine and all, and I don't begrudge anyone their style of play, but it's really not for me. My mind says that sub-optimal move was a mistake, and mistakes aren't fun or interesting. I don't like making mistakes, and I don't like my opponent intentionally making mistakes, because I won't follow suit; I'll take advantage of it and the game will actually be less interesting because it will be weighed more in my favor, making it less of a challenge (and remember, challenge is what I like).


Neither of these playstyles are bad, but sometimes they are incompatible. I don't believe changing the rules of the tournament will really make these problems go away, because it's a bigger difference than just what people are playing, it's HOW people play. I don't have a good answer for how to join these two groups together, unfortunately. I think different formats might be a good idea, because some (like drafts) are just harder to meta game, so it takes a little of the power away from the competitive players. That might at least solve some of the surface issues that are a result of these underlying differences.

_________________
"An elegant, easy-to-understand concept or mechanic that accomplishes 95% of what you want is much better than a clunky, obtuse mechanic that gets you 100%" - Rob Daviau

"You can't per aspera ad astra unless there's some aspera in front of your astra. And that means sometimes the aspera gets you." - Donald X. Vaccarino


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:37 pm 
Droid Army Commander
Droid Army Commander
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 2:05 pm
Posts: 1276
Location: Yes, I am yet another Canadian. Keeping the game alive on life support in the GTA.
Turn the tables with a Utinni tournament.

_________________
ImageImage


Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:41 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
Why aren't tournaments fun? This escapes me.

Competition is FUN. Letting everyone have no restrictions and still beating them is FUN.

Even losing a hard fought game is fun. (Sometimes disappointing or frustrating, but still fun)

You're playing the game we all love - when is that ever not fun?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:49 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:18 am
Posts: 532
Location: Eugene Oregon
I have always thought that I want try this format. Could be an interesting "fun way" to play for a night.

Utinni
Build a 100-point squad.
Once paired and seated, hand everything to your opponent. He will attempt to win using the squad that you built, and vice versa!
Map edge choice and set up proceeds as normal.

Special Build Rules:
No more than two of any miniature can be used.
Each squad must have a build of at least 98 points.
Squads must contain at least four and no more than 11 miniatures.
You must supply all reinforcements, etc., for use with creatures that can bring other troops that build beyond your original choice

_________________
Text Based RP @ The Galactic War Site


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:57 pm 
Death Star Designers
Death Star Designers
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:57 pm
Posts: 3515
TimmerB123 wrote:
Even losing a hard fought game is fun. (Sometimes disappointing or frustrating, but still fun)



I agree with this of course, but lots of people don't. Lots of people see something across the table that they think is broken, then they just resign themselves to losing and don't have fun.

I think that's more of a problem with the player than a problem with the game.


Alternatively, people might not have fun (or have less fun) if they people they are playing with are always playing the same thing due to a skewed view of what's powerful. For example, if everyone at your store ALWAYS plays Bastila because everything thinks she's way overpowered, I could see that being less fun than if everyone played different stuff. The problem is that it's just plain not true that she's that overpowered; in fact, nothing is so powerful that even if you know you're going to play against it you can't beat it. Some people might not be experienced enough to figure out what can beat it or might not really care to spend the time figuring it out, but again, that's not really a problem with the game. There's also the issue I mentioned above with people having "pet squads" that they want to play and do well with that don't do well. If they don't do well they get mad and don't have fun.

_________________
"An elegant, easy-to-understand concept or mechanic that accomplishes 95% of what you want is much better than a clunky, obtuse mechanic that gets you 100%" - Rob Daviau

"You can't per aspera ad astra unless there's some aspera in front of your astra. And that means sometimes the aspera gets you." - Donald X. Vaccarino


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:08 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
The way to fix people always playing the same squad is pounding them with a counter. They usually only keep playing it if they win with it. Nothing in this meta is all powerful. Figure out how to beat it and do it


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 3:44 pm 
Imperial Dignitaries
Imperial Dignitaries
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 12:42 pm
Posts: 3599
Location: New Jersey
Good points, but I think the competitive and non-competitive player issue goes deeper. Perhaps a sports analogy will help to explain what I see to be the reason for the difference in how people play SWM:

I suck at basketball (and golf too, but we'll just stick with one for now). I always will. I could practice and learn and train for hours and hours, and I know I'd improve. But the fact remains that I'm just not a natural basketball player, and so I've never grown to love the game at a deep level. I enjoy shooting some hoops and trying some new moves, and I'll play around with some friends, and even join in an organized game or two. And I might even sign up with my friends for a league, because I enjoy the time with my friends and the exercise. But the more competitive the game gets, the less I want to be part of it. It's no fun getting schooled every time I get the ball.

Now, soccer, on the other hand.... ;) I'm no Lionel Messi by a long shot, but I've been playing all my life and I've gotten to be decently good; I can hold my own on most teams that I play on, and there have even been some teams where I was one of the better players. I'm totally happy when the games move from pick-up soccer to high-intensity competition. (And if I'm honest, I tend to get bored and even irritated when people are only giving a half-@@@-ed effort on the field.) Why? Because I'm good at soccer and I've learned to love the game at a deep level and I tend to do well at it.


Ditto for SWM. Some players are more naturally inclined toward in-depth strategy, the way that Daniel described. As Daniel said, these players tend to put lots of time and/or thought into the development of squads and strategies; this includes analyzing the meta and considering counters to various builds/strategies. Those people tend to do well, week-in and week-out...partially because they are naturally skilled, and partially because they put so much effort into it. They have learned to love the game (ie, the challenge of out-maneuvering your opponent) at a deep level.

Other people tend to not do so well; the kind of strategic thinking that Daniel described is more work for some than for others. So if a strategically-minded player plays in a mirror-match with a not-so-much-strategically-minded player, the former will be more likely to win. One of the reasons that competitive players enjoy competitive play is--at least partially--because they tend to do well at it.

Likewise, one of the reasons that non-competitive players tend to not enjoy competitive play (ie, "tourney squads" and tactics) very much is at least partially because they tend not to do well at it. Let's face it: it's no fun to lose most of the time. And it's no fun to face an uphill battle every game, no matter how much effort you've put into your squad building. They could put more effort in, but what's the point if they're going to lose anyway?

I think this mindset or perspective is going on behind comments like these:
--"[I know I'm probably not going to win.] But can't we just play for fun, rather than always having to go for the gold?" ...or...
--"Can't we just play non-tourney squads [so that I'll at least have a chance to win]?"

I don't think it's because the players are lazy or dumb or don't enjoy the game. Rather, I think it's that they aren't driven to compete in the same way that the top-ranked SWM players are. That drive comes from the success those players have found and the proficiency they've developed in the game. We both enjoy SWM...but some of us enjoy the game at a deeper or more intense level than others.

_________________
"Don't give the tool more credit than the master." --Weeks
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:22 pm 
Warmaster
Warmaster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 2:35 pm
Posts: 677
Location: Danville IL
thereisnotry wrote:
snipped for space


I wish I could fit all of that in my sig, absolutely golden and accurate.

Everyone has done a great job describing the situation at hand here. I don't know about other venues but that has been the problem with every single game ever played here locally lol. I think on friday were going to try something totally off the beaten path which I'll go into the details once the group finalizes the idea lol.

Of course though this is a just a fix for the weekend, but then again I don't think there can ever be a fix for the issue lol.

_________________
Winning a tournament always allows doing whatever is within the rules to win. - Billiv15


[===0=]=============>


Sentinel for Life!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  

Offline
 Post subject: Re: SWM's for fun.
PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:55 pm 
Master of the Order
Master of the Order
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:01 pm
Posts: 6662
Location: Chicago, IL
I also try and handicap myself in games of mismatched skill levels. (Not tournaments obviously).

If I am playing Jake or Deri then it's no holds barred. They are good enough to handle anything. If I am playing a newer player, then I bring a weaker squad and then play my best handicapped.

It's something that the more experienced player needs to do to themself. It's hard to impose it upon them.

For me in casual play, whipping a newb is no fun. Handicapping myself and making it a challenge for both of us is fun.

And if in casual play with evenly skilled opponents or not, I see the squads are horribly mismatched (either direction) I'll suggest a new build for a better game

But in tournaments - go for broke.


Last edited by TimmerB123 on Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours

Mark forums read

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Jedi Knights style by Scott Stubblefield