Do you choose different Schemes in a 3-4 turn game?

[Serigala]

I played in the Leeds (UK) tournament yesterday. I played Viks (with or without Von Schill) against Collette, Perdita and Ramos.

We were playing to strict time constraints, with the axe coming down on 'finish the current activation'.
In two of the games, I didn't get to finish turn three with my own models (though I think on the most part my opponents had done so, through companion chains or just having fewer models) and in the dying seconds of both games I had to choose which model to move to accomplish one of my schemes or strategies leaving others unfinished.

Against Collette, had we played on, the game might still have gone against me, but against Ramos I think had we been able to play out the rest of the game I would have turned a 0-2 loss against ramos to a 6-2 win (I forgot grudge had to be accomplished by a non-Master model).

Even in the single game I won, which went to turn 4 I think, I was having to rush to achieve objectives, which could have easily been accomplished had we gone to turn 6.
Across the tournament as a whole, most games were stopped by the clock before turn 6.

So my question is, "Do the more successful tournament players actually choose Schemes differently in tournament games, if they think there is a strong likelihood of not reaching the end of the game?"

It seems to me that Schemes which can be done and completed at any point in the game have advantages over those which depend on end game conditions (when you don't know if your mobile objective holder will get another turn or not). Thus Sabotage is easier than Stake a Claim. Denial schemes become easier also (Holdout is easier than Breakthrough).
Grudge, Assassinate and Kill Protegee are also more straightforward.
Maybe I'm just a bit slow on the uptake and this is all obvious to everyone else...what do other players do?

[ukrocky]

Aye this happened to me at Leeds too, I was against Steve D, a player I know and get on with from the old fantasy scene and he's quite a new player. I chose exterminate on his 3 gremlins + Ophelia, and Kill protegee on his Bad Juju.

Steve chose Stake a Claim and Bodyguard on Zoraida.

The strat was shared destroy the evidence.

We only played 4 turns and I was quite lucky to be able to destroy all the evidence and get both schemes, but one more turn would have seen his Juju dead again and unable to come back up in time, and Zoraida dead so would have got me an extra 4vp difference, which in a 3 game tournament is huge.

I defo would have chosen 'early game' schemes (Sabotage, stake a claim, bodyguard etc) had I thought it would only go on 4 turns and spend more time preventing his.

The way I choose schemes at the minute is I look at round 1 as a way to get the most difficult ones out the way, and I kept sabotage and power ritual (Ie, 4vps for Marcus) until the final game to give myself the best possible chance against the, in theroy, the players I'm going to have the hardest game against.

It also sort of depends on strategy, if I get a good strat for Marcus, I'll go for difficult schemes and vice versa.

[nilus]

Yeah, in a tournament setting you need to take into account time limits. So people generally pick schemes easier to accomplish early on. Its also why you are probably not going to see a lot of Avatars in tourney play. Its a 2 point investement that won't see the table until turn 2 but most likely turn 3 or 4.

[Math Mathonwy]

How long were the time limits, btw? I think that in a three-game tournie, the rounds could be 120 minutes long (well, maybe 110 with 10 minutes between rounds) so as to ensure that people finish the games. The game isn't balanced for three turns games, IMO.

[karn987]

Yeah right away this says to me the Tourney organizer didn't get the round time right. If less then half the games can't reach turn 6 because of the clock, then it's the clocks problem. Malifaux isn't balanced at 3 turns, it's meant to go to 6 turns. About 120 min rounds seem to work really well, I've rarely ever had someone not finish in that time. Maybe 100 - 110 min rounds, but any less is shorting the players.

So unless it's meant to be a lightning round tourney, you need at least 50% (i would personally say 70%) of the games to be able to be completed through turn 6 before the clock ran out. Otherwise as you saw and people have said, a lot of Strats and Schemes become broken and others become nearly impossible.


But yes, I would take earlier to complete schemes when the time limit is an issue. Body is always a good one since the shorter turns work out in your favor as well. Kill Protege is another good one as its on you to complete asap and doesn't need to wait for the end.

[Hookers]

Experienced players don't have to look at their cards for stats and abilities, and don't have to ask their opponents what their stats and abilities are, which cuts playing time about in half. They can also largely plan out how their turns are going to go (less time spent deliberating). The more you play the faster you will get. But yes, if you know you a slow player, you scheme choice might reflect that. However, your options get limited in a 4 round tournament.

[Iron Skies]

Just a qualifier here. Does the round time include the setup time? As in that case there was 105 minutes (15 mins setup and 90 mins to play the game)

[edonil]

90 minutes? How many points?

[Iron Skies]

Was 35 stones (Recommended time was coming out at 85 mins)

[edonil]

Hm. That does seem right, although for a newer community, I'd be a little looser on the rounds...we're all still learning stuff here (the game is still young yet) and a 35 SS game tends to take more around the 120 minute mark.