I've updated our policy document for the lead-up to the Post-Release next Saturday, October 8th. Please review it and print it off. I'll only have one more adjustment to it that I need to add in but I need to get some opinions on it first (the Draft Pod cutoff).
Let me know what you think.
Thanks!
LINK: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1m5i_x-BI3n78sCbdpwCc6HBAu77uyibTceOyRL-Wprw/edit?hl=en_US (or click on the title of this post)
Showing posts with label policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label policy. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Thursday, September 8, 2011
NEW and IMPORTANT: Policy Document for SMM Effective 9/10
Hello everyone!
Since some major confusion during a tournament that was run while I could not be in attendance, it became clear that a policy document of some kind was needed so that everyone knows what everyone's roles and expectations are at SMM.
So if you follow the link in the headline of this blog post or just click right here, you will see Version 1 of the SMM Policy Document.
Outlined in this policy document are, in general:
1) "Chain of Command": Who's in charge of disciplinary actions, Tournament Organizer chain of command, Judge/Rules Manager chain, and Socrekeeper chain.
2) "General Expecations at Saturday Morning Magic (SMM)": This outlines the expectations of you, the player, at all times and specifically during games.
3) "Tournament Policies: Introduction": This basically lays the groundwork for the policies guiding the Tournament Organizer.
4) "Tournament Policies: Specifics": Start Times, Formats, Overtime rules, Types of Tournaments, Rules Questions, and Penalties are all covered here. NOTE: A section on prizes is missing. For the moment, this is at TO's discretion.
This policy is to go into effect this Saturday, 9/10. Of course, with all new policies it'll take us a while to get acclimated to the changes so I don't expect perfect adherence the first few times out. Please work on things that are mentioned in this document with which you know you will have problems.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Preston
Since some major confusion during a tournament that was run while I could not be in attendance, it became clear that a policy document of some kind was needed so that everyone knows what everyone's roles and expectations are at SMM.
So if you follow the link in the headline of this blog post or just click right here, you will see Version 1 of the SMM Policy Document.
Outlined in this policy document are, in general:
1) "Chain of Command": Who's in charge of disciplinary actions, Tournament Organizer chain of command, Judge/Rules Manager chain, and Socrekeeper chain.
2) "General Expecations at Saturday Morning Magic (SMM)": This outlines the expectations of you, the player, at all times and specifically during games.
3) "Tournament Policies: Introduction": This basically lays the groundwork for the policies guiding the Tournament Organizer.
4) "Tournament Policies: Specifics": Start Times, Formats, Overtime rules, Types of Tournaments, Rules Questions, and Penalties are all covered here. NOTE: A section on prizes is missing. For the moment, this is at TO's discretion.
This policy is to go into effect this Saturday, 9/10. Of course, with all new policies it'll take us a while to get acclimated to the changes so I don't expect perfect adherence the first few times out. Please work on things that are mentioned in this document with which you know you will have problems.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Preston
Monday, April 25, 2011
Poll: Start Times and When to Implement if Changed, Part 1
We've got a slight issue with our start times.
Although we advertise 10:00 AM start times, rarely do we have the majority of our players at the church at 10:00 AM...or even close to 10:00 AM.
Our church overseer, Rachel, gets to the church right when we say our start time is. The more weekends she waits for someone to show up after 10:00 AM, the more I'm sure her patience for it wears thin as she could be doing other things while waiting for us.
So here's the proposal: Since the majority of us don't make it until 10:30 - 11:00 when we do make it in, I suggest we move the start time back and keep a 4-hour block like we have now (so if we start at 10:30, we'll be done at 2:30).
The other question is, if we change things, when should be implement this change? A week from Saturday? The middle of May? The start of June?
So we'll do this in a 3-part poll. It will be 3 parts only if the majority answer to Part 1 is "yes."
Part 1 of 3: Should we change the start time of the "league" to a later time than 10:00 AM? (If you think we should, please do not suggest times yet).
While this poll is on-going, we'll stick to 10:00 AM as our start time (and consequently, 2:00 PM as our end time). We will not make changes as the poll continues.
Either E-mail me or post a comment here with your preference of either keeping the time or changing it. Please have your responses by no later than Saturday, April 30th.
Thanks for your time and consideration. Let's make our time at the church the best we can. :)
Although we advertise 10:00 AM start times, rarely do we have the majority of our players at the church at 10:00 AM...or even close to 10:00 AM.
Our church overseer, Rachel, gets to the church right when we say our start time is. The more weekends she waits for someone to show up after 10:00 AM, the more I'm sure her patience for it wears thin as she could be doing other things while waiting for us.
So here's the proposal: Since the majority of us don't make it until 10:30 - 11:00 when we do make it in, I suggest we move the start time back and keep a 4-hour block like we have now (so if we start at 10:30, we'll be done at 2:30).
The other question is, if we change things, when should be implement this change? A week from Saturday? The middle of May? The start of June?
So we'll do this in a 3-part poll. It will be 3 parts only if the majority answer to Part 1 is "yes."
Part 1 of 3: Should we change the start time of the "league" to a later time than 10:00 AM? (If you think we should, please do not suggest times yet).
While this poll is on-going, we'll stick to 10:00 AM as our start time (and consequently, 2:00 PM as our end time). We will not make changes as the poll continues.
Either E-mail me or post a comment here with your preference of either keeping the time or changing it. Please have your responses by no later than Saturday, April 30th.
Thanks for your time and consideration. Let's make our time at the church the best we can. :)
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Possible New End of Match Procedure. Please Discuss!
As we're an informal group (we don't follow DCI rules to the letter, for example), we get to consider things like different formats (outside of Standard or traditional Drafts), procedures, etc.
I want to consider a procedure change for our "end of match" determinations.
Currently, we do adopt the DCI's "five extra turns" rule: At the end of time, after the current turn there are 5 additional turns (total) in the game.
The way we do the "who wins" consideration is this:
CURRENT POLICY
Games 1 or 3: Whoever has the most life at the end of the 5 extra turns wins the game and thus the match (winner would either be 1-0 or 2-1, so there's no need for an extra game).
Game 2: If there's no clear winner, the winner of Game 1 wins the match.
To be honest, I'm personally tired of losing Game 2 in extra turns because I can't kill my opponent. And I've had opponents not even go to Game 2 because time was about to run out and they had no chance to kill me. If Games 1 and 3 get to determine their game (thus match) winner by ending life totals, I want Game 2 to do something similar and mean something.
So I want us to consider this end-of-match policy:
PROPOSED POLICY
Games 1 and 3: Same as normal, since the game records would give one player the clear win of the match.
Game 2: At the end of the extra 5 turns, the winner of Game 2 is determined by who has the highest life total. If it's a tie, ignore non-combat damage/life gain and go to the first combat damage dealt. If there's no clear Match winner (after extra turns, the result is 1-1), go to Game 3. In Game 3, non-combat damage is ignored, as is non-combat life gain. First combat damage in Game 3 wins.
This is just an idea. The crux of it is I want Game 2 to possibly mean something, to not let people quit just because the winner of Game 1 got to run the clock out. I want to do some form of "go to Game 3 if the match score is tied after extra turns", but I don't want cheap burn/life gain to win the game by itself in Game 3. Combat damage would make you work for it. I know it would take longer, but I think it's be a better system to ensure the person who works hardest wins, not the guy who happens to luck up on the clock/direct damage topdeck/life gain topdeck.
Feel free to comment below or send an E-mail to CardGameNut@gmail.com . Chances are we won't implement this for the Scars of Mirrodin draft unless we get a majority approval, so take your time to think about this and respond.
I want to consider a procedure change for our "end of match" determinations.
Currently, we do adopt the DCI's "five extra turns" rule: At the end of time, after the current turn there are 5 additional turns (total) in the game.
The way we do the "who wins" consideration is this:
CURRENT POLICY
Games 1 or 3: Whoever has the most life at the end of the 5 extra turns wins the game and thus the match (winner would either be 1-0 or 2-1, so there's no need for an extra game).
Game 2: If there's no clear winner, the winner of Game 1 wins the match.
To be honest, I'm personally tired of losing Game 2 in extra turns because I can't kill my opponent. And I've had opponents not even go to Game 2 because time was about to run out and they had no chance to kill me. If Games 1 and 3 get to determine their game (thus match) winner by ending life totals, I want Game 2 to do something similar and mean something.
So I want us to consider this end-of-match policy:
PROPOSED POLICY
Games 1 and 3: Same as normal, since the game records would give one player the clear win of the match.
Game 2: At the end of the extra 5 turns, the winner of Game 2 is determined by who has the highest life total. If it's a tie, ignore non-combat damage/life gain and go to the first combat damage dealt. If there's no clear Match winner (after extra turns, the result is 1-1), go to Game 3. In Game 3, non-combat damage is ignored, as is non-combat life gain. First combat damage in Game 3 wins.
This is just an idea. The crux of it is I want Game 2 to possibly mean something, to not let people quit just because the winner of Game 1 got to run the clock out. I want to do some form of "go to Game 3 if the match score is tied after extra turns", but I don't want cheap burn/life gain to win the game by itself in Game 3. Combat damage would make you work for it. I know it would take longer, but I think it's be a better system to ensure the person who works hardest wins, not the guy who happens to luck up on the clock/direct damage topdeck/life gain topdeck.
Feel free to comment below or send an E-mail to CardGameNut@gmail.com . Chances are we won't implement this for the Scars of Mirrodin draft unless we get a majority approval, so take your time to think about this and respond.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)